Speculation: 2014-15 goaltending speculation

[Vladys Gumption]

I am no Halak defender and I do like Elliott (as a backup) but...

Sent.To.Minors.And.Replaced.By.A.Rookie.Goaltender.In.2013...not exactly a ringing endorsement of your point.

You forgot to add that he was sent.to.minors.on.conditioning.assignment. And when he returned he literally put the team on his back. See the 7 game stretch in which he went 6-1 while getting a grand total of 8 goals of support in said stretch.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

I am no Halak defender and I do like Elliott (as a backup) but...

Sent.To.Minors.And.Replaced.By.A.Rookie.Goaltender.In.2013...not exactly a ringing endorsement of your point.

And what does this statement then say about Halak? Seriously c'mon guys, I really do not get what Elliott has to do to get some respect.

 

[Multimoodia]

If you are looking to me to defend Halak I fear you may be pointed in the wrong direction.None of the Blues current goaltenders satisfy by themselves.

Halak and Elliott are both entirely too inconsistent, Allen entirely too young and inexperienced.

Fortunately, Halak and Elliott are typically able to do sort a sine/cosine thing where when one slumps (or just as often with Halak, is injured) the other can carry the weight.
The issue for both of them seems to be either when one seems to be given the #1 starter role to hold, or when they play for too many games in a row (which may be related).
Suddenly the breakdowns start again.

Allen, while very impressive that he brought the Blues out of their funk last year, still managed a save percentage barely over .900, of which we had another poster take to task Elliott for having a similar percentage last January. Frankly Allen is not ready for the NHL as a starter...likely not next year either.

For the Blues it is absolutely necessary Halak and Elliott continue to be yin and yang to one another because if the Blues find themselves relying on one or the other completely it is going to be another very short trip in the playoffs.
Unless the Blues feel that paying the inflated price for Miller is a more attractive alternative.

Glad they have to make those decisions and I get to make fun of them later.

 

[rumrokh]

I hope and believe the Olympics will make things clear for the rest of this year and next year.

Halak could crank it up like he did last Olympics and never look back, or it could be the Halak we know and support, but don't love. If Miller gets significant time for USA, that could help set his value, too.

At this point, I'm probably happier with Elliott-Allen than Halak-Elliott, even though I fully recognize that Halak can and has gotten really hot in the past. I just see less and less of that. He has repeatedly been given the starting position and repeatedly failed to take it and run for even a dozen games.
I don't have a quote, but Kerber said that when asked if either Halak or Elliott could take the mantle and kick ass for something like 16 or 18 of twenty games, Hitchcock said he didn't know. That says that Hitchcock doesn't like the goaltending situation for the playoffs and if the Blues can pull off a move, they will. And it seems like the Olympics could very well spell it out.

Unfortunately, it could also mean that Halak stumbles and Miller's stock rises, making it that much harder or directing Armstrong towards a different, riskier move.

 

[BlueDream]

In the regular season, I think Elliott is actually the better goalie.

In the playoffs though, I don't think either is the answer which is a shame.

But I feel I can at least trust Elliott more than Halak.

 

[BigB]

Any word about Halak? His "sickness"?

 

[Mike Liut]

I don't trust either one in the playoffs, but I trust Elliott more currently. In a week or 2, it could change. Maybe that month long stretch last year when he couldn't save a beach ball soured me on him. But, he has looked great these past few games.

 

[rumrokh]

Any word about Halak? His "sickness"?

He had the flu, but is good to go now. Allen was reassigned to the Wolves.

 

[Harley83]

I think a lot of people (myself included) have the residual Montreal impression of Halak. They both have had some bad games in St. Louis but it seems that Elliott holds his composure better after a goal is let in. Would it be better to have a reliable, proven playoff-ready goaltender? Absolutely.. But right now St. Louis has to make the choice on which car to drive to the playoffs, the broken-down BMW or the reliable Toyota. In the recent Chicago game Elliott proved that he is more than capable.

 

[DeuceNine]

My statement is false and made-up? Remember, I'm talking about last season, 2012-2013: http://espn.go.com/nhl/player/gamelog/_/id/2865/year/2013/brian-elliott

I forgot to include March in my statement. Whoops!

Which part of those stats isn't crapping the bed? Is a .901 save percentage good suddenly? Guy had an adequate game (13 save shutout isn't exactly outstanding), two terrible games, and a good game in all of January. Then the SHTF. .810... .857. Fantastic.

Glad he followed it up and got his act together for March, but it's still unacceptable if we're talking about handing the starting reigns to a guy who takes a month or two off. One good month makes not a good goaltender.

Nothing worse than dishonesty backed by carefully-chosen statistics. The left pulls this all the time in politics.

Many players -- including Elliott -- didn't play overseas or hockey at all during the lockout. If you understand goaltending -- and we'll assume you don't given what you're saying here -- you understand timing and rhythm mean everything. That's partly why he looked overwhelmed when the season started, and why he was back to normal after he had some routine and playing time. I'm sure the bus trip sent a message too that nothing is a given, something Elliott to his credit responded well to. It would be fascinating to see how Halak would take such a message.

Point is, you eliminate that aberration and unusual circumstances, and what you're left with is a very good body of work. Honestly, even with that bad stretch the numbers are more solid than Jaro's.

 

[execwrite]

Per JR - Dating back to April 1, Elliott is 22-3-2 with a 1.59 GAA and .937 save-percentage in his last 27 regular-season starts

Elliott won a NCAA championship as the Wisconsin goaltender in 2006.

Why can't he be the Stanley Cup winning goalie with the Blues?

 

[intangible]

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.

 

[jmwc95]

In the playoffs though, I don't think either is the answer which is a shame.

Corey Crawford, Antti Niemi, Marc-Andre Fleury, and Chris Osgood have all backstopped their teams to Stanley Cups in the past 6 seasons. Sure, Elliott may not carry us on his back to a Cup, but I think his level of play is certainly good enough to give us a chance. I would put his stats up against any of the other goalies I mentioned previously.

 

[Alklha]

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.

And by 3 months off you mean a streak of 9 bad games?

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Per JR - Dating back to April 1, Elliott is 22-3-2 with a 1.59 GAA and .937 save-percentage in his last 27 regular-season starts

Elliott won a NCAA championship as the Wisconsin goaltender in 2006.

Why can't he be the Stanley Cup winning goalie with the Blues?

If circumstances have Elliott as the starter in the playoffs again....and the Blues win the Cup, I think you'd have to assume the team re-signs him to at least platoon with Allen the following season.

I'm trying to think of other examples where teams let their goalie leave after winning the Cup. Other than Anti Niemi, I can't think of a recent one....and that was due to salary cap hell.

 

[DeuceNine]

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.

Wasn't really an excuse. Many players suffered the same ill. But if you're going to evaluate his entire career and projection over a short time frame that was marked by unusual circumstances it reinforces my opinion that you're reaching for things to pin on the guy.

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.

Halak was injured, yes? And Elliott did his time and learned from the experience, no question. Look how he's been once he's had consistent playing time. Starting goalies normally don't have issues with their routines and rhythm because, well, they play. We've seen once Elliott is clearly given the reins what he can do.

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."

And your implication is what, he's slacking off? Some goalies need to ramp up. Many goalies will tell you it's bad for their game to play against scrubs just to stay on the ice, which is why NHLers went to high level leagues during the lockout ONLY if they did at all. Some were concerned about injury, and that's valid.

He does, but it's in his more appropriate roll: as backup.

The numbers disagree with you.

 

[jmwc95]

Also, I doubt you see anything done contract-wise with either goalie until the offseason. If you extend one during the season, you are just going to piss off the other goalie. They will wait until all the games are played to keep them competing against each other.

 

[bleedblue1223]

If Elliott wins a Cup, I doubt he gets resigned, unless he really wants to come back. Imagine the dumb contract he could get offered from the Oilers or Islanders. Same goes for Halak.

 

[DeuceNine]

At this point, I'm probably happier with Elliott-Allen than Halak-Elliott, even though I fully recognize that Halak can and has gotten really hot in the past. I just see less and less of that. He has repeatedly been given the starting position and repeatedly failed to take it and run for even a dozen games.
I don't have a quote, but Kerber said that when asked if either Halak or Elliott could take the mantle and kick ass for something like 16 or 18 of twenty games, Hitchcock said he didn't know. That says that Hitchcock doesn't like the goaltending situation for the playoffs and if the Blues can pull off a move, they will. And it seems like the Olympics could very well spell it out.

Seems to me a fair answer. Elliott in fairness was competent if not dominant in the POs the last two years. Halak never had much a fair shot with the injuries. I think in typical Hitch fashion a few words says tons. Elliott could be that guy, but other variables like an inability for the team to finish opportunities against LA spoiled that chance. Hitch is also concerned about Halak's mental fortitude and durability rather than ability -- in my opinion. I say that because when he's on, he's very good. But that dominance isn't consistent so that tells me the situation is mental and playing in fear of another setback. It's my further opinion that Halak is a bit fragile emotionally, which is why he responds so well in MTL where he's clearly still loved even when he beats them but can't seem to handle splitting goaltending duties where he feels he should start 80%. To some degree, that's on the Blues. They paid him to start but he's not on a full-time basis, and that's working on him.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I don't remember if I have voiced this here, but I think Elliott may have displaced Halak as the starter again. He's playing at a high level and Jaro's illness kind of created an opportunity again. We'll see how the starts are distributed going forward, but I think until Elliott falls off he'll get the majority of them.

 

[542365]

I don't remember if I have voiced this here, but I think Elliott may have displaced Halak as the starter again. He's playing at a high level and Jaro's illness kind of created an opportunity again. We'll see how the starts are distributed going forward, but I think until Elliott falls off he'll get the majority of them.

That's pretty much how it's always been. If one guy is playing well, he gets the starts. If they are both playing equally well(or poor), the majority of the starts goes to Jaro, as he is the perceived 1A here. I don't think either guy is the "starter".

 

[Celtic Note]

Corey Crawford, Antti Niemi, Marc-Andre Fleury, and Chris Osgood have all backstopped their teams to Stanley Cups in the past 6 seasons. Sure, Elliott may not carry us on his back to a Cup, but I think his level of play is certainly good enough to give us a chance. I would put his stats up against any of the other goalies I mentioned previously.

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.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I don't remember if I have voiced this here, but I think Elliott may have displaced Halak as the starter again. He's playing at a high level and Jaro's illness kind of created an opportunity again. We'll see how the starts are distributed going forward, but I think until Elliott falls off he'll get the majority of them.

I think it's safe to say at this point, that he should displace Halak. He's definitely outplayed Jaro this year. He deserves the chance to run with it.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't really care who plays during these games during the regular season, we should win most of them regardless of who is in net. As long as one of them is hot right before the playoffs, then we should be in good shape.

 

[jmwc95]

I said about a month ago that Elliott would be the starter by the end of the season. It's happened the past two years, and it history has a way of repeating itself. At least at the end of this season, they don't have to worry about pissing their $3.75M goalie off because he'll be gone next year anyway.