Deadpool8812
Registered User
- Feb 10, 2018
- 12,738
- 16,209
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.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.I guess I’ve only read his fluff pieces then.
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.
Not currently. Not to me.He has credibility?
Sample size...The Flyers had a .777 winning percentage with Goulbourne in the lineup. Makes you wonder why they ever replaced him.
What does this even mean?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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
Bryzgalov was a fine goalie in the Flyers-Pens series because the team overcame his WTF moments.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.
Bryzagalov was a locker room cancer. Please don't ignore pertinent information in my posts.Bryzgalov was a fine goalie in the Flyers-Pens series because the team overcame his WTF moments.
We should've kept him around.
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.
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?
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.
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.