EHM The Blue Line

philou21 wrote: For Panarin I'm not surprised. I mean...wasn't it Howard than won or got nominated at 26 or something like that? He did played in the KHL, which is a pro league but the Calder only mentions that it's for the NHL rookie of the year. They don't mention any age or particular situations required.

It definitely shouldn't be prohibited to vote even for the oldest rookie but I'm just wondering if it's ''fair'' to the other guys. Before the awards I thought they would take his age and playing partners into consideration and value how well McDavid did even with missing a chunk of the season with injury.

I would have given my vote to Parayko.

They put the age limit of 26 to Calder after Sergei Makarov won it at the age of 31. However, the player's age is not taken into consideration in the evaluation itself.

ClassicSwarley wrote: I mean, how can you NOT give the award for the best defenseman to a guy who scored 82 points.. as a defenseman?!

There's some backlash about the whole "offensive defenseman" aspect of it, and some voters are now trying to put less weight on the scoring aspect. Karlsson has improved some defensively but is... still a hot mess at times on the ice in his own zone. Some voters look at Doughty's dependability in his own zone and have decided that should weigh more.

jhcjobpb wrote:I would have given my vote to Parayko.

He definitely put up some impressive numbers, especially the ''geeky''/analytics stuff.

ClassicSwarley wrote:

jhcjobpb wrote:I would have given my vote to Parayko.

He definitely put up some impressive numbers, especially the ''geeky''/analytics stuff.

I haven't seen any of those. He looked like he'd played in NHL for 10 years. Very rarely made mistakes.

Primis wrote:

ClassicSwarley wrote: I mean, how can you NOT give the award for the best defenseman to a guy who scored 82 points.. as a defenseman?!

There's some backlash about the whole "offensive defenseman" aspect of it, and some voters are now trying to put less weight on the scoring aspect. Karlsson has improved some defensively but is... still a hot mess at times on the ice in his own zone. Some voters look at Doughty's dependability in his own zone and have decided that should weigh more.

I agree with the "some voters"

And how can anyone think points makes one the best defensemen? That shows he excels at one part of the game, the least important for a defensemen.
IMO Pronger in his prime was a better D than "offensive" defensemen like Karlsson/Doughty

I used to hate it when Paul Coffey got Norris votes!

it's almost hereeeeee Do you guys think any of the big names gets moved over the weekend? Especially round 1?

Like almost every years there is rumors but nothing happens.

The next week or two should be interesting at the very least. Draft tonight and then free agency in a week. I hope the Bruins get a clue and do something!

I'm super stoked for the Draft and the start of Free Agency, especially the whole Stamkos debacle.

Top 10 in the 2016 NHL Draft, a tad bit surprised Dubois went 3rd before Puljujarvi but other than that, everything went pretty much as expected.

The best draft in history for Finland. 3 in Top5. Bright future!

Kekäläinen (CBJ GM) who is Finnish is know for disliking Finns. So I'm not surprised.

Edmonton who really needs a D-man should have picked Juolevi instead imo.
But I'm glad that Puljujärvi might now get a chanse to play with McD.

Tasku wrote:At amateur level Finland is more a football country than hockey.....At supporter level ice hockey is clearly the most popular sport

That's Canada too...hockey's WAY more popular as a spectator sport

I'm surprised Dubois got picked 3rd and I can't believe EDM didn't picked a freaking defensemen. I know I know, you go with the BPA....

Habs got rid of Eller. I have a hard time to understand how WAS gave two second round pick for him.....and how the Habs gave two second round for Shaw! Overall though I think they are better with Shaw than Eller.

Habs signed Shaw for 6 years averaging 3.9$ per year. I think 6 years is a bit long and that 3.9 might be a bit too much. Maybe 3.5 would've been better.

Forsberg signed a nice deal with Nashville too. I still can't believe WSH let him go for Eaton.

philou21 wrote:Forsberg signed a nice deal with Nashville too. I still can't believe WSH let him go for Eaton.

He was traded for Erat. But yes it' one of the worst trades.

I think Habs made a mistake signing Shaw to that kind of deal. Usually that's the kind of stuff you regret later on, saying to yourself, 'Why did they give him 6 years..'
But.. maybe that's just me and he turns out to be great for them!

jhcjobpb wrote:

philou21 wrote:Forsberg signed a nice deal with Nashville too. I still can't believe WSH let him go for Eaton.

He was traded for Erat. But yes it' one of the worst trades.

Oh yeah my bad.


And yes Swarley that's what I'm think too. 4 years max with these kind of players should be enough.

I don't think it is that bad. Shaw is only 24 years old. He'll be 30 when that contract is over
Sure, his style of play might take its toll but he has been durable so far.

I'd be more wary of signing Stamkos long-term. He's coming from a not-so-great season and he will never score 60 again

Yeah his age makes the deal ok with me. If he was 28 that would've been a bad choice.

Manimal wrote:I'd be more wary of signing Stamkos long-term. He's coming from a not-so-great season and he will never score 60 again

Yeah but if he scores 40 (which he can totally do IMO) he's probably worth it for most teams. 40 goals scorers are very, very hard to find in this day and age, and in a "down" year last year he was still 8th in the league in Goals, with "only" 36.

As a Detroit fan, I know I'd take that infusion of offense. My only questions are his blood clots/health. Not his production.

Shaw is not as good as everyone thinks he is. He was in a good team with good guys. He will never produce those Chicago numbers again (penalty minutes only). Mark my words. Makes that deal a laugh in my eyes.

But hey! I can be wrong and you can quote me and have a laugh!

jhcjobpb wrote:Shaw is not as good as everyone thinks he is. He was in a good team with good guys. He will never produce those Chicago numbers again (penalty minutes only). Mark my words. Makes that deal a laugh in my eyes.

But hey! I can be wrong and you can quote me and have a laugh!

I agree at some point with you. He was often playing with Toews and only ended up with 39? 44 pts? The Habs are not even close to have some of the players Chicago has. He might play on the second line and on the PP but I doubt he will produce like he did.

That being said. Shaw plays with alot of intensity and this is something the Habd are missing, ALOT. So they're still a bit better with him than Eller IMO.