NHL Rookie of the year
Jeff Richardson
Trophy for the NHL's rookie of the year, even though it seemed obvious that
Mario Lemieux would get it. This year is not so obvious, so I figured I'd
get the ball rolling.
I thought that Montreal's Kjell Dahlin had it wrapped up because he is by
far the leading rookie scorer with 28 goals and 63 points. However, if the
journalists that we read and hear here are any indication, he'll do no
better than third in the voting. His great stats are dismissed because
about half of them (13 goals and I don't know how many assists) have come
while playing on the top power-play in the league, with people like Mats
Naslund, Larry Robinson and Bobby Smith helping him out. On the other hand,
would that power play be as successful without Dahlin?
The name I hear the most as the league's top rookie is Toronto's Wendel
Clark, and that talk is coming from across Canada, not just the Toronto
area. Clark is well down the list of rookie scorers and Toronto scorers
with only 35 points, but what really catches people's eyes is his
agressive play and his ability to get things going by whatever means are
appropriate, and he is seen as a much more complete player than Dahlin.
Also, he has scored almost as many goals as Dahlin (26) playing on a bad team
with nowhere near as much help. What they fail to mention, however, is how
such a great complete player can have the second worst plus/minus on the
team (-27), but he is being judged the way players should be judged, by
ignoring the numbers and just watching him play, as indicated
by opposing coaches often raving about him after playing the Leafs.
Mike Ridley of the Rangers may also be ranked ahead of Dahlin. He's second
in rookie scoring, 13 points behind Dahlin, but he is leading his team in
scoring and getting much less help than Dahlin. He obviously means much more
to the Rangers than Dahlin does to Montreal.
So far, I'm undecided. Clark's been playing his best hockey lately, so
I'd like to wait and see what happens in the last 20 games. Any comments?
What's the view of the situation from where you are?
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsri!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff
Carlo Sgro
>Dahlin's great stats are dismissed because
>about half of them (13 goals and I don't know how many assists) have come
>while playing on the top power-play in the league, with people like Mats
>Naslund, Larry Robinson and Bobby Smith helping him out. On the other hand,
>would that power play be as successful without Dahlin?
Remember Warren Young? How about the plethora of journeymen wingers that played
on Gretzky's line in the early '80's. I've seen Dahlin play a few times this
year and am of the opinion that, if he were on a different line, he would be
an acceptible rookie, but not good enough for the Calder.
>The name I hear the most as the league's top rookie is Toronto's Wendel
>Clark, and that talk is coming from across Canada, not just the Toronto
>area. Clark is well down the list of rookie scorers and Toronto scorers
>with only 35 points, but what really catches people's eyes is his
>aggressive play and his ability to get things going by whatever means are
>appropriate, and he is seen as a much more complete player than Dahlin.
Definitely! He can really get a game going with his hitting. We are
looking at someone who can lead by example. Clark will be the captain of
the Leafs three years from now. He reminds me of Terry O'Reilly, except
with more talent.
>Also, he has scored almost as many goals as Dahlin (26) playing on a bad team
>with nowhere near as much help. What they fail to mention, however, is how
>such a great complete player can have the second worst plus/minus on the
>team (-27),
But when you watch him play, you don't see any obvious flaws in his defensive
style.
>but he is being judged the way players should be judged, by
>ignoring the numbers and just watching him play, as indicated
>by opposing coaches often raving about him after playing the Leafs.
True. Who does the voting, though?
One last comment about Clark ... What I feel cannot be ignored is his ability
to liven up a game by his aggressiveness. If his example catches on with the
Leafs, we have the makings of a .500+ hockey team.
>
>Mike Ridley of the Rangers may also be ranked ahead of Dahlin. He's second
>in rookie scoring, 13 points behind Dahlin, but he is leading his team in
>scoring and getting much less help than Dahlin. He obviously means much more
>to the Rangers than Dahlin does to Montreal.
I haven't seen much of Ridley but, based on the numbers, I would agree with
Jeff.
--
Carlo Sgro
...![ihnp4||decvax||allegra||clyde||utzoo]!watmath!watdragon!cjsgro
"ihnp4 Express: Overnight to the USA or you don't pay!"
Al Sary
>
>Remember Warren Young? How about the plethora of journeymen wingers that played
>on Gretzky's line in the early '80's. I've seen Dahlin play a few times this
I remember one; how does Blair McDonald sound (I might have got the first
name wrong). He had somethig like 40 (+?) goals one year, then he was traided
and gone from the leage a few years later. Wonder where he is now.
>looking at someone who can lead by example. Clark will be the captain of
>the Leafs three years from now.
A sprotscaster suggested that he should be named the captain now. In my
opinion, that would be a big mistake; that kind of a pressure is too much
for a 19 year old, in his first year in the NHL. I favour more experienced
(ie. older) players for captains.
--
Al Sary, CS Dep., U. of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2L 3G1
UUCP: ...!{utzoo|decvax|ihnp4|clyde|allegra|linus}!watmath!watcal!absary
ARPA: absary%watcal%waterlo...@csnet-relay.arpa
CSNET: absary%wat...@waterloo.CSNET
gbelleville
> In article <17...@dciem.UUCP> je...@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes:
> >Dahlin's great stats are dismissed because
> >about half of them (13 goals and I don't know how many assists) have come
> >while playing on the top power-play in the league, with people like Mats
> >Naslund, Larry Robinson and Bobby Smith helping him out.
> I've seen Dahlin play a few times this
> year and am of the opinion that, if he were on a different line, he would be
> an acceptible rookie, but not good enough for the Calder.
I suggest you watch a few more Montreal games.
Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith.
Did Montreal have the best power play last year? Noooooo.
And why do you suppose it is a lot better this year?
Did Bobby Smith score 80+ points last year?
Did Mats Naslund score 100+ points last year?
What has been added to the Montreal power play since last year?
Yup... Kjell Dahlin.
I'm sick and tired of Dahlin being devalued simply because
others are having good years. (Bobby Smith is the one benefitting
from playing with Naslund and Dahlin).
> >The name I hear the most as the league's top rookie is Toronto's Wendel
> >Clark, and that talk is coming from across Canada, not just the Toronto
> >area. Clark is well down the list of rookie scorers and Toronto scorers
> >with only 35 points, but what really catches people's eyes is his
> >aggressive play and his ability to get things going by whatever means are
> >appropriate, and he is seen as a much more complete player than Dahlin.
>
> Definitely! He can really get a game going with his hitting.
> He reminds me of Terry O'Reilly, except with more talent.
And we all know how many awards O'Reilly won.
The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
How many goals has he cost the Leafs this year by stupid penalties?
(Like Saturday vs Detroit). I agree the man has goal scoring talent,
but its awful hard to score from the penalty box.
>
> >Also, he has scored almost as many goals as Dahlin (26) playing on a bad team
> >with nowhere near as much help. What they fail to mention, however, is how
> >such a great complete player can have the second worst plus/minus on the
> >team (-27),
> But when you watch him play, you don't see any obvious flaws in his defensive
> style.
Ha! Maybe you don't but I do. He rarely back checks, and is always coasting
at centre ice. (The only reason he has so many goals is because Courtnall
is spoon-feeding him all the time).
When someone is -27, that says something about his defensive ability.
And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument,
because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's
plus-minus.
> >Mike Ridley of the Rangers may also be ranked ahead of Dahlin. He's second
> >in rookie scoring, 13 points behind Dahlin, but he is leading his team in
> >scoring and getting much less help than Dahlin. He obviously means much more
> >to the Rangers than Dahlin does to Montreal.
>
> I haven't seen much of Ridley but, based on the numbers, I would agree with
> Jeff.
So What?
The Calder Trophy is not for the most valuable rookie, but for the *BEST*
rookie. Just because Clark plays for the hapless Leafs is no reason to hand
him the Calder.
How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists?
NINE !! Clark beats up an opponent more often than he completes a pass.
The last time I checked (3 weeks ago), Clark was 188 th in the NHL in
scoring. Rookie of the year??? Gimme a break.
Here is a list of who I think the best rookies are:
1. Kjell Dahlin Mtl
2. Mike Ridley NYR
3. Per-Erik Eklund Pha
4. Steve Thomas Tor
Awaiting your flame,
G.B.
Carlo Sgro
Warning: the following article contains plenty of unedited material. I
usually cut down the preceding articles far more than this but I felt
that it was necessary in order to maintain the spirit of this article.
Please do not adjust your set.
In article <78...@watrose.UUCP> gbell...@watrose.UUCP (gbelleville) writes:
>< Donning Asbestos Suit >
Damn right, Gary! :-)
>
>> In article <17...@dciem.UUCP> je...@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes:
>> >Dahlin's great stats are dismissed because
>> >about half of them (13 goals and I don't know how many assists) have come
>> >while playing on the top power-play in the league, with people like Mats
>> >Naslund, Larry Robinson and Bobby Smith helping him out.
>> I've seen Dahlin play a few times this
>> year and am of the opinion that, if he were on a different line, he would be
>> an acceptible rookie, but not good enough for the Calder.
> I suggest you watch a few more Montreal games.
> Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith.
> Did Montreal have the best power play last year? Noooooo.
> And why do you suppose it is a lot better this year?
> Did Bobby Smith score 80+ points last year?
> Did Mats Naslund score 100+ points last year?
> What has been added to the Montreal power play since last year?
> Yup... Kjell Dahlin.
I suggest that you review the principles of causation. Just because Dahlin
is new does not mean that he is responsible for the success. Nor am I saying
that he did not have a part in it, either. What I said was that Dahlin
would not be good enough for the Calder. Is that a sin? He's still good
but let's not go overboard here.
>(Bobby Smith is the one benefitting from playing with Naslund and Dahlin).
Smith finally has the type of atmosphere that made him such a success in
Minnesota. He's a talented player who was not adapting to things in
Montreal. I'm glad that he's finally clicking. Let's not minimize his
effect on the other two, either.
>
>> >The name I hear the most as the league's top rookie is Toronto's Wendel
>> >Clark, and that talk is coming from across Canada, not just the Toronto
>> >area. Clark is well down the list of rookie scorers and Toronto scorers
>> >with only 35 points, but what really catches people's eyes is his
>> >aggressive play and his ability to get things going by whatever means are
>> >appropriate, and he is seen as a much more complete player than Dahlin.
>>
>> Definitely! He can really get a game going with his hitting.
>> He reminds me of Terry O'Reilly, except with more talent.
> And we all know how many awards O'Reilly won.
Come on! Do you mean to tell me that Terry O'Reilly was not a valuable
member of the Boston Bruins?!? Before age crept up on him, O'Reilly was
the team leader and a primary inspiration on the Bruins. I've always
hated the Bruins but I've always admired Terry O'Reilly's spunk and value.
By the way, in case you don't like the O'Reilly example, let me name a few
more names from the past for you (and remember, add more talent, OK?):
John Ferguson, Serge Savard, Butch Goring, Bobby Clarke ...
> The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
> How many goals has he cost the Leafs this year by stupid penalties?
> (Like Saturday vs Detroit). I agree the man has goal scoring talent,
> but its awful hard to score from the penalty box.
He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. And sometimes when
you're the only guy with guts out there you have to take some penalties in
order to show the other team that you can't be pushed around (like going
after (I think) Reed Larson on Friday night after Larson injured Salming).
If you're going to yell at him for goals scored due to penalties then
at least examine the other side of the ledger and take into account the number
of goals that he produces both directly and indirectly due to his inspirational
aggressive play.
>>
>> >Also, he has scored almost as many goals as Dahlin (26) playing on a bad team
>> >with nowhere near as much help. What they fail to mention, however, is how
>> >such a great complete player can have the second worst plus/minus on the
>> >team (-27),
>> But when you watch him play, you don't see any obvious flaws in his defensive
>> style.
> Ha! Maybe you don't but I do. He rarely back checks, and is always coasting
> at centre ice. (The only reason he has so many goals is because Courtnall
> is spoon-feeding him all the time).
It's obvious that we see two different types of games. To me, it seems like
Clark has directly produced Courtnall's improvement by letting him get more
open ice. I claim that Clark is to Courtnall as you claim Dahlin is to
Naslund and Smith (proportionately).
> When someone is -27, that says something about his defensive ability.
> And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument,
> because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's
> plus-minus.
As far as his backchecking goes, it's no worse than Mr. Dahlin's (and I would
say better). He's only a rookie playing on a lousy team. Like it or not,
it is a valid argument (or do you believe that all players should be able
to play like they've just played 5 years on the Edmonton Oilers?).
>
>> >Mike Ridley of the Rangers may also be ranked ahead of Dahlin. He's second
>> >in rookie scoring, 13 points behind Dahlin, but he is leading his team in
>> >scoring and getting much less help than Dahlin. He obviously means much more
>> >to the Rangers than Dahlin does to Montreal.
>>
>> I haven't seen much of Ridley but, based on the numbers, I would agree with
>> Jeff.
> So What?
> The Calder Trophy is not for the most valuable rookie, but for the *BEST*
> rookie. Just because Clark plays for the hapless Leafs is no reason to hand
> him the Calder.
a) No one is *handing* him anything.
b) Do you not define "best" as meaning best overall, including talent,
aggressiveness, effect on the team, etc.? In that case, how can you
categorically say "So What?" In doing that, you are saying that
factors such as those mentioned above don't matter, instead of
saying that we can make an incomplete judgement based on the information
that we have. Don't forget, we're talking about Ridley here.
c) Just because Dahlin plays for the Canadiens on a line with Naslund and
Smith and regularly on the powerplay, let's not equate that with playing
for the Leafs or the Rangers (as I stated before).
> How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists?
By the same token, anyone with only 19 assists doesn't deserve to be on
the All-Star team, right? I'm sure Tim Kerr would appreciate the
vacation.
> The last time I checked (3 weeks ago), Clark was 188 th in the NHL in
> scoring. Rookie of the year??? Gimme a break.
I call your attention to the aforementioned list of players, none of which
would break the bank in any scoring race (except Mr. Clarke). Give *him*
a break, huh?
gbelleville
> Damn right, Gary! :-)
> > Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith.
> > Did Montreal have the best power play last year? Noooooo.
> > And why do you suppose it is a lot better this year?
> > Yup... Kjell Dahlin.
> I suggest that you review the principles of causation. Just because Dahlin
> is new does not mean that he is responsible for the success. Nor am I saying
> that he did not have a part in it, either.
And that fact has been ignored in the media's evaluation of Dahlin.
> >(Bobby Smith is the one benefitting from playing with Naslund and Dahlin).
> Smith finally has the type of atmosphere that made him such a success in
> Minnesota. He's a talented player who was not adapting to things in
> Montreal. I'm glad that he's finally clicking. Let's not minimize his
> effect on the other two, either.
think the powerplay would suffer without him.
(I am confident Stephane Richer could be just as successfull).
> > The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
> > How many goals has he cost the Leafs this year by stupid penalties?
> > (Like Saturday vs Detroit). I agree the man has goal scoring talent,
> > but its awful hard to score from the penalty box.
> He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. And sometimes when
> you're the only guy with guts out there you have to take some penalties in
> order to show the other team that you can't be pushed around (like going
> after (I think) Reed Larson on Friday night after Larson injured Salming).
Isn't that what Goons are for?? Why should you have your #1 draft pick
playing policeman?? That job used to belong to Brubaker, but since the
Leafs got Clark they don't need him anymore. You should have your
garbage players doing the fighting so the people with goal scoring
talent(like Clark) can put the puck in the net. Clark might have
35+ goals by now if he had stayed on the ice longer this year.
>
> > And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument,
> > because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's
> > plus-minus.
> As far as his backchecking goes, it's no worse than Mr. Dahlin's (and I would
> say better). He's only a rookie playing on a lousy team. Like it or not,
> it is a valid argument (or do you believe that all players should be able
> to play like they've just played 5 years on the Edmonton Oilers?).
No, it is NOT a valid argument. You can't really believe that someone
with a -27 plus/minus is no worse defensively than someone with a -2
plus/minus when they both play forward on the same team.
Statistics do not tell the whole story, but this stat on Clark cannot
be overlooked when one tries to decide who is the best rookie.
>
> > How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists?
> By the same token, anyone with only 19 assists doesn't deserve to be on
> the All-Star team, right? I'm sure Tim Kerr would appreciate the
> vacation.
Wrongo. Consider that:
1) 19 is more than twice as much as 9, and that it was attained
in fewer games
2) Kerr had an amazing number of goals
3) Please don't compare being named to the "All Star" team with
winning a major NHL award.
>
> > The last time I checked (3 weeks ago), Clark was 188 th in the NHL in
> > scoring. Rookie of the year??? Gimme a break.
> I call your attention to the aforementioned list of players, none of which
> would break the bank in any scoring race (except Mr. Clarke). Give *him*
> a break, huh?
Sure. But if he didn't get into double digits in assists in his rookie
year thats *all* I would give him.
Gary.
Carlo Sgro
>> Damn right, Gary! :-)
> It's getting mighty warm in here! :-)
>
>> > Kjell Dahlin is NOT riding on the coat tails of Naslund and Smith.
>> > What has been added to the Montreal power play since last year?
>> > Yup... Kjell Dahlin.
>> I suggest that you review the principles of causation. Just because Dahlin
>> is new does not mean that he is responsible for the success. Nor am I saying
>> that he did not have a part in it, either.
> OK fine. He's not the only reason, but he is a contributing factor.
Finally! We agree on something! You won't get an argument from me there.
> And that fact has been ignored in the media's evaluation of Dahlin.
But you might here. I don't really think that Dahlin's relationship with
the powerplay has been ignored. After all, Jeff originally stated that
the large contribution that the power play made to Dahlin's stats was
tainting his position.
>> Smith finally has the type of atmosphere that made him such a success in
>> Minnesota. ... Let's not minimize his effect on the other two, either.
> You are right, Bobby is playing better this year, but I don't
> think the powerplay would suffer without him.
> (I am confident Stephane Richer could be just as successfull).
Amazing! Another point of agreement! I've only seen Richer twice this
year (he's been injured quite a bit) but it seems like he is a very good
player with a good sense for the open ice. Richer could possibly
replace Smith but that's only because of the Canadiens' depth.
>> > The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
>> He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. And sometimes when
>> you're the only guy with guts out there you have to take some penalties in
>> order to show the other team that you can't be pushed around (like going
>> after (I think) Reed Larson on Friday night after Larson injured Salming).
>
> Isn't that what Goons are for?? Why should you have your #1 draft pick
> playing policeman?? That job used to belong to Brubaker, but since the
> Leafs got Clark they don't need him anymore. You should have your
> garbage players doing the fighting so the people with goal scoring
> talent(like Clark) can put the puck in the net. Clark might have
> 35+ goals by now if he had stayed on the ice longer this year.
That's a fault of the Leafs, not a slight on Clark.
>>
>> > And don't use that "HE'S ON THE LEAFS AND THEY ARE A CRUDDY TEAM" argument,
>> > because that doesn't cut it. Check Courtnall's, Thomas' and Salming's
>> > plus-minus.
>> As far as his backchecking goes, it's no worse than Mr. Dahlin's (and I would
>> say better). He's only a rookie playing on a lousy team. Like it or not,
>> it is a valid argument (or do you believe that all players should be able
>> to play like they've just played 5 years on the Edmonton Oilers?).
>
> No, it is NOT a valid argument. You can't really believe that someone
> with a -27 plus/minus is no worse defensively than someone with a -2
> plus/minus when they both play forward on the same team.
> Statistics do not tell the whole story, but this stat on Clark cannot
> be overlooked when one tries to decide who is the best rookie.
And it won't be overlooked, either. I'm sure that there are plenty
of people who will look at that -27 and faint. But he is a ROOKIE.
Experience is a key when it comes to backchecking. Note that I tried
to emphasize that point. Evidently I failed.
>>
>> > How can you justify giving the Calder to someone with NINE assists?
>> By the same token, anyone with only 19 assists doesn't deserve to be on
>> the All-Star team, right? I'm sure Tim Kerr would appreciate the
>> vacation.
> Wrongo. Consider that:
> 1) 19 is more than twice as much as 9, and that it was attained
> in fewer games
So Kerr is better than Clark. Do we have any argument here?
> 2) Kerr had an amazing number of goals
See above.
Take everything in proportion and don't forget that we are dealing
with a ROOKIE here. They're not expected to have the same types of
numbers as veterans (can I borrow your asbestos suit for this one?).
> 3) Please don't compare being named to the "All Star" team with
> winning a major NHL award.
Why not? Kerr deserves to be an All Star, unlike many players
who are named to fill up space. Also, there have been a lot of
stiffs who have won the Calder.
Tom Haapanen
>>> Damn right, Gary! :-)
>> It's getting mighty warm in here! :-)
> The sprinklers just went off! :-)
>>> ... Dahlin and the Montreal power play ...
>> OK fine. He's not the only reason, but he is a contributing factor.
>Finally! We agree on something! You won't get an argument from me there.
>> And that fact has been ignored in the media's evaluation of Dahlin.
> But you might here. I don't really think that Dahlin's relationship with
> the powerplay has been ignored. After all, Jeff originally stated that
> the large contribution that the power play made to Dahlin's stats was
> tainting his position.
Yes, but! What the media is assuming is that Dahlin's production is
impressive BECAUSE OF the fact that he's on the league's best power
play unit. They're the ones that should be figuring out causation.
That power play production should NOT taint his chances -- although it may.
>>> ... Bobby Smith and the power play ...
>> (I am confident Stephane Richer could be just as successfull).
> Amazing! Another point of agreement! I've only seen Richer twice this
> year (he's been injured quite a bit) but it seems like he is a very good
> player with a good sense for the open ice. Richer could possibly
> replace Smith but that's only because of the Canadiens' depth.
In my opinion, had Richer not been injured, he would be a viable
candidate for the Calder as well. Flames on that one?
>>>> The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
>>> He's just a rookie making mistakes of overaggressiveness. <excuses follow>
>> Isn't that what Goons are for??
> That's a fault of the Leafs, not a slight on Clark.
I'm sure Maloney is not telling him "Go get him, Wendel!" (now if
Clark was playing for Detroit...). So, yes, he is making mistakes of
overaggressiveness. But, Carlo, in my opinion he is making far too
many of them, even for a rookie. Compare his penalty total to Dahlin
or Ridley...
>And it won't be overlooked, either. I'm sure that there are plenty
>of people who will look at that -27 and faint. But he is a ROOKIE.
>Experience is a key when it comes to backchecking. Note that I tried
>to emphasize that point. Evidently I failed.
We KNOW he's a rookie --- we ARE talking about the Calder trophy,
aren't we? OK, look at Clark's plus/minus and compare it to the other
Leafs. Now look at Dahlin's and Ridley's and compare them to the rest
of the Canadiens and Rangers. Do you still say Clark is good enough
defensively, EVEN AS A ROOKIE?
It's not that Clark isn't (or at least won't be in the future) a good
player, I just feel he's got too many deficiencies right now to merit
the Calder trophy.
\tom haapanen / watrose!tohaapanen
university of waterloo ..!watmath <-- watmum!tohaapanen
\ watlion!tohaapanen
I am one in ten, a number on a list
I am one in ten, even though I don't exist
No-body knows me, though I'm always there
A statistical reminder of a world that doesn't care (c) UB40, 1981
Carlo Sgro
<Welcome to net.sport.hockey.waterloo. By the time this posting makes it
out of the city, it will no doubt be joined by umpteen other postings by
other Waterlooites. Well, at least it's getting lively!>
Key: >>>>> and >>> = Gary Belleville; > = Tom Haapanen; >>>> and >> = me
>>>>> < Donning Asbestos Suit >
>>>> Damn right, Gary! :-)
>>> It's getting mighty warm in here! :-)
>> The sprinklers just went off! :-)
>Hey, this is really starting to look like fun!
Net.sport.hockey.flame, anyone?
>>> And that fact has been ignored in the media's evaluation of Dahlin.
>
>> But you might here. I don't really think that Dahlin's relationship with
>> the powerplay has been ignored. After all, Jeff originally stated that
>> the large contribution that the power play made to Dahlin's stats was
>> tainting his position.
"tainting" meaning "warping".
>That power play production should NOT taint his chances -- although it may.
Of course. You shouldn't be penalized for something good that happens
to you. This happens far too often in pro sports (especially when assessing
pitching in various ballparks in baseball, but that's another newsgroup).
>> ... I've only seen Richer twice this
>> year (he's been injured quite a bit) but it seems like he is a very good
>> player with a good sense for the open ice. Richer could possibly
>> replace Smith but that's only because of the Canadiens' depth.
>
>In my opinion, had Richer not been injured, he would be a viable
>candidate for the Calder as well. Flames on that one?
My original comment on Richer was not strong enough. I agree with you on
this one, Tom.
>
>>>>> The bottom line is Clark has spent far too much time in the penalty box.
>> That's a fault of the Leafs, not a slight on Clark.
>Compare his penalty total to Dahlin or Ridley...
I don't see how this disagrees with my point on how the Leafs need someone
to be aggressive for them. Dahlin and Ridley don't have that role (and NOT
the goon role; has everyone forgotten my Terry O'Reilly comparison already?)
with their teams because other players do it.
>>And it won't be overlooked, either. I'm sure that there are plenty
>>of people who will look at that -27 and faint. But he is a ROOKIE.
>>Experience is a key when it comes to backchecking. Note that I tried
>>to emphasize that point. Evidently I failed.
>
>We KNOW he's a rookie --- we ARE talking about the Calder trophy,
>aren't we?
It seems as though that fact got lost (or ignored) in previous postings.
>OK, look at Clark's plus/minus and compare it to the other
>Leafs. Now look at Dahlin's and Ridley's and compare them to the rest
>of the Canadiens and Rangers. Do you still say Clark is good enough
>defensively, EVEN AS A ROOKIE?
Again, it goes back to his aggressiveness. His plus/minus won't be
ignored but does his aggressiveness make up for it. I say yes. The
Leafs simply would not be where they are if it were not for Wendel
Clark. I know that we are not talking about "most valuable rookie" but
maybe we should be.
nwszcyrek
>
> <Welcome to net.sport.hockey.waterloo. By the time this posting makes it
> out of the city, it will no doubt be joined by umpteen other postings by
> other Waterlooites. Well, at least it's getting lively!>
>
> >>>>> < Donning Asbestos Suit >
> >>>> Damn right, Gary! :-)
> >>> It's getting mighty warm in here! :-)
> >> The sprinklers just went off! :-)
> >Hey, this is really starting to look like fun!
> Net.sport.hockey.flame, anyone?
Okay, I'll bite (although I think I better put on the Suit too).
(Please humour the remarks you are about to read. They come to you from one who has only been reading the postings for one week.)
After reading all the available postings on the subject of ROTY, I felt I should add another opinion to it. Right off the bat, I think that both Dahlin and Clarke are very good rookies and it's a shame that one of them won't cop
the Calder.
While it's true that I've seen more Leaf games than Habs games (much to my dismay), I've watched enough games with both players to draw
adequate conclusions on both.
Wendel Clarke has been the better of the two from about the halfway point
of the season up-to-date. He's an exciting player to watch since his
style of play resembles a bull in a china shop. If he takes the Stan Mikita
approach (Mikita led the league in penalty minutes in his rookie season and
then went on to capture two Lady Byng's) to let the rest of the league know
he won't be pushed around, fine. Right now though, he is a little too
reckless. I won't comment on his plus-minus stats since everyone else has
thoroughly covered that topic.
As for Dahlin, all the negative points about his scoring so many goals on the
power-play bothers me. Has anyone noticed that the reason he is used on the
power-play is that he's good enough to be out there! Usually a team puts out
their best players in order to score (isn't that the point of a powerplay?).
Anyway, for the first half of the season Dahlin was the most dominant rookie
in the league. He still has to work on his defence and also try to be a little
more consistant.
> >> ... I've only seen Richer twice this
> >> year (he's been injured quite a bit) but it seems like he is a very good
> >> player with a good sense for the open ice. Richer could possibly
> >> replace Smith but that's only because of the Canadiens' depth.
> >
> >In my opinion, had Richer not been injured, he would be a viable
> >candidate for the Calder as well. Flames on that one?
> My original comment on Richer was not strong enough. I agree with you on
> this one, Tom.
No flames here, either. Everyone seems to have forgotten that Richer was tied with Dahlin throughout the beginning of the season, before his injury. Since he has returned, he has not been quite as effective, unfortunately. Another Hab rookie seems to have been forgotten, Sergio Momesso. Before his injury, he was starting to show some offensive output to go along with his defensive prowess.
He would have been a long-shot. As for the rest of the rookies in the league,
Steve Thomas is pretty good but his chances for RYOT were virtually eliminated
when the Leafs sent him down to the minors. I haven't seen enough of Mike
Ridley, Per-Erik Eklund or either of the two Finnish Islander forwards
(whose names escape me) to make any judgments.
Hey, don't forget who does the balloting for this thing, the writers. The whole thing depends on how the writers outside the divisions of the above mentioned
rookies vote. These people only get to see Clark and Dahlin three games out of
the season. What tends to influence these writers are statistics. In most
recent years, the player who has scored the most POINTS gets the majority of
the votes (unless there happens to be an outstanding defenceman or goalie that
year).
(Flames, anyone?)
Norman Szcyrek.
(You only live life once...and sometimes not even then!)