The Race for the Calder Trophy

[Hawkaholic]

Whoosh. There is no way of definitively proving that, and even if you could, it just means those points relied on who he played with, nothing to do with his own play. I cannot state any clearer how little I care about raw production, but rather the means of getting there.

And theres no proof that Faber would improve the Hawks any more than Bedard has.

And no, thats not what that means, it means the players he is playing with can't finish any of Bedards perfectly set up passes, and can't get him the puck the way a really good player could, so he could score more goals. No one cares that you don't care about raw production, what you care about means very little. I don't care that Faber plays a lot of mins as a rookie, it means nothing to me.

Again, if you remove Faber from Minnesota, do you think they would be in the position they are in now?

Not in the playoffs, but not a bottom of the barrell team? Yes, they would be in the same position, with a couple handful of less points.

 

[Hawkaholic]

The argument from me is that relative team strength is a stupid topic when talking about how good an individual player is. There is so much nuance to each situation that blanket statements about how much higher one’s point output would be is complete nonsense. You play the hand that you are dealt, how you play it, regardless of luck based outcome, is what determines how good you are in my eyes.

Its not though. Who you play with reflects on how many goals you can score, how many assists you can get, and you can spend less time chasing the puck in your own zone. If Bedard had 70pts right now, playing with much better talent, this "race" isn't even a debate, he's running away with it. The only reason it's close is because Bedard missed 14 games, and doesn't play with any top 6 talent. As an individual, he is a much better hockey player than Faber.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Yeah fair enough and in terms of individual talent Bedard is clearly ahead of Faber. The gap would be even greater if Bedard was playing with Kaprizov, JEE, Boldy, Zuccarello, and Hartman. He's not, however, and instead plays with aging vets or barely-NHL level talent.

Bedard is ahead regardless and he'll win the Calder because of it. You and Whiskey have just gone too far along on your tangents to be objective

Well I just disagree about the individual talent part of that equation, at the current moment in time. I think Faber is much more consistent at displaying high level skills in nearly every facet of the game. “Skills” I suppose are the subjective part of the debate. I am not trying to be a pain or start tangents, I just want the discussion to be coherent either way and not rely on logical fallacies and emotional responses.

If Bedard had 10, 20, 30 more raw points while playing the same exact game, I would still hold the opinion that he does not demonstrate proficiency without the puck, at least the minimum level that I personally require from an NHL center. Just my own opinion and not one I am trying to force others to have.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Not in the playoffs, but not a bottom of the barrell team? Yes, they would be in the same position, with a couple handful of less points.

They would have Middleton-Bogosian as their first pairing defense. Their SV% for goalies is the same for Chicago and Chicago is giving up a little more than half a goal per game than Minnesota.

Here's an interesting fact:

Brock Faber is 7th for TOI this season for defensemen - not just rookies but ALL defensemen

If the season ended today, he would break the record for TOI by nearly :37 seconds. No other defensemen since 1999-2000 has had more than 25 minutes average of ice time.

Only two defensemen had more than 24 minutes and those were on expansion teams (Enstrom and Kuba). 9 more had 23 minutes or more. So, in more than 24 years, only 11 defensemen had more than 23 minutes of ice time or more. Faber would make it 12.

Think about that for a second; in 24 years only 11 defensemen EVER had more than 23 minutes of ice time and generally they were on terrible teams. Doughty, Whitney, Keith are three of those names.

 

[Hawkaholic]

They would have Middleton-Bogosian as their first pairing defense. Their SV% for goalies is the same for Chicago and Chicago is giving up a little more than half a goal per game than Minnesota.

Here's an interesting fact:

Brock Faber is 7th for TOI this season for defensemen - not just rookies but ALL defensemen

If the season ended today, he would break the record for TOI by nearly :37 seasons. No other defensemen since 1999-2000 has had more than 25 minutes average of ice time.

Only two defensemen had more than 24 minutes and those were on expansion teams (Enstrom and Kuba). 9 more had 23 minutes or more. So, in more than 24 years, only 11 defensemen had more than 23 minutes of ice time or more. Faber would make it 12.

Think about that for a second; in 24 years only 11 defensemen EVER had more than 23 minutes of ice time and generally they were on terrible teams. Doughty, Whitney, Keith are three of those names.

Thats nice, TOI doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things. His coach likes him, and he has no competition for that ice time. That's literally all that means.

Minnesota has scored 60 more goals than Chicago, near a goal more per game, so they still wouldn't be as bad as Chicago, who would be just as bad defensively with the same goaltending, but way worse offensively.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Thats nice, TOI doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things. His coach likes him, and he has no competition for that ice time. That's literally all that means.

Minnesota has scored 60 more goals than Chicago, near a goal more per game, so they still wouldn't be as bad as Chicago, who would be just as bad defensively with the same goaltending, but way worse offensively.

So your contention is that Brock Faber wouldn’t improve Chicago’s defense at all then?

I reiterate that this whole hypothetical is impertinent, but that take seems extremely poor.

It is a lot easier to win a low scoring game than a high scoring one, it keeps the luck factor far more significantly in play. For bad teams, playing defense is the best way to improve your record, though I may be biased by Jacques Lemaire regarding that philosophy.

 

[Dr Salt]

The argument from me is that relative team strength is a stupid topic when talking about how good an individual player is. There is so much nuance to each situation that blanket statements about how much higher one’s point output would be is complete nonsense. You play the hand that you are dealt, how you play it, regardless of luck based outcome, is what determines how good you are in my eyes.

And despite playing with a worse hand Bedard is straight up playing better hockey!

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

As an individual, he is a much better offensive hockey player than Faber.

FTFY. Creating tons of offense doesn't mean so much if you're giving up even more chances the other way. Everyone agrees the Blackhawks are terrible, yet Bedard still somehow has negative relative possession numbers.

If I was heading into the playoffs, all else being equal, I would take 21 year old Faber over 18 year old Bedard (as a center). But if you're planning on deploying Bedard on the wing next to a guy like Barkov or Hischier, I think you could justify taking Bedard over Faber. But I wouldn't trust him to matchup vs other top 6 centers in the playoffs at this point.

If I was Vegas or LA, I probably add RW Bedard. If I was Toronto or Edmonton, I'd add Faber.

 

[dirtydanglez]

bedard looks like he going to win comfortably. farber is a worthy runner up tho

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

And despite playing with a worse hand Bedard is straight up playing better hockey!

I disagree, but I welcome your opinion too!

 

[thestonedkoala]

Thats nice, TOI doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things. His coach likes him, and he has no competition for that ice time. That's literally all that means.

TOI is really important for defensemen; that's why you don't have guys like Goligoski playing in all situations. It's important for forwards, but very important for defensemen. Also think about what you just said; he has no competition for ice time? How is Faber so much better than a bunch of veterans like Merrill, Goligoski, Middleton and Bogosian for ice time. It's not that the coach just likes him, he trusts him in the game and how important Faber is to the team.

Minnesota has scored 60 more goals than Chicago, near a goal more per game, so they still wouldn't be as bad as Chicago, who would be just as bad defensively with the same goaltending, but way worse offensively.

Yes, because scoring is the only thing that matters in the NHL. It isn't about preventing goals or shots, it's just generating shots. That's why they are getting rid of defensemen and just going with 5 forwards these days.

 

[State of Hockey]

But they're different types of defenseman. I put a priority on defenseman who can shut down the opponents top scorers, and Faber does that better than both of those guys while still being a valuable offensive player.

Faber is not a shutdown defensemen by any metric. Shutdown defensemen don't see the 3rd-most pucks go into his net from his position for half the season and counting. Shutdown defensemen don't have below average possession numbers near the bottom of his team. Shutdown defensemen don't play nearly half the game for a team, only slightly improve the expected 5 on 5 goals against when he's on the ice, and yet still give up more goals than most teams. And the kicker? His team's expected offense is only slightly improved when he's on the ice. Your definition of valuable offensively must be a lot wider than mine.

Without Faber, Minnesota wouldn't even be sniffing at the playoffs. They'd be around where Chicago is.

That's a ridiculous assertion that no logic or stat supports. Ironically in order for your hypothetical to be true, it would mean that Kaprizov, Boldy, JEE, Zuccarello, Brodin, Etc. are garbage and are essentially about equal to the trash that Chicago is icing on a daily basis.

Faber plays with the 4th best D man and then gets half his time with top 6 and half his time with the Wild’s bottom 6 forwards, which has been entirely AHLers. We have a very significant sample of how Faber looks playing with bad players, the coach trusts him in those scenarios for a reason.

By nature (4 forward lines, 3 D pairings) defensemen always play with a variety of forward talent. They have to play with top lines and bottom lines. The fact of the matter is that Faber has played nearly his entire season with a solid to very good partner (Brodin or Midddleton), and he's played a very healthy amount with top forward talent in Kaprizov, Boldy, Ericksson Ek, Zuccarello, etc. That absolutely matters when deciding who's had the better season. There's no comparing Faber's teammates to Bedard's. Any attempt to do so just shows an extreme bias toward Faber.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Well I just disagree about the individual talent part of that equation, at the current moment in time. I think Faber is much more consistent at displaying high level skills in nearly every facet of the game. “Skills” I suppose are the subjective part of the debate. I am not trying to be a pain or start tangents, I just want the discussion to be coherent either way and not rely on logical fallacies and emotional responses.

If Bedard had 10, 20, 30 more raw points while playing the same exact game, I would still hold the opinion that he does not demonstrate proficiency without the puck, at least the minimum level that I personally require from an NHL center. Just my own opinion and not one I am trying to force others to have.

You have been commenting Faber > Bedard endlessly in this thread stating the same things over and over again despite only one other person in the whole threat agreeing with.

Sounds exactly like you’re trying to force this on others.

This isn’t a debate, Bedard wins in a landslide. Today, and for the rest of his career.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

You have been commenting Faber > Bedard endlessly in this thread stating the same things over and over again despite only one other person in the whole threat agreeing with.

Sounds exactly like you’re trying to force this on others.

This isn’t a debate, Bedard wins in a landslide. Today, and for the rest of his career.

I think you are confusing me with someone else, my primary contributions to this topic are posting videos and articles, or responding directly to posts that I think make poor arguments. Like this one, where you attempt to end any discussion, on a message board, while acting dismissive and posting something directly at odds with recent quotes from NHL insiders.

The only purpose of this reply is to refute your false statement about me personally. I will not be seeing any further posts from you, I do not think you have the capacity to offer any actual insight if this is your usual approach to discussion.

 

[Hawkaholic]

TOI is really important for defensemen; that's why you don't have guys like Goligoski playing in all situations. It's important for forwards, but very important for defensemen. Also think about what you just said; he has no competition for ice time? How is Faber so much better than a bunch of veterans like Merrill, Goligoski, Middleton and Bogosian for ice time. It's not that the coach just likes him, he trusts him in the game and how important Faber is to the team.


Yes, because scoring is the only thing that matters in the NHL. It isn't about preventing goals or shots, it's just generating shots. That's why they are getting rid of defensemen and just going with 5 forwards these days.

Yes, it's important, but just because you get a lot doesn't automatically make you worthy of the time you are getting relative to the other Dmen logging a ton of mins. He's not nearly as good as most of the other top 10 Dmen in the TOI stat. Hell, I'd take Seth Jones over Faber, and I don't like Jones one bit, he's a middle pairing Dman getting 25mins a night.

No one said scoring is the only thing that matters, but defending is far more of a team effort, compared to offense.

 

[Hawkaholic]

So your contention is that Brock Faber wouldn’t improve Chicago’s defense at all then?

I reiterate that this whole hypothetical is impertinent, but that take seems extremely poor.

It is a lot easier to win a low scoring game than a high scoring one, it keeps the luck factor far more significantly in play. For bad teams, playing defense is the best way to improve your record, though I may be biased by Jacques Lemaire regarding that philosophy.

Of course he would improve Chicago's defense, their defense is a train wreck. But it wouldn't improve it that much to make much of a difference, they would still be a bottom of the barrell team.

 

[EbonyRaptor]

Hypothetical - if "current 18 year old Bedard" and "current 21 year old Faber" were offered (for free) to each of the 32 NHL GM's - how many do you think would choose Faber over Bedard?

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Hypothetical - if "current 18 year old Bedard" and "current 21 year old Faber" were offered (for free) to each of the 32 NHL GM's - how many do you think would choose Faber over Bedard?

Most would choose Bedard. Age works in his favor for that discussion. This is the Calder trophy topic though, age only matters for eligibility.

 

[ZDH]

Lol what race?

 

[north21]

Lol what race?

Pretty much, Faber has had a great season but so has Hughs, just give it to Bedard already and be done with it, not worth arguing any longer.

 

[x Tame Impala]

Pretty much, Faber has had a great season but so has Hughs, just give it to Bedard already and be done with it, not worth arguing any longer.

Bedard has had it locked down since before his injury

 

[Hawkaholic]

Most would choose Bedard. Age works in his favor for that discussion. This is the Calder trophy topic though, age only matters for eligibility.

Lol "most"

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Lol "most"

Have you seen the decisions that many NHL teams make? To think there’s absolute consensus on anything in this league is absurd. Lol

 

[Yepthatsme]

Have you seen the decisions that many NHL teams make? To think there’s absolute consensus on anything in this league is absurd. Lol

You’re absolutely right that teams routinely make horrendous decisions, and that there’s practically never a consensus. This is not a bad decision and a consensus. Lol

 

[north21]

Bedard has had it locked down since before his injury

I think the injury made it a little interesting but that was short lived.