The Calder is for Rookies, Right?

The Calder Trophy is the award handed out each year "to the player selected as the most proficient in his first year of competition in the National Hockey League" ... but does it really get given to that player?  Sure, I suppose it can be argued that it does, however there is a pretty big problem with who is considered a rookie and who isn't.  I have gone into changes I believe should be made with other trophies but previously I haven't discussed this one.  However that changes here today.

I'll take a moment to quote one of the qualifications to be named a rookie.  "To be eligible for the award, a player cannot have played any more than 25 games previously in any single season, nor have played in more than six games in each of two separate preceding seasons in any major professional league."  Players must also be 26 or younger on September 15th of the "rookie" year, but that isn't a problem here.  That first, quoted qualification however is.

For example, Wayne Gretzky in his first year in the NHL scored 137 points which was tied for tops in the league, did not win the rookie of the year award.  Instead it went to Ray Bourque who did have a great season but nothing like Gretzky's.  So why didn't he win it?  He played in the World Hockey Association the previous year and thus was ineligible to be called a rookie in his first year of NHL play.  Sure, he was only 18 at the time and won the trophy for the league's most valuable player but because of his season in the WHA he wasn't a rookie in the NHL.

The problems with Calder eligibility are evident in this year's voting as well.  Take for example Alex Pietrangelo who played 8 games two years ago, then 9 games last year.  Those 17 games made him a "veteran" according to the league.  However then you take the likes of Couture, a nominee this year, who played 25 games last season but then also got 15 playoff games which don't count towards the total for some reason ... or Grabner who played 20 games and then 9 more playoff games.  Both of these players are Calder finalists with their 40 and 29 games, yet Pietrangelo is not despite having played less games than either of those players.  Grabner even has an additional 2 1/2 years playing in the NHL to draw upon.

So why is it that playoff games don't count?  Why is that a player with only 17 games isn't eligible where one with 40 games is?  The system just doesn't make sense and needs changed.  Perhaps something as simple as "anyone with more than 20 games in any previous seasons, regular season or playoff, is ineligible for rookie status".  It seems to make sense that someone who is younger and played fewer games would be eligible but in Pietrangelo's case that isn't so.  He is younger, has played fewer games, but yet he is not eligible compared to the finalists Couture and Grabner.  This is a system that needs a change.