2019/20 Roster Thread XXXIV

[Deadpool8812]

I guess I’ve only read his fluff pieces then.

If you have only read the stuff that he's put out the last few season, probably. I think he was hired by the Flyers 2-3 years ago.

 

[Curufinwe]

Meltzer pumping up Elliott now is no different than we he was telling us how great Grossman was five years ago.

 

[Starat327]

Meltzer pumping up Elliott now is no different than we he was telling us how great Grossman was five years ago.

or MacDonald 2 seasons ago, or when he and the dude who just got laid off were pumping up Stewart. Its annoying, but it's not at all surprising at this point.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Here is where I have an issue with the issues with Elliott... The team has gotten 64.5% of the points available this season before the stoppage. In games Elliott started they got 66.7% of the available points. So we are replacing the goalie with the higher points percentage earned? I'm not sure there is improvement to be gotten there for the cost against the cap.

 

[Flyerfan4life]

or MacDonald 2 seasons ago, or when he and the dude who just got laid off were pumping up Stewart. Its annoying, but it's not at all surprising at this point.

or how Meatpig was such a good lockerroom guy...

sigh..

 

[FLYguy3911]

The Flyers had a .777 winning percentage with Goulbourne in the lineup. Makes you wonder why they ever replaced him.

 

[Striiker]

He has credibility?

Not currently. Not to me.

 

[dragonoffrost]

The Flyers had a .777 winning percentage with Goulbourne in the lineup. Makes you wonder why they ever replaced him.

Sample size...

And there is more than stats to base moves on.

Elliott for all his warts is a proven NHL goalie. He will let in clunkers but so does 90% of the league. Hell even the great backups Doby and Halak let them in.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Sample size...

And there is more than stats to base moves on.

Elliott for all his warts is a proven NHL goalie. He will let in clunkers but so does 90% of the league. Hell even the great backups Doby and Halak let them in.

What does this even mean?

The Flyers scored goals at a higher clip with Elliott on the ice than they did with Hart on the ice. They allow an additional 0.5 goal with Elliot on the ice. I think that is more important when evaluating goalies. Unless he is somehow influencing team offense or figured out a way to perfectly sequence results for the Flyers to win more games, I'm not sure why a team's winning percentage is particularly relevant when determining whether to look for an upgrade or not.

And the elephant in the room is that he is 35 with likely his best hockey behind him.

 

[dragonoffrost]

What does this even mean?

The Flyers scored goals at a higher clip with Elliott on the ice than they did with Hart on the ice. They allow an additional 0.5 goal with Elliot on the ice. I think that is more important when evaluating goalies. Unless he is somehow influencing team offense or figured out a way to perfectly sequence results for the Flyers to win more games, I'm not sure why a team's winning percentage is particularly relevant when determining whether to look for an upgrade or not.

And the elephant in the room is that he is 35 with likely his best hockey behind him.

We have 3 kids coming that in a year or two will make Elliott gone anyway. Upgrading the place will cost more than he is making which means you'd need to save cap space elsewhere.

Teams always play differently with different goalies. So changing from a goalie they are winning with is just as risky as not changing. In sports if you are winning a points percentage of .667 you are doing something right under those circumstances for a season. This isn't a sample of 5 games.

Also he's playing better when he's not being rode into the ground by Hakstol.

 

[Starat327]

We have 3 kids coming that in a year or two will make Elliott gone anyway. Upgrading the place will cost more than he is making which means you'd need to save cap space elsewhere.

Teams always play differently with different goalies. So changing from a goalie they are winning with is just as risky as not changing. In sports if you are winning a points percentage of .667 you are doing something right under those circumstances for a season. This isn't a sample of 5 games.

Im not taking this argument one way or the other, though I do believe that upgrading Elliott is probably one of the more prominent things we need to do this year.

Keep in mind as the backup, Elliott should be seeing easier matchups. Hes playing the weaker side of back to backs, and the Detroits of the world to give Hart a break. His win % should be higher because he's playing - in theory - significantly easier opponents, on average.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Im not taking this argument one way or the other, though I do believe that upgrading Elliott is probably one of the more prominent things we need to do this year.

Keep in mind as the backup, Elliott should be seeing easier matchups. Hes playing the weaker side of back to backs, and the Detroits of the world to give Hart a break. His win % should be higher because he's playing - in theory - significantly easier opponents, on average.

Funny fact. Elliott has played the majority of his games on the road recently more like he's been saving Hart from his mental block on the road. In his last 10 he's faced Washington x2, Pittsburgh x2, Columbus, Islanders and St Louis, Not really seeing this backup playing the easier game.

 

[Starat327]

Funny fact. Elliott has played the majority of his games on the road recently more like he's been saving Hart from his mental block on the road. In his last 10 he's faced Washington x2, Pittsburgh x2, Columbus, Islanders and St Louis, Not really seeing this backup playing the easier game.

I get what youre syaing, but youre adding a level of nuance to the conversation that is pretty detailed and time-sensitive. If you want to do this properly, you need to go back and see what the teas scoring rate is during both time frames as well. What impact did the teams run of not being able to score goals have on this %? How many times did the team have to outscore the opponent to win games vs. how many times was the result a direct result of the goaltender himself? It' not as simple as saying 'the team wins more when he plays' because a goalies involvement is limited to one side of that equation. I don't think elliott is as bad as some on here make him out to be, but he certainly has more "wtf?" moments than "holy shit, what a save" moments.

 

[dragonoffrost]

I get what youre syaing, but youre adding a level of nuance to the conversation that is pretty detailed and time-sensitive. If you want to do this properly, you need to go back and see what the teas scoring rate is during both time frames as well. What impact did the teams run of not being able to score goals have on this %? How many times did the team have to outscore the opponent to win games vs. how many times was the result a direct result of the goaltender himself? It' not as simple as saying 'the team wins more when he plays' because a goalies involvement is limited to one side of that equation. I don't think elliott is as bad as some on here make him out to be, but he certainly has more "wtf?" moments than "holy shit, what a save" moments.

I don't need holy shit moments to make me think a goalie is doing his job and if the team is overcoming his WTF moments I don't see the issue there either. It's when the WTF moments are costing games and causing chemistry issues is when you need to look elsewhere.

 

[Starat327]

I don't need holy shit moments to make me think a goalie is doing his job and if the team is overcoming his WTF moments I don't see the issue there either. It's when the WTF moments are costing games and causing chemistry issues is when you need to look elsewhere.

Well have to agree to disagree then in regards to the bolded. More than any other position, you need consistency in the crease. If your forward group is getting jekyll and hyded by your goalie, its a recipe for disaster.

 

[Striiker]

Well have to agree to disagree then in regards to the bolded. More than any other position, you need consistency in the crease. If your forward group is getting jekyll and hyded by your goalie, its a recipe for disaster.

Bryzgalov was a fine goalie in the Flyers-Pens series because the team overcame his WTF moments.

We should've kept him around.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Bryzgalov was a fine goalie in the Flyers-Pens series because the team overcame his WTF moments.

We should've kept him around.

Bryzagalov was a locker room cancer. Please don't ignore pertinent information in my posts.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Teams always play differently with different goalies. So changing from a goalie they are winning with is just as risky as not changing. In sports if you are winning a points percentage of .667 you are doing something right under those circumstances for a season. This isn't a sample of 5 games.

Always? This seems like another imaginary generalization.

I'm not even arguing for or against Elliott. I'm arguing against using Team Points% as a basis for any roster decision. It's foolish.

 

[dragonoffrost]

Always? This seems like another imaginary generalization.

I'm not even arguing for or against Elliott. I'm arguing against using Team Points% as a basis for any roster decision. It's foolish.

It's not the only basis if you follow the whole discussion...

 

[FLYguy3911]

It's not the only basis if you follow the whole discussion...

If you say all you care about is wins Elliott is tied for 30th in the league in Win percentage for a goalie for goalies over 20 games started.

I'm not focusing on stats cause really in a back all that matters is wins.

The team has gotten 64.5% of the points available this season before the stoppage. In games Elliott started they got 66.7% of the available points. So we are replacing the goalie with the higher points percentage earned?

 

[Appleyard]

What does this even mean?

The Flyers scored goals at a higher clip with Elliott on the ice than they did with Hart on the ice. They allow an additional 0.5 goal with Elliot on the ice. I think that is more important when evaluating goalies. Unless he is somehow influencing team offense or figured out a way to perfectly sequence results for the Flyers to win more games, I'm not sure why a team's winning percentage is particularly relevant when determining whether to look for an upgrade or not.

And the elephant in the room is that he is 35 with likely his best hockey behind him.

Yeh, the Flyers were winning with Elliott in net as they were scoring 4-5 goals a game... which is not sustainable unless you are the 1980s Oilers.

 

[Appleyard]

I mean... I dont "mind" keeping Elliott. He was a good NHL goalie for quite some time... and was "solid"/good back-up level in 2017-19 before last year looking like he had fell off a bit.

BUT I would kick tyres on:

Khudobin
Talbot
Greiss
*maybe* Dell

Apart from Khudobin there is a *chance* that Elliott is better than the other 3 next year.

But I think ~70% Talbot and Greiss are better... and ~60% Dell is.

(Anderson will be too expensive I think, and Miller is not going to the east coast)

 

[tymed]

I would love to see Khudobin here in Philly, always loved the guy.

Greiss would be a nice upgrade, Talbot seemed fine.

I'd prefer to keep Elliott around for a year than go with Dell for any amount of time though. The times I've watched him play it's been a lot of flopping around and too often needlessly.

Elliott seems to remain somewhat effective but no matter how well he's playing I'm always notably nervous when he's between the pipes. I'd like to move on, especially if we plan to make noise in the playoffs. He's aged, injury prone, and there's little behind him in terms of pro depth as it stands.

 

[GapToothedWonder]

Sample size...

And there is more than stats to base moves on.

Elliott for all his warts is a proven NHL goalie. He will let in clunkers but so does 90% of the league. Hell even the great backups Doby and Halak let them in.

Your argument is based off a single stat that you brought up?

What are you trying to accomplish?

 

[deadhead]

I'd be wary of trying to get another year out of Elliott, he wasn't a bad backup this season but I get this feeling that when he falls off the cliff it's gonna be ugly.