The Race for the Calder Trophy

[EbonyRaptor]

None of that materially changes anything about how Brock Faber looks unless you are incapable of assessing a player individually. And the exact same can be said about his MN situation, I don’t expect you to know the nuances of MNs cap and injury challenges this season, but Middleton is very obviously not an ideal partner, I mentioned previously that if you do actually care, you can take a look at middleton’s stats playing the Wilds other rookie defensemen this year and you see the massive gulf right away.

Yeah, that must be it.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Yeah, that must be it.

I’m not trying to troll you or anything here, the argument just legitimately does not make sense to me. Faber plays half the game, meaning he has time with and against nearly everyone on the ice for both teams. I’ve seen him make some of his most interesting plays with Middleton and the third line, the guy is very good on his own merits to me, the hypothetical doesn’t change my perception of that at all.

 

[EbonyRaptor]

I’m not trying to troll you or anything here, the argument just legitimately does not make sense to me. Faber plays half the game, meaning he has time with and against nearly everyone on the ice for both teams. I’ve seen him make some of his most interesting plays with Middleton and the third line, the guy is very good on his own merits to me, the hypothetical doesn’t change my perception of that at all.

I haven't seen Faber play enough to have formed my own opinion of him but from all the positive comments I've read I have no doubts he is a very good young d-man. The thing I'm disputing is the notion that his effectiveness isn't affected by who he plays with. That's not saying he doesn't play well, only that it's easier for players to play better with better team mates - which is to say they don't play as well with poor team mates.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

I haven't seen Faber play enough to have formed my own opinion of him but from all the positive comments I've read I have no doubts he is a very good young d-man. The thing I'm disputing is the notion that his effectiveness isn't affected by who he plays with. That's not saying he doesn't play well, only that it's easier for players to play better with better team mates - which is to say they don't play as well with poor team mates.

Minnesota’s situation this year has had him playing with a pretty wide variety of player quality, half the lineup are AHLers, and despite the name recognition, almost all of the Wild’s top players have been in and out of the lineup with injuries, I think it’s pretty fair to say his teammates have been inconsistent from their norms.

Now I will say that the Wild players are pretty well coached and even the AHLers are mostly playing responsible hockey first, that is the aspect that is different between the clubs. I have only seen about a dozen Blackhawk’s games but it is pretty apparent that guys do not know where to be on the ice (the maybe controversial part of that assessment is that Bedard is one of them, at least in his own zone.)

Faber was quoted as saying the NHL feels easier than college because both his teammates and opponents tend to always be in the right places with their sticks in the lanes that he expects. You see some of the posted plays in this topic and it makes sense how he is exploiting those tendencies, his third assist against Philadelphia earlier this season is a great example: Couterier sees a rookie d man approaching the red line and looking all the world like he’s about to dump it, Couts sells out to try and pick off a dump along the boards but instead Faber delays for the over commit and slides it up the middle of a now open lane to his man entering the zone with a full head of steam. A simple play that says a lot IMO, adapting to his surroundings seems to be one of his main strengths.

 

[TaLoN]

Kaprizof made Sam Steel look like a decent NHLer

No... he really didn't. It was painful to see Kaprizov saddled with such a linemate... Steel was never decent.

 

[Guttersniped]

Yeah, but voters only care about points these days. If Drew Doughty were a rookie in 2015-16 he probably loses the Calder to Panarin even though he won the Norris that year lol.

Doughty
82gp 14g 37a 51p

Panarin
80gp 30g 47a 77p

Are you arguing that voters care more about points now than in the past? Or that underserving players win more now? Not sure I get your point.

Ekblad won the Calder the year before Panarin did while scoring a total of 39 points in 81 games. Seider won.

When have underserving players been gifted Calder recently? (Or whatever you’re arguing.)

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Are you arguing that voters care more about points now than in the past? Or that underserving players win more now? Not sure I get your point.

I am arguing that defensive defenseman have a tendency to get undervalued for awards because of a bias towards box score watching. Specifically the Calder and Norris.

Ekblad won the Calder the year before Panarin did while scoring a total of 39 points in 81 games. Seider won.

Ekblad won it because he was a 1st overall pick and a bunch of the other votes were split between forwards who were later round picks (Gaudreau. Stone, and Forsberg had 64, 64, and 63 points respectively that year).

Seider won with 50 points, while Bunting only had 63.

When have underserving players been gifted Calder recently? (Or whatever you’re arguing.)

I think a good example of defensive dmen being undervalued for this award is 2012-13, where three middle 6 wingers were voted ahead of a top pairing dman for the calder.

Brodin averaged over 23 mins a night while successfully contributing on Minnesota's top pair that year. He was a great #2 shut down dman right off the bat. Meanwhile, Huberdeau, Gallagher, and Saad scored at a 53, 52, and 48 point paces respectively. And they all finished above him in the Calder voting.

 

[Guttersniped]

I am arguing that defensive defenseman have a tendency to get undervalued for awards because of a bias towards box score watching. Specifically the Calder and Norris.


Ekblad won it because he was a 1st overall pick and a bunch of the other votes were split between forwards who were later round picks (Gaudreau. Stone, and Forsberg had 64, 64, and 63 points respectively that year).

Seider won with 50 points, while Bunting only had 63.

I think a good example of defensive dmen being undervalued for this award is 2012-13, where three middle 6 wingers were voted ahead of a top pairing dman for the calder.

Brodin averaged over 23 mins a night while successfully contributing on Minnesota's top pair that year. He was a great #2 shut down dman right off the bat. Meanwhile, Huberdeau, Gallagher, and Saad scored at a 53, 52, and 48 point paces respectively. And they all finished above him in the Calder voting.

Coming in 4th for the Calder is a lot closer than Brodin has ever gotten to a Norris.

And 48 game season is tougher to vote on. I don’t see Brodin as robbed of a Calder there though.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Coming in 4th for the Calder is a lot closer than Brodin has ever gotten to a Norris.

That has nothing to do with my point?

And 48 game season is tougher to vote on. I don’t see Brodin as robbed of a Calder there though.

I didn't say he was robbed of a Calder, though I certainly think he should have won or at the very least finished 2nd. A top pairing shut down dman >>>> a one dimensional 50 point winger. Do you disagree?

 

[Mrfenn92]

 

[majormajor]

I would like less discussion of who will win, and all the regular biases of the Calder vote, and more discussion on who you think should win. What do you see out there? That would be much more interesting.

 

[ES]

Might be bigger question how many voters don't put Bedard to #1.

 

[Dust]

No... he really didn't. It was painful to see Kaprizov saddled with such a linemate... Steel was never decent.

Maybe decent was not the right word... does not waiver fodder count?

 

[Hawkaholic]

I didn't say he was robbed of a Calder, though I certainly think he should have won or at the very least finished 2nd. A top pairing shut down dman >>>> a one dimensional 50 point winger. Do you disagree?

Depends, if the 50pt winger was 18 years old and got 50 points with absolutely no help around him, that's more impressive than a 21 year old Dman being really good defensively.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

Depends, if the 50pt winger was 18 years old and got 50 points with absolutely no help around him, that's more impressive than a 21 year old Dman being really good defensively.

Not when that defenseman is playing more minutes than 98% of the NHL and is doing better than most at it

50+ points isnt that impressive comparatively whether the team stinks or not; Crosby put up 102 with his second teammate having 58 on the second worst team in the league

 

[TLEH]

You're not arguing in good faith if you don't look at the roster the Hawks are currently rolling. It legit could lose to an AHL All-Star team. We just snagged Megna off waivers and he was easily our 2nd or 3rd best D.

No one is having success on this roster. The PK the Rangers ran last night essentially just had a guy chat with Bedard.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Depends, if the 50pt winger was 18 years old and got 50 points with absolutely no help around him, that's more impressive than a 21 year old Dman being really good defensively.

The Calder is not for the most impressive rookie, it's for the best rookie. Being "more impressive" does not mean better.

Age is not a factor in deciding who the better player was during the season. But in case you didn't know, Brodin was actually younger than Huberdeau, Saad, and Gallagher that year. So by your logic, that should have strengthened his case for the Calder.

And in that year, Huberdeau wasn't even the leading scorer on his team. Gallagher was 6th and Saad was 4th. So it's not like any of them had "absolutely no help".

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

I would like less discussion of who will win, and all the regular biases of the Calder vote, and more discussion on who you think should win. What do you see out there? That would be much more interesting.

I would agree that conversation is healthier but, unfortunately, the bias for awards makes the thought toward a legitimate debate seem futile at times

Perhaps when advanced metrics can better determine defensive impact we can see the fruits of their labor more-often recognized

Personally, id have Faber #1 with Bedard #2 and Hughes #3; while also recognizing Bedard likely wins by a landslide due to draft position, the hype around him as 'generational', and him being a productive forward

 

[ZachaFlockaFlame]

It should be Bedard, Faber and Luke as the finalists. Could be talked into Fantilli but their coach is a moron and doesn't put the kid in more spots to explode point total wise.

 

[FLAMESFAN]

The Calder is not for the most impressive rookie, it's for the best rookie. Being "more impressive" does not mean better.

Age is not a factor in deciding who the better player was during the season. But in case you didn't know, Brodin was actually younger than Huberdeau, Saad, and Gallagher that year. So by your logic, that should have strengthened his case for the Calder.

And in that year, Huberdeau wasn't even the leading scorer on his team. Gallagher was 6th and Saad was 4th. So it's not like any of them had "absolutely no help".

You've posted this a few times. Is there a description of the award specifically saying this?
Is there not a max age that a player can be to win the award?

 

[Hawkaholic]

Not when that defenseman is playing more minutes than 98% of the NHL and is doing better than most at it

50+ points isnt that impressive comparatively whether the team stinks or not; Crosby put up 102 with his second teammate having 58 on the second worst team in the league

That's like, your opinion, man.

Crosby played with talented players, legit NHLers every night. 50pts is definitely impressive when playing with strictly 4th line players every night and with a completely inept PP.

The Calder is not for the most impressive rookie, it's for the best rookie. Being "more impressive" does not mean better.

Age is not a factor in deciding who the better player was during the season. But in case you didn't know, Brodin was actually younger than Huberdeau, Saad, and Gallagher that year. So by your logic, that should have strengthened his case for the Calder.

I don't really care about Brodin.

Do you vote for the Calder? Because I guarantee those that do, take age into the equation if it's a close vote. And how do you quantify best? To some, maybe best is who put up the most points, and they don't take into account your analytics or other team based statistics.

Whats more impressive, being in on 40% of your teams total goals, or being a really good defensive Dman?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

You've posted this a few times. Is there a description of the award specifically saying this?
Is there not a max age that a player can be to win the award?

There is a max age, but as long as you qualify, age isn't part of the criteria, which is my point.

The award is given "to the player selected as the most proficient in his first year of competition in the National Hockey League".

So no, age should not be a factor when deciding between eligible players.

 

[Hawkaholic]

There is a max age, but as long as you qualify, age isn't part of the criteria, which is my point.

You say this, but you have no idea what voters are taking into consideration for the award. I guarantee if Player A who is 25 scores 60pts, and player B who is 18 scores 50pts, that Player B would win the award.

 

[Hischier and Hughes]

That's like, your opinion, man.

Crosby played with talented players, legit NHLers every night. 50pts is definitely impressive when playing with strictly 4th line players every night and with a completely inept PP.


I don't really care about Brodin.

Do you vote for the Calder? Because I guarantee those that do, take age into the equation if it's a close vote. And how do you quantify best? To some, maybe best is who put up the most points, and they don't take into account your analytics or other team based statistics.

Whats more impressive, being in on 40% of your teams total goals, or being a really good defensive Dman?

Could have saved some time and instead wrote "Im refusing to budge my position on the subject, no matter what reasoning is provided to me". Forum boards do tend to be about opinions, yes! Though, since I am new here, perhaps I have misunderstood the assignment

Crosby had the greatest rookie year in the history of hockey; not sure how someone can so easily discredit that, but to each their own I suppose

 

[Hawkaholic]

Could have saved some time and instead wrote "Im refusing to budge my position on the subject, no matter what reasoning is provided to me". Forum boards do tend to be about opinions, yes! Though, since I am new here, perhaps I have misunderstood the assignment

Crosby had the greatest rookie year in the history of hockey; not sure how someone can so easily discredit that, but to each their own I suppose

Who discredited it? All I simply said was that he played with legit NHLers and talent after you seemed to be claiming he played with no one.