Speculation: 2014-15 goaltending speculation

[jmwc95]

Osgood and Crawford have better SV% in the playoffs than the regular season. I think they are both guys who get locked in come playoff time (well sometimes).

Niemi and MAF both seem to be cases where the team they won with had an unreal amount of depth and scoring power.

I am not saying anything about how this relates to the Blues, just some food for thought.

Sounds like Osgood and Crawford's teams ratcheted up their defense in the playoffs. There is no way you are going to convince me they are better playoff goalies than Elliott. They just played for better teams.

Also, Leighton and Emery backstopped the Flyers and Ottawa to the Finals in that timeframe as well. Osgood and MAF had a second trip to the finals since the 04-05 lockout as well.

The point is that you don't need Dominick Hasek in goal to make it to or win the Cup. Average goaltending is good enough if you have a top team. I'd rather keep our core together and keep Elliott/Allen on ~$4M/yr than drop $7M+ for 5+ years on a 34-year-old (on July 17th) "name" goaltender and have to trade away some of our core. The incremental upgrade is net is less than the incremental downgrade we would have to make on our 3rd line and/or 3rd defensive pairing.

 

[Bluesgirl]

As I already mentioned once, I may be Halaks biggest fan, but I can be objective too. But some things really bother me, I mean, seriously, how can people blame him for having flu, or still bringing up his groin? Quick is having groin problems too and hes one hell of a goalie. Its really disgusting when some of you actually think hes faking it and what bothers me the most is people blaming him for not being interested enough or being lazy. Just because someone doesnt really show emotions doesnt mean he doesnt care. Jaro wants to play and win as anyone else, trust me. And he DOES work hard, Im sure you all read about his offseason workout and Ive read on twitter couple of times that Halak was leaving the practice the last one. And to his goaltending skills, well Im his defender so I may be biased sometimes but I dont think you are always objective, cause there are people who said Halak never steals any games. Well I can remember people jumping on Halak bandwagon after first two games against Chicago and the game against Boston, saying that he won that game. Hes been stellar in the game against CGY but still some people actually blamed him, even though he actually saved the blues from losing in regulation. And the last game against Chicago, well the 3rd goal was all on him but I dont think you could fault him for the first two goals, yet there were many people bashing him, despite some big saves in the first minutes. And its been reported Halak has been feeling sick since Dec. 21st so he wasnt at 100% . I just dont think hes as bad as some of you make him out to be. Actually its funny, detroit fans are complaing about Howard, Jets fans about Pavelec, Oilers about Nabokov, everyone is always blaming the goalies, I guess thats the nature of hockey fans. Thats all I wanted to say. Peace

 

[Celtic Note]

Sounds like Osgood and Crawford's teams ratcheted up their defense in the playoffs. There is no way you are going to convince me they are better playoff goalies than Elliott. They just played for better teams.

Also, Leighton and Emery backstopped the Flyers and Ottawa to the Finals in that timeframe as well. Osgood and MAF had a second trip to the finals since the 04-05 lockout as well.

The point is that you don't need Dominick Hasek in goal to make it to or win the Cup. Average goaltending is good enough if you have a top team. I'd rather keep our core together and keep Elliott/Allen on ~$4M/yr than drop $7M+ for 5+ years on a 34-year-old (on July 17th) "name" goaltender and have to trade away some of our core. The incremental upgrade is net is less than the incremental downgrade we would have to make on our 3rd line and/or 3rd defensive pairing.

Sure DET and CHI played well defensively, but Osgood and Crawford played really well during their Cup runs. Lets not completely downplay that accomplishment.

Again, I am not trying to argue one way or the other for our goaltenders, just trying to avoid revisionist history.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Sure DET and CHI played well defensively, but Osgood and Crawford played really well during their Cup runs. Lets not completely downplay that accomplishment.

Again, I am not trying to argue one way or the other for our goaltenders, just trying to avoid revisionist history.

They did play well, but they also had some incredible team defense played in front of them. You're right in that it's definitely not one factor or the other individually. That said, if Cory friggin Crawford can win a cup, I think Halak or Elliott could do the same if they get hot at the right time. I guess the point to take away from all the discussion is that even an average regular season goalie who gets hot at the right time can help his team win a cup.

 

[Celtic Note]

They did play well, but they also had some incredible team defense played in front of them. You're right in that it's definitely not one factor or the other individually. That said, if Cory friggin Crawford can win a cup, I think Halak or Elliott could do the same if they get hot at the right time. I guess the point to take away from all the discussion is that even an average regular season goalie who gets hot at the right time can help his team win a cup.

I think most of the goalies we are discussing are more than just average though. It might only be above average, but they had points and the ability to step up.

To be honest, I think either Elliot or Halak could be on a Cup team if they got hot at the right time and the team played lights out in front of them. In my mind, Elliot was not far off from accomplishing that last year, but he let up some fluke goals and are team couldn't put away the Kings when the opportunity arose.

The other side of the coin for me is always how can we improve the team? A top six center/goaltending are the top two areas followed by bigger defense and forwards that use their size in addition to the qualities our guys already bring (those are harder to find traits than most think IMO).

Since this is the goaltending discussion thread and we have nitpicked our goaltenders to death, I would be interested in analyzing guys who bring that higher level of play more consistently. Then we can try to figure out if they are attainab le and if we can afford them (financial + assets). I guess we have done this with Miller, but that has been beaten to death too. So who are some other guys worth disussing?

 

[Sundowner1646]

i think elliott deserves the position of #1 for a while, even if he has a couple random bad games in the next few months. that stat line of "22-3-2 with a 1.59 GAA and .937 save-percentage in his last 27 regular-season starts" is friggin' ridiculous. i don't think the blues were ousted last year by the kings because of poor goaltending anyways, it was because the boys couldn't find the back of the net. elliott let up one soft goal in overtime in game 5 that really hurt but gave the team adequate chances to win game 3 and game 6. i'm sure ryan miller, jonathan quick (game 1 and 2 last year) and jimmy howard have let in their share of untimely soft goals. elliott played good enough for the team to beat the defending stanley cup champs provided he had some goal support, what more can you ask for?

if there's any way to improve the club through trade (with a goalie, scorer, defensemen), armstrong should listen but he shouldn't overpay or be convinced something is imminently wrong with the team he already has assembled.

jaro entered the year with the job and frankly he hasn't played well enough for a nhl #1 goalie. he's tied for 29th in the league in save percentage and he looked flat in the most recent san jose game, looked flat in the chicago game. i think the best thing for jaro would be to go down to the minors for a few weeks, play every day, get some hunger and confidence back. maybe the olympics will give him a boost of self esteem.

in summation, it's elliott's job right now and his to keep or lose.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I think most of the goalies we are discussing are more than just average though. It might only be above average, but they had points and the ability to step up.

To be honest, I think either Elliot or Halak could be on a Cup team if they got hot at the right time and the team played lights out in front of them. In my mind, Elliot was not far off from accomplishing that last year, but he let up some fluke goals and are team couldn't put away the Kings when the opportunity arose.

The other side of the coin for me is always how can we improve the team? A top six center/goaltending are the top two areas followed by bigger defense and forwards that use their size in addition to the qualities our guys already bring (those are harder to find traits than most think IMO).

Since this is the goaltending discussion thread and we have nitpicked our goaltenders to death, I would be interested in analyzing guys who bring that higher level of play more consistently. Then we can try to figure out if they are attainab le and if we can afford them (financial + assets). I guess we have done this with Miller, but that has been beaten to death too. So who are some other guys worth disussing?

I think you and I are both pretty much in agreement on this one. To your point about who else, I'm not really sure. Hiller maybe?

 

[intangible]

Considering the Blues aren't putting Elliott in the starting role, it seems they agree with me. Though I disagree with them about Halak being a starter. Personally, I think we have two backups on this team.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Still waiting for an actual argument for why you can simply discount three months worth of bad play by Elliott and only focus on the one good month (actually, spectacular month).

p.s. Considering the Blues aren't putting Elliott in the starting role, it seems they agree with me. Though I disagree with them about Halak being a starter. Personally, I think we have two backups on this team.

Try 9 games. You act as if he was the only guy playing for a 3 month stretch, when in fact he barely ever played. If you don't think that a lockout couldn't possibly negatively effect a goalie then I don't know what to say. So again, 9 flipping games.

 

[Celtic Note]

MOD NOTE: Warning - Posters continuing to use snarky comments will receive thread bans.

 

[PocketNines]

Nah, only have played goalie for 16+ years of my life, including juniors in Canada.

What you described, Pocket, are excuses, plain and simple. I don't care that there was a lock out, that he CHOSE not to play overseas or, apparently, get in some sort of rhythm. Fact of the matter is he was terrible for three months of the season, so much in fact that we brought up a rookie who usurped both him and Halak at the time. Starting goalies can't take three months off (regardless of Luongo attempting this seemingly every year). It was inexcusable then and would be now. Elliott simply isn't a starter regardless of how much you and/or others want to "know why Elliott doesn't get any respect." He does, but it's in his more appropriate roll: as backup.

p.s. If I took three months off when I played juniors, you know what would've happened? Cut. "Oh, you took four months off, not playing at all, came back and was horrible? Thanks but no thanks. Enjoy hockey in the States!" At his level it's even more inexcusable.

This is a truly terrible post, not least of which because you're responding to someone else, or that you're peddling the extraordinarily dishonest "three months" line. I challenge you to take the best argument of the other side and show why your argument is superior anyhow and instead you caricaturistically expand your terrible argument to "three months." Sums it all up. Not even worth engaging any further. Also there is a difference between roll and role.

 

[BlueDream]

"Blues coach Ken Hitchcock believes that teammates are rallying behind Elliott because of his personality — taking the ice in warm-up gear on an optional day of practice — and his work ethic.

“You know Jaro had the net there for a little while,†Hitchcock said. “Brian wasn’t playing, but he was staying late, coming on early, working his tail off in practice. That rubs the players the right way. He had a great attitude when he played, had a great attitude when he practiced, and then when it’s his turn, the players feel an obligation towards putting in the extra effort, blocking the extra shot. They see all the work that he’s put in to make himself better, and the guys feel obligated to do extra things to help him out.â€

“You want him to do well and that’s something that goes a long way,†Blues defenseman Barret Jackman said. “He’s one of those guys when you need him, he’s there and he’s challenging everybody around him to be better. You really feel good for a guy that works that hard and gets the payoff.â€

One could make the case that Elliott’s tough stretch last season was the exception, not the rule, in his time with the Blues. In 74 games with the club, he’s 48-19-7 with a 1.82 GAA and a .928 save percentage.

“Everyone was always worried about when you lose him, you lose him,†Hirsch said. “But we’re talking in the past three seasons, we lost him a little bit last year, and he had to go get his game refined. But we’ve gotten 60, 70 really good games out of him. How many guys around the league can say that? Of all the goalies that I’ve ever worked with, if you had someone that you would call a true professional, it’s him.â€

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/hock...cle_f9caaf9b-49ef-5d8f-8df4-62e27012a6fb.html

You wouldn't see most of this stuff written about Halak. It's pretty easy to see the how the personalities of Elliott and Halak mesh differently with the team. Just relaying the article.

 

[Alklha]

Considering the Blues aren't putting Elliott in the starting role, it seems they agree with me. Though I disagree with them about Halak being a starter. Personally, I think we have two backups on this team.

Let's wait and see what the role of Elliott is. I tend to agree that we have 2 backups, but your accusations of a bad 3 month spell simply isn't true. He had a bad 9 game stretch, and 3 of those games weren't even bad.

I'll be the first to say I'm not convinced that Elliott is a starter, but I'm certain that Halák isn't going to be the answer on this team. Halák "earned" the starters role in preseason, and cemented it with a hot start.

Elliott is our best option for now, and despite my own reservations, we shouldn't be completely discrediting him on the basis of small bad run.

 

[Cotton McKnight]

I am just frustrated with our tending, but the stats that other posters are throwing up about Elliot makes me feel a tad bit more comfortable with him than I previously felt. I just really hope we make the right choice and we are not looking back at this one shaking our head at a difficult situation that we had to make a guess on.

 

[rumrokh]

I am just frustrated with our tending, but the stats that other posters are throwing up about Elliot makes me feel a tad bit more comfortable with him than I previously felt. I just really hope we make the right choice and we are not looking back at this one shaking our head at a difficult situation that we had to make a guess on.

Honestly, we've seen enough of Elliott and Halak not to actually feel bad about any choice. I prefer Elliott, and I feel like both he and Allen fit into the Blues better as teammates, but Halak is still pretty good and has performed well under pressure a couple times before. Going with one or the other is not going to bite the Blues in the ass. And if they choose to acquire another goalie (such as Miller), they'll still keep one of Halak or Elliott (probably Elliott due to costs).

I don't think they're in a situation where it all might collapse if they make the wrong call. We know exactly what they offer and any given call might not improve the team, but it very likely won't hurt it, either.

 

[intangible]

Halak: 10th in wins, 21st in GAA, 34th (out of 48) in save percentage. Mind you, we're the top team in the league, winning percentage-wise. Those stats are downright horrendous. And this isn't a new thing, either.. his month of October had a .917 save percentage, .914 in November, and a terrible .885 in December (even excluding the 23rd and 28th for "sickness," the stats still aren't great). This team is winning despite Halak, not because of him.

Elliott, in 10 less games played, is 18th in wins, 4th in goals against average, and 8th in save percentage.

My problem with Elliott's stats, though, is that, while they're good, they've been against weaker teams. In 14 game starts, just one was against an opponent above 13th in the league (and that was vs LA, which was because Halak was out sick). All of the games vs better opponents, fairly or unfairly, have gone to Halak. Elliott's really going to have to run with this opportunity if he wants to secure a position for 14-15, as the game selection for him, even despite a struggling Halak, doesn't show that management has a lot of confidence in him.

 

[Alklha]

You can only beat the team you are playing against, until he is facing better teams on a regular basis then that can't really be held against him. As you say he has started 14 games, and only 5 of those have been against teams currently in the top 15. His save percentage against the teams in the top half (including the games he came in against the Sharks, Blackhawks & Ducks) is still .927 on 178 shots.

 

[SteenMachine]

Does anyone think the Olympics might have an effect on Halak? Could that kind of opportunity to compete for his country revitalize him a bit? It certainly seems to be where all of his reputation comes from, must-win games on a darkhorse.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

You can only beat the team you are playing against, until he is facing better teams on a regular basis then that can't really be held against him. As you say he has started 14 games, and only 5 of those have been against teams currently in the top 15. His save percentage against the teams in the top half (including the games he came in against the Sharks, Blackhawks & Ducks) is still .927 on 178 shots.

Because Halak was pulled and again needed Elliott to come in and try to save his ass

It's a bit ridiculous that Halak still has a spot on this team when you look at what Elliott has done compared to him.

 

[Thallis]

What do we think are the odds that Hiller doesn't re-sign with the Ducks? He could be an intriguing option should he get to that stage.

 

[bleedblue1223]

He's probably staying, but if there is a goalie to get, he'd be the ideal one. He's an upgrade over the vets that we do have, and his contract won't handcuff us when Allen needs more playing time and his eventual contract.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

What do we think are the odds that Hiller doesn't re-sign with the Ducks? He could be an intriguing option should he get to that stage.

He's no better than Halak IMO. I've never been high on Hiller.

 

[Hooliganx3]

What do we think are the odds that Hiller doesn't re-sign with the Ducks? He could be an intriguing option should he get to that stage.

I think there is almost no chance he stays with the Ducks. Fasth is signed for next season Anderson is a good goalie to take over as starter/backup next season. Then they Have Gibson in the AHL.

Anderson's stats for the year.

2013-2014DUCKS 11 9 2 - 0 0 21 286 .927 1.98 637.

I think people tend to forget about how good of a young goalie Anderson is due to them having Gibson.

 

[Celtic Note]

He's no better than Halak IMO. I've never been high on Hiller.

They have pretty comparable regular season save percentages and in the playoffs Hiller has been better (but he has only two post season appearances).

The difference is Hiller is more consistent and can handle a heavier load.

Overall, he might be a slight upgrade, but nothing I would be excited about.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

They have pretty comparable regular season save percentages and in the playoffs Hiller has been better (but he has only two post season appearances).

The difference is Hiller is more consistent and can handle a heavier load.

Overall, he might be a slight upgrade, but nothing I would be excited about.

Yeah I'm not saying he's a bad goalie, he's just a mediocre goalie like but like you said, can handle a heavier load. I'll pass on Hiller.