Is it possible to win Rookie of the Year (Calder) twice?

[BarD2428]

Hear me out ,

To be considered a rookie, a player must not have played in more than 25 NHL games in any preceding seasons, nor in six or more NHL games in each of any two preceding seasons. Any player at least 26 years of age (by September 15th of that season) is not considered a rookie. ~ NHL.Com

So lets just say player X was injured for all but 25 games in season 1. If this person produced at an unseen rate (i.e 3pts/game) and potted 75 points in these games, then that would surely be the best rookie campaign (of all time, no doubt) and would possibly garner a calder (Yes IK they only played 25 games but 75 points!?)

And then the season after (also being considered a rookie), they put like 100+ pts over 82 games (which would also 100% get them the calder).

Point is, could this happen and would the NHL do something to stop this crazy scenario?

Click to read more...

 

[ResilientBeast]

Hear me out ,

To be considered a rookie, a player must not have played in more than 25 NHL games in any preceding seasons, nor in six or more NHL games in each of any two preceding seasons. Any player at least 26 years of age (by September 15th of that season) is not considered a rookie. ~ NHL.Com

So lets just say player X was injured for all but 25 games in season 1. If this person produced at an unseen rate (i.e 3pts/game) and potted 75 points in these games, then that would surely be the best rookie campaign (of all time, no doubt) and would possibly garner a calder (Yes IK they only played 25 games but 75 points!?)

And then the season after (also being considered a rookie), they put like 100+ pts over 82 games (which would also 100% get them the calder).

Point is, could this happen and would the NHL do something to stop this crazy scenario?

I assume the rule is having played <25 games and =>25 is ineligible.
So no

 

[BarD2428]

I assume the rule is having played <25 games and =>25 is ineligible.
So no

True, but whenever you hear something like: "Marner has been an excellent Rookie", he's already classified as a rookie despite not playing 25 games. So technically is it "untrue" to refer to someone who hasn't played 25 games as a rookie?

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

True, but whenever you hear something like: "Marner has been an excellent Rookie", he's already classified as a rookie despite not playing 25 games. So technically is it "untrue" to refer to someone who hasn't played 25 games as a rookie?

No.

They'll continue to be a rookie until they finish a season with more than 25 games.

A player can be a rookie for multiple seasons.

Not exactly sure what the threshold for that is though. I don't imagine a player skating in 24 games a season until he's 40 would still be a rookie.

 

[Fear]

I'm sure if the first part happened (someone won Calder before 25 games) the NHL would clarify the rule in that summer before it could happen.

Also, I think this could happen with a goalie. Imagine some rookie goalie comes in and starts 22 games at the end of the year and goes 18-4 or something absurd.

 

[Thehair17]

Well Jamie Storr was top rookie goalie two years in a row, so if there was a really weak rookie class two years in a row with a the same solid rookie backup, maybe. Highly unlikely though.

 

[ClydeLee]

No.

They'll continue to be a rookie until they finish a season with more than 25 games.

A player can be a rookie for multiple seasons.

Not exactly sure what the threshold for that is though. I don't imagine a player skating in 24 games a season until he's 40 would still be a rookie.

There's already the rules of or having played X whatever it is many games over multiple seasons. Like it's even a low number like 6 each year in 3 years or something.

Even if he played that well he'd likely get shunned by precedent.

 

[Juicy Pop]

I inclined to believe that, in such an extreme scenario, the voting pool would simply pass the player over for the 2nd best rookie.

 

[Diamondillium]

I'm sure if the first part happened (someone won Calder before 25 games) the NHL would clarify the rule in that summer before it could happen.

Also, I think this could happen with a goalie. Imagine some rookie goalie comes in and starts 22 games at the end of the year and goes 18-4 or something absurd.

That theoretical is actually an understatement of the exact Andrew Hammond situation. 24 games played to finish the year, 0.941 and 20 wins to bring team into the playoffs.

If that goalie performance didn't win one, then no goalie performance will under 25 games.

 

[VainGretzky]

The op has to much free mind time A+ for original thread though .Can't see this ever being one since HF started.

 

[amnesiac]

Well Jamie Storr was top rookie goalie two years in a row, so if there was a really weak rookie class two years in a row with a the same solid rookie backup, maybe. Highly unlikely though.

he made the all-rookie team 2 years in a row even!

 

[Treb]

That theoretical is actually an understatement of the exact Andrew Hammond situation. 24 games played to finish the year, 0.941 and 20 wins to bring team into the playoffs.

If that goalie performance didn't win one, then no goalie performance will under 25 games.

Hammond turned 26 in February 2014, rendering him ineligible for the Calder because he was 26 before September 15 2014.

 

[Kamina]

That theoretical is actually an understatement of the exact Andrew Hammond situation. 24 games played to finish the year, 0.941 and 20 wins to bring team into the playoffs.

If that goalie performance didn't win one, then no goalie performance will under 25 games.

Ineligible due to age.

edit: got beat to it, damn.

 

[Diamondillium]

Hammond turned 26 in February 2014, rendering him ineligible for the Calder because he was 26 before September 15 2014.

Ah right, forgot about that.