42 replies to this topic

[egroen]

First, I agree with you that age will be used by the voters against Howard. But I disagree that it is "unfair".

MLB has seen a 28-year-old Rookie of the Year who was an established professional in Japan for many years and arguably in the "prime" of his career by the time he came over. http://www.seattlepi...16_mari12.shtml

That said, I do not think Howard will win the Calder. He should be "considered", but I don't know if he will even be thought of as Top 3. As impressive as he has been, he's 5th in save percentage and 5th in GAA, and the guy that leads both categories is a 23-year old rookie, Tukka Rask. And that's not even comparing him to non-goaltenders, such as Myers, Tavares, and Duchene. I do not believe that Howard has any realistic shot at Top 3 or even Top 5 in the Vezina, either. Rask has the numbers for it, but his workload (only 37 games started) is probably too low. Also, that would be 2 years in a row to Boston goaltenders. To put that into perspective, Carey Price has basically "lost" his starting job to Jaroslav Halak on MTL, this season, yet Price still has more starts (39) than Rask. (Howard has started 58 games). I think the Vezina will be Ryan Miller's award, and there are other guys like Bryzgalov and even Craig Anderson (whose numbers aren't all that great) who would be considered before Howard.

As for the "fairness" point, it's not unfair to factor in age and previous experience into the Calder. The whole point of a "rookie" award is that we are supposed to marvel at how advanced this player is so early in their career. Jimmy Howard has had NHL experience since the '05-'06 season. At several points, it looked like there was an opening for him to steal the backup or even starting position, but it wasn't until this season (and Osgood completely falling off the map) that he was able to secure a job. Howard's early career is impressive, but it's more akin to a post-hype prospect, like baseball's Adam Lind, or hockey's Guillaume Latendresse (Wild) than a true rookie performer.

Rask, Neimi and Halak do not have enough games to be up for the Vezina - which puts Jimmy firmly at #3 in both SV% and GAA.
I understand and accept his age will be used against him - but then they should go ahead and change the definition of a "rookie" if that is the case.
Age really should have nothing to do with the voting, when talking about which rookie is having the best season.

[zettie85]

(1) There's no way anybody should be comparing numbers from past seasons to current seasons for purposes of handing out awards. If that were the case, I guess both Crosby and Ovechkin "suck" because they haven't eclipsed that 200-point mark yet, ala 80's Gretzky.

(2) Two years IS much less of a difference than six years, and there is a younger goalie (Rask) who is 23 years old and has better numbers than Howard anyway. The Ovechkin/Crosby comparison is stupid because they only ended up in the same rookie class because of the lockout. Moreover, Crosby very likely would've won the award as a Canadian media darling, but Ovechkin ended up with 4 more points and 13 more goals over the same number of games, which made Ovechkin a pretty clear favorite on the merits. Both were first-year NHL players--whereas Jimmy Howard is in his 4th NHL season. Yes, I am aware that Tuukka Rask played in two other seasons, but see the earlier comments about age and numbers, and he also played a grand total of 5 games in those first two years. (Howard played 9, but has been "in the league" longer).

It is pretty much my point. It doesn't matter when you play. If you are an outstanding rookie you should be acknowledged for it. Your age shouldn't matter.

If Rask was the outright starter and maintained those numbers then he should have won it. There is a 17 game difference in games played between him and Howard. A lot can happen in 17 games.

[Carman]

Wasn't Raycroft 24?

[zettie85]

Wasn't Raycroft 24?

Ya he was. I would gladly hand the Calder to someone else for Howard not to follow the same path as Raycroft though.

[egroen]

Most likely Howard will join an esteemed list of Red Wings who were runner-up for the Calder:

2003: Zetterberg (behind Jackman)
1992: Lidstrom (behind Bure)
1991: Fedorov (behind Belfour)
1984: Yzerman (behind Barrasso
1966: Bert Marshall (behind Selby)
1963: Doug Barkley (behind Douglas)
1960: Murray Oliver (behind Hay)
1954: Earl Reibel (behind Henry)
1947: Jim Conacher (behind Meeker)
1941: Johnny Mowers (behind Quilty)
1936: Bucko McDonald (behind Karakas)

A few other notable Red Wings, who were not Wings at the time they were runner-ups:

2000: Brad Stuart (behind Gomez)
1999: Hossa was runner-up to Drury
1988: Ray Sheppard (behind Nieuwendyk)
1985: Chelios (behind Lemieux)
1982: Larry Murphy (behind Statsny)

Roger Crozier was the last Red Wing to win it in 1965!
Glenn Hall won in 1956.
Terry Sawchuk won in 1951.
Jim McFadden won in 1948.
And Carl Voss won it the first year it was awarded, in 1933.

[po-GoWings]

two words: sergei makarov

[Broken 16]

I flip-flop on this every day. Half the time I feel like what Howard has done is impressive enough despite his age. Especially since expectations (from the fan base) were pretty low. He is a massive reason why we have clinched a berth.

On the other hand...

It's been a long, long time since a rookie has come into the league on defense and made such an impact on their team, especially at his age. And it's not just impressive numbers, he plays well in all situations as far as I can tell.

Today I like Howie.

Tomorrow it'll probably be Myers.

Both are deserving. I'm just gonna call it a dead heat and not give a s*** who gets the trophy.

Edited by Broken 16, 06 April 2010 - 12:40 PM.

[GMRwings1983]

Based on the criteria, he's obviously not too old to win it.

It does, however, feel weird when he's going up against guys that are recently removed from high school for a rookie trophy. He obviously has more years and maturity on those guys.

I wouldn't be opposed to the league changing the criteria in the future, but right now Howard should be the leading candidate based on the current rule.

[Lidstromboli]

I'd hope the voters would realize that the large majority of goalies don't come into the league when they're 19 and 20 and generally take longer to develop.

[mmamolo]

To me the criteria are set in a very specific way for a reason - both in terms of defining the age requirements and the experience requirements. That being said, for anyone to make the arguments of (1)Howard's age being used against him or; (2) his few previous games of NHL experience or multiple years as a pro in the AHL being used against him, seem really contradictory to me.

I'm not trying to knock anyone by saying that and the fact is despite the fact I think those two arguments are silly, I do realize that not only will ppl believe them but the sports writers will use them. The facts are Howard is not only classes as a rookie by the NHL in terms of age but also in terms of experience. Being 26 years old and having AHL experience and 5 odd NHL games experience before this season should have nothing to do with the voting.

That being said, as much as I'd like to see Howard win, I'd be hard pressed to not vote for Myers.

My prediction:
1. Myers
2. Howard
3. Duchene

[titanium2]

2003: Zetterberg (behind Jackman)

[GMRwings1983]

I've said this before, but Jackass is no better a player now than he was then.

Guy hasn't improved at all since he was a rookie. What a lame joke.

[toby91_ca]

I'd hope the voters would realize that the large majority of goalies don't come into the league when they're 19 and 20 and generally take longer to develop.

You could say the same thing about defensemen.

[zettie85]

You could say the same thing about defensemen.

If Howard finishes 2nd I won't be disappointed as long as the winner is Myers and not Duchene.

[Finnish Wing]

I'd hope the voters would realize that the large majority of goalies don't come into the league when they're 19 and 20 and generally take longer to develop.

So you mean Rask should win it?

[Lidstromboli]

You could say the same thing about defensemen.

True, but the oldest Calder-winning defenseman in the past 30 years was 21. There's only been one d-man older than that to win it since the the award first came about.

The goalies have generally been in the 22-25 range.

So you mean Rask should win it?

If Rask had played 10-15 more games at the same level of play he'd probably be a lock to win it. That wasn't really my point though.

Edited by Lidstromboli, 06 April 2010 - 01:34 PM.

[Yzerman191]

People keep mentioning that Rask has better stats than Howard, but the workload has a lot to do with that. One of your jobs as a starting goaltender is to be ready to start any given game, whether they're back-to-back games (as Howard has done all season) or stretches of 20+ games in a row. Having played 60+ games in a season should warrant extra consideration, because as a goalie, battling the fatigue is one of your most difficult tasks. For example, had the last two games Howard played in not happened he would still be sitting around a .928 save percentage.

I also don't think age should play a factor. In Andrew Raycroft's Calder season, he was 23 years old, had 29 wins, a 2.05 GAA, .926 save percentage, and 3 shutouts in 57 games played. In Evgeni Nabokov's Calder season, he was 25 years old, had 32 wins, a 2.19 GAA, .915 save percentage, and 6 shutouts in 66 games played. Ed Belfour was also 25 years old when he won it. Howard differs from the three above goalies in no significant ways. His age, games played, GAA, save percentage, wins, and shutouts will be pretty similar to many recent goaltenders who have won it before him.

I'm not necessarily advocating Howard for the Calder because I think that Myers is equally deserving. I just think that it's ridiculous to discredit Howard based on his age or goaltenders with fewer games played but slightly better statistics.

[Finnish Wing]

People keep mentioning that Rask has better stats than Howard, but the workload has a lot to do with that. One of your jobs as a starting goaltender is to be ready to start any given game, whether they're back-to-back games (as Howard has done all season) or stretches of 20+ games in a row. Having played 60+ games in a season should warrant extra consideration, because as a goalie, battling the fatigue is one of your most difficult tasks. For example, had the last two games Howard played in not happened he would still be sitting around a .928 save percentage.

I also don't think age should play a factor. In Andrew Raycroft's Calder season, he was 23 years old, had 29 wins, a 2.05 GAA, .926 save percentage, and 3 shutouts in 57 games played. In Evgeni Nabokov's Calder season, he was 25 years old, had 32 wins, a 2.19 GAA, .915 save percentage, and 6 shutouts in 66 games played. Ed Belfour was also 25 years old when he won it. Howard differs from the three above goalies in no significant ways. His age, games played, GAA, save percentage, wins, and shutouts will be pretty similar to many recent goaltenders who have won it before him.

I'm not necessarily advocating Howard for the Calder because I think that Myers is equally deserving. I just think that it's ridiculous to discredit Howard based on his age or goaltenders with fewer games played but slightly better statistics.

I'm not saying Rask is a better candidate for the Calder than Howard, but I definitely think that he's the better goalie. People don't seem to get how insane those stats are. If he keeps those stats until the end of the season he will be on the all time top10 in save%. The reason why he hasn't been able to play so many games that the other goalie there is last year's Vezina winner whose cap hit is 5m. I think it's kinda easier to be the number one when the other goalie's name is Osgood and not Thomas.

So, Howard will probably be in the top3 for Calder voting and Rask won't. Still I think Rask has the chance to be the best goalie in the world in 5 years, and he already is better than Howard.

[egroen]

I'm not saying Rask is a better candidate for the Calder than Howard, but I definitely think that he's the better goalie. People don't seem to get how insane those stats are. If he keeps those stats until the end of the season he will be on the all time top10 in save%. The reason why he hasn't been able to play so many games that the other goalie there is last year's Vezina winner whose cap hit is 5m. I think it's kinda easier to be the number one when the other goalie's name is Osgood and not Thomas.

So, Howard will probably be in the top3 for Calder voting and Rask won't. Still I think Rask has the chance to be the best goalie in the world in 5 years, and he already is better than Howard.

Though Rask has faced considerably worse teams than Howard (like a backup typically does).
You might be right, but Rask's stats have definitely benefited from an easier schedule (and less games).

Edited by egroen, 06 April 2010 - 03:03 PM.

[toby91_ca]

People keep mentioning that Rask has better stats than Howard, but the workload has a lot to do with that. One of your jobs as a starting goaltender is to be ready to start any given game, whether they're back-to-back games (as Howard has done all season) or stretches of 20+ games in a row. Having played 60+ games in a season should warrant extra consideration, because as a goalie, battling the fatigue is one of your most difficult tasks. For example, had the last two games Howard played in not happened he would still be sitting around a .928 save percentage.

I also don't think age should play a factor. In Andrew Raycroft's Calder season, he was 23 years old, had 29 wins, a 2.05 GAA, .926 save percentage, and 3 shutouts in 57 games played. In Evgeni Nabokov's Calder season, he was 25 years old, had 32 wins, a 2.19 GAA, .915 save percentage, and 6 shutouts in 66 games played. Ed Belfour was also 25 years old when he won it. Howard differs from the three above goalies in no significant ways. His age, games played, GAA, save percentage, wins, and shutouts will be pretty similar to many recent goaltenders who have won it before him.

I'm not necessarily advocating Howard for the Calder because I think that Myers is equally deserving. I just think that it's ridiculous to discredit Howard based on his age or goaltenders with fewer games played but slightly better statistics.

I think you could draw pretty significant differences between Belfour's rookie season and Howard's, not that it really matters though.

True, but the oldest Calder-winning defenseman in the past 30 years was 21.

Yes, but that's really the point. With defensemen generally taking longer to develop, they tend to miss out on the Calder because they are not in the NHL at a young age or are not developed enough. So, age seems to play a bit of a role. You see very, very few young defensemen enter the league and play at the level Myers has played, that will give him a big edge I believe.

However, haven't considered this much, but I think Howard will get a bit of an edge due to timing. He and his team have been playing their best hockey at the end of the season....perhaps this is what the voters will remember.