2016-17 Blues Discussion Thread Part II
- Thread starter Alklha
- Start date
- Status
Continuing on with the goalie discussion...
We could probably have moved Allen for a good return, but instead moved Elliott for a decent return. I disagree with that decision, but I understand it.
What is perplexing is the decision to double down on that by extending Allen. We're entering a season with the unusual situation of an expansion draft looming and the fact that at least 2 decent goalies were going to be available (Bishop & Fleury). Possibly more. Trading Elliott was one thing, but extending Allen when we did basically locked him in.
Signing him to that deal suggests that management thought he was going to have a really big year this year. I'd love to know why when he has had 1 season with an above average sv%, his past playoff performances, our team defence had just got worse with the loss of Backes (& even Brouwer) and he had never had the workload we were going to expect of him this season.
I'm not a big fan of Allen, but I don't think the contract is going to be a bad one. It was just a bizarre decision.
We could probably have moved Allen for a good return, but instead moved Elliott for a decent return. I disagree with that decision, but I understand it.
What is perplexing is the decision to double down on that by extending Allen. We're entering a season with the unusual situation of an expansion draft looming and the fact that at least 2 decent goalies were going to be available (Bishop & Fleury). Possibly more. Trading Elliott was one thing, but extending Allen when we did basically locked him in.
Signing him to that deal suggests that management thought he was going to have a really big year this year. I'd love to know why when he has had 1 season with an above average sv%, his past playoff performances, our team defence had just got worse with the loss of Backes (& even Brouwer) and he had never had the workload we were going to expect of him this season.
I'm not a big fan of Allen, but I don't think the contract is going to be a bad one. It was just a bizarre decision.
HolyJumpin
Registered User
- Sep 30, 2016
- 688
- 355
Jake has been much better than the numbers say imo. And this is coming from a full fledged Elliott fan. A lot of it has been how the team doesn't play the same game it's played for the past 3+ years. I think his numbers will turn around.
Hunt has been amazing though. He's cut from the same defensive style that Dallas and Pens had last year. North-South, mobile defense. I really think our defense is an asset that we need to exploit more. I felt like when we were having Parayko and Petro enter into the zone that it was probably the best way for the Blues to enter. We GOTTA figure out a way to enter the zone and not dump and chase. Players like Hunt help. I'd really like to see our D play a lot more aggressively. The Blues will be at their best with sound offensive pressure.
Hunt has been amazing though. He's cut from the same defensive style that Dallas and Pens had last year. North-South, mobile defense. I really think our defense is an asset that we need to exploit more. I felt like when we were having Parayko and Petro enter into the zone that it was probably the best way for the Blues to enter. We GOTTA figure out a way to enter the zone and not dump and chase. Players like Hunt help. I'd really like to see our D play a lot more aggressively. The Blues will be at their best with sound offensive pressure.
542365
2018-19 Cup Champs!
- Mar 22, 2012
- 22,329
- 8,706
I would strongly disagree that Jake has been better than the numbers suggest. I honestly am surprised his Save percentage is above .900. He allows at least 1 bad goal a game. Not "oh I think he could've saved it, but that was a very tough chance" type of goal. One of "how the **** does an NHL goalie possibly let that in" variety. At least one a game along with usually a couple that he couldn't do anything about(the defense's fault). If he just made every easy stop and no spectacular saves his numbers would be better. That's it. That's all he would have to do, make the save you're supposed to make. That's what Elliott did his entire time here. He's not super athletic like Jake so he didn't make many sprawling/desperation saves that Jake makes on occasion, but he was always in the right spot and very rarely let in a softie(like all goalies). I'm not asking him to be perfect, I just want him not to let in goals like the Forsberg one from last game(or the one off his glove right in front to an empty net) or the Dumba one from the game before.
I get that he's very athletic and has the ability to make some unbelievable saves, but that's not what we need from him. He's like the Nail Yakupov of goalies. He plays too fast. He's too jumpy. He has the ability to be at least a good starting goalie. He's shown that at times, but he's also shown to be extremely inconsistent and completely useless under any sort of pressure as well.
Vladys Gumption
Colt55
Schwartz-Stastny-Jaskin
Fabbri-Lehtera-Tarasenko
Steen-Berglund-Perron
Upshall-Brodziak-Yakupov
Edmundson on the top pairing with Pietrangelo tonight.
Edmundson-Petro
Hunt-Shatty
Bouw-Parayko
Allen in net. I guess they really do plan on running him into the ground.
Gross.
Fabbri-Lehtera-Tarasenko
Steen-Berglund-Perron
Upshall-Brodziak-Yakupov
Edmundson on the top pairing with Pietrangelo tonight.
Edmundson-Petro
Hunt-Shatty
Bouw-Parayko
Allen in net. I guess they really do plan on running him into the ground.
Gross.
Last edited:
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,140
- 13,101
I agree that he hasn't been playing better than his numbers. I think a.906 is a pretty accurate reflection of the number of bad goals he is allowing.
But I think you are writing off his ability to make great saves. His SV% is above .900 right now specifically because he makes way more great saves than the average goalie. He is overcoming (to a degree) the bad goals by stopping many pucks that should be sure-fire goals. He needs to reduce the bad goals. No one would argue that the number of bad goals allowed is OK. But there is value in the ridiculous saves he makes. He is a major driver in the success of our penalty kill and is 5th in the NHL in shorthanded SV% (4th if you exclude Grubaeur who has started just 6 games).
For the entire time Moose was here, I heard over and over that 'we need a goalie who can change the game with a save he shouldn't make'. He did that for a few months last year, but I think you are correct that he generally wasn't that goalie. And I'm not sure you can win the Cup with a solid-but-not-spectacular goalie in 2016. Thomas, Crawford, Quick and Murray were all asked to go well above and beyond in the playoffs en route to the Cup. It has been 6+ years since we have seen a 'make the saves you should and nothing else' goalie win the Cup. I think that is probably why the Blues chose Allen over Elliott. If Allen can reduce the Forsberg-level-weak goals by 50%, he is the type of goalie that can win a Cup in today's NHL. From a coaching standpoint, that should be easier to accomplish than changing Elliott's game to turn him into the type of goalie that can win the Cup in today's NHL. Elliott has tried to become that goalie in Calgary and it has been a disaster. The consensus in the hockey world is that he has been trying to do to much and it has destroyed his game.
I'm not sure if Allen can cut out the bad goals enough to be a top 10 NHL starter. But after watching Elliott this year, I'm sure that Elliott isn't a top 10 starter in the NHL. I was a huge Elliott supporter and have repeatedly said that I would have moved Allen and extended Elliott. After watching him in Calgary, I firmly believe that I was wrong in that assessment. Our team D is noticeably worse than last year and at this point I don't think it is significantly better than Calgary's. It is better, but not by a huge margin.
Corsica has some good stats regarding expected goals against a goalie. Essentially, it looks at where shots are coming from and calculates the expected number of goals based on shot location. It isn't perfect, but it helps quantify the quality of chances a goalie is facing. Among goalies with 500+ minutes, Elliott is dead last in 'goals saved above average', adjusted Fenwick SV%, and high danger SV%. Again, these aren't perfect metrics, but these stats are both intended to take quality of chances into account. These tell me that the D isn't the problem (especially considering Johnson is excelling behind that D). Meanwhile, Allen is middle of the road to slightly below average in these categories. Both my eye test and the advanced stats both suggest to me that Elliott isn't getting screwed by his D and that both Allen and Elliott saw an inflation of their stats in the past due to our D.
Last edited:
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,140
- 13,101
I don't think it is the main cause of Allen's struggles, but there is no doubt in my mind that it is a factor. His biggest issue right now is mental lapses and a high workload is unquestionably harder to handle mentally than an average workload.
He isn't playing like a top 10 goalie. We need to adjust his workload accordingly. I understand that some goalies like to play their way out of slump. But he very obviously needs a night off. I'm not big on questioning lines/lineup decisions because every NHL coach has a better pulse on the team than I do sitting at home. But this is absurd.
LetsGoBooze
Buium or bust
- Jan 16, 2012
- 2,308
- 1,395
Vladys Gumption
Colt55
stl76
No. 5 in your programs, No. 1 in your hearts
- Jul 2, 2015
- 9,064
- 8,346
The Dumba goal was the definition of a "oh I think he could've saved it, but that was a very tough chance" type of goal IMO. It was a hard, well placed, uncontested shot from the high slot...how is that not a tough chance? I don't mean to make a big deal about this, but I've seen a lot of people critiquing that goal and I think their frustration is completely misplaced in this instance. If you go back and rewatch the entire play, you'll notice the real culprits were the forwards that made a terrible change just prior to that goal.
I think your memories of Elliott's time with the Blues are a bit rosy. He definitely let in less "soft" goals that Allen, but he still let in his fair share. That said I completely get the frustration with Allen letting in "soft" goals. The Forsberg goal and the one off his glove were absolutely inexcusable. He HAS to make those saves. Period.
Interested to see if Ed can handle playing top minutes with Pietro. I think he has been playing great this year, but this is a big step for him. I'm also curious to see what the TOI will look like for each pair. It would not shock me to see a more even distribution of minutes, depending on game flow. Obviously a lot of special teams play will inflate/deflate some peoples numbers.
Anyone care to wager on how long it takes for the Ed and Bouw to switch back?
I'm not wild about the forward lines, but something had to give. Lehtera - Berglund - Yak had to go.
Shwabeal
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2016
- 786
- 405
Anyone care to wager on how long it takes for the Ed and Bouw to switch back?
O/U 2.5 Shifts. I'll take the under
izzy
go
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 51,911
- 14,888
Not sure if this is fair, but I'm pretty much done with Jaskin. How does he keep staying in the lineup / getting promoted to scoring lines? His numbers are pitiful. I don't care how good his forechecking is. I'd much rather have Paajarvi at this point. At least he's fast
Oberyn
Prince of Dorne
- Mar 27, 2011
- 14,422
- 3,980
He has these sparks where it looks like he's finally putting it together and then he's invisible the very next game. At least he's more useful than Yakupov or Rattie
Evocable Manager
Registered User
Is that really a positive? He's more useful than two guys who aren't even NHL players?
Jaskin is a 4th liner. He isn't a bad player, if in that role, but he is a non-factor offensively.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 51,911
- 14,888
Because our forwards after our best 6 are god awful. Besides Stastny, Schwartz, Tarasenko, Fabbri, Steen, Perron, none of them have been playing at even a quality 3rd line rate.
Among forwards, Lehtera is ranking 332 in points, Berglund is 377, Jaskin is 413, and Yakupov is 440.
Of players with at least 10 games, this is how they rank in points/game: Lehtera is 356, Berglund is 474, Jaskin is 487, and Yakupov is 406.
You can make the argument that they aren't even producing at 4th line rates. Lehtera is the only one doing that, and it's at the absolute bottom of pure offensive numbers.
They all really, really, really suck. At the end of the day, whichever plug gets put on whatever line, it's just arguing over which turd is the least smelly pile of poop.
Among forwards, Lehtera is ranking 332 in points, Berglund is 377, Jaskin is 413, and Yakupov is 440.
Of players with at least 10 games, this is how they rank in points/game: Lehtera is 356, Berglund is 474, Jaskin is 487, and Yakupov is 406.
You can make the argument that they aren't even producing at 4th line rates. Lehtera is the only one doing that, and it's at the absolute bottom of pure offensive numbers.
They all really, really, really suck. At the end of the day, whichever plug gets put on whatever line, it's just arguing over which turd is the least smelly pile of poop.
The problem definitely gets amplified with all three of those guys playing together. Both berglund and lehtera would be a lot more tolerable if they were the only big slow offensively challenged player in the line. With three guys who are slow and can't score, like somebody else said it's just a complete black hole of a line. As much as I dislike Lehtera and am disappointed in 2016 Berglund, both are much better hockey players than Jaskin
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 51,911
- 14,888
I'm pretty sure if it exists in the land of bbcode you can use it, even if it's not on the list in the emoji window
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 51,911
- 14,888
No luck, HF just gets confused when I try the ways I've done it before on other places.
542365
2018-19 Cup Champs!
- Mar 22, 2012
- 22,329
- 8,706
It was an unscreened wrister from just inside the blue line. It's a goal an NHL goalie absolutely must have. The forwards didn't do their jobs perfectly, and the Dmen absolutely screwed up by even allowing him to get a shot off, but the end result was the same. He took a wrister from the point without a screen and it went in. If Vladi Tarasenko or Ovi took that shot I'd be a bit more lenient(still one that should be stopped), but it's Matt Dumba. That can't happen in my mind.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 51,911
- 14,888
shpongle falls
Ass Möde
I do like the balanced approach to the lines tonight and curious how it plays out. I hope Jaskin can produce or at least be effective with Schwartz and Stas but I doubt it.
- Status
