Elliot or Allen?

[Vladys Gumption]

I'm not giving up on him at all, but I do think it's fair to point out how pathetic he was in game 6. That second goal was easily the worst goal I've ever seen an NHL goalie let in.

One series is certainly not enough to write him off. He has some holes in his game to work on, but the tools are there to be a top tier starter. I don't expect him be top tier this year, but I do want to see some significant improvement in his game.

 

[Dbrownss]

I'm not giving up on him at all, but I do think it's fair to point out how pathetic he was in game 6. That second goal was easily the worst goal I've ever seen an NHL goalie let in.

One series is certainly not enough to write him off. He has some holes in his game to work on, but the tools are there to be a top tier starter. I don't expect him be top tier this year, but I do want to see some significant improvement in his game.

Game 5 1st goal....well never mind. He let in an identical goal against Baaaaaston. Either way...this ****ing team couldn't rebound from being 1 goal down

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Game 5 1st goal....well never mind. He let in an identical goal against Baaaaaston. Either way...this ****ing team couldn't rebound from being 1 goal down

My philosophy is basically that soft goals are going to happen at some point. The team has to show enough resiliency to come back from it. It sucks and you don't want to see them, but they're going to happen. We just have to accept that. What I don't like is letting in a softy in the first and then following that up with an even more putrid sinker in the second. That sucks.

But I have to give Allen credit for playing very well in games 1 and 2. He played well enough for us to come out of that up 2-0. Relying on a rookie to win take you to the promised land is a risky strategy. I didn't mind going with Allen to start the playoffs, but Hitch should have gone to Elliott after the meltdown in game 5. He just refuses to make adjustments and it pretty much tells me he has zero faith in Elliott. Any coach in their right mind should have gone to Ells for game 6.

 

[Dbrownss]

Exactly. I remember people clamoring for "Bishop coming back". My goodness did he let in some garbage. Same with Crawford, for all the **** he gets, he's an absolute clutch goalie. Even though he has random meltdowns. After the Hawks got blown up by the Preds, they still bounced back.

This team is just going to have to learn how to win. I have no idea how they do that either

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I still have faith in Elliott being good enough to win with, if the offense doesn't completely disappear. You need timely scoring.

I think Allen is talented enough to win with if he can make some adjustments.

 

[Ranksu]

Exactly. I remember people clamoring for "Bishop coming back". My goodness did he let in some garbage. Same with Crawford, for all the **** he gets, he's an absolute clutch goalie. Even though he has random meltdowns. After the Hawks got blown up by the Preds, they still bounced back.

This team is just going to have to learn how to win. I have no idea how they do that either

There is a reason for that. Do you guys remember what Q did differently compare to Hitch?

 

[GoldenSeal]

Brian Elliott. To date, he has the only first round playoff win and owns a few franchise records and has proven to have the highest ceiling. Watch his positioning, the guy has the fundamentals down pat. He has to be given the chance to succeed or fail without interfearance.

The fact is, every other goalie option is one we have to grow in the position and that takes time, and time is something we don't have with our window of opportunity open now. It can take 3-5 years to grow a netminder in. By the time we find out if we have the answer, that window may be closed. Every other position we have players who are ready to take the step and have proven their weight. We shouldn't be handing the reins over completely to players who aren't ready and if we aren't sure about Elliott, then he should be traded. This wish-washy thing Hitch is doing is stupid, especially when he put full faith into Halak, no matter what and only went with Elliott because he had no other option.

They traded in Miller.

They started Allen in the playoffs.

And yet Elliott is the only one to have proven far more than enough to earn a shot. A bad skid is a fact of life for any goalie, it's not enough to bench them. We shouldn't have walked into the playoffs rolling a rookie, but we did and Allen got far more faith and trust on a mere handfull of games towards the end of last season than Elliott ( ever has, and he has past earned it.

If you take Elliott's numbers from when he signed with the Blues onwards, his numbers state his case. He's the guy you go with. Put Allen in the backseat and give him a chance to learn from his mistakes. Let Elliott rule the pipes and give him a shot at winning the Vezina and maybe more.

 

[Majorityof1]

It's surprising how many fans hate Allen after one playoff series. Scratch that. It isn't surprising. Blues fans hate their goaltenders.

This was probably directed at me. Re-reading my comment I cam off overly harsh. I don't hate Allen. I think he is very over-rated. People on this board romanticize a few years ago when we were struggling and he came in and played well. His numbers were decent but the team rallied behind him and got wins. He puts up good stats because he plays for the Blues. He makes highlight reel saves because he is athletic. However, he also makes horrible plays because he isn't sound in several key aspects. And he has a history of choking when it counts. Game 6 more confirmed my thoughts than made me hate him.

What I hate is the treatment of Elliott who I am a fan of. I think he is much better than given credit for. I think he is a great fit for the team. However, management has never given him a fair shake. He is continuously blamed for any thing that goes wrong. Sure he has let in bad goals in playoffs before. However, he does not wilt afterwards. He steps up and plays better.

So when I want Allen to crash and burn, it is not because I hate him. But I think we are better off with Elliot in goal, and the only way he gets a fair shot is when e have no other choice.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Allen makes some saves that Elliott can't. He has much better rebound control. But he seems to lack the mental part of the game to come back after a bad goal as consistently as Elliott does. Elliott's work ethic is probably among the best in the league. I didn't understand why the team seems determined to groom Allen until I saw the heat charts that were posted last season, showing what percentage of shots relative to the league average each goalie allows from different spots on the ice. Allen has a higher ceiling and if he can learn that mental discipline, he will be the better starter.

In all honesty, I don't know if that kind of thing is innate or can be learned. What did Quick ever do in his early development to demonstrate the playoff toughness he is now known for? Or even his early NHL days? Seems like most of the great goalies weren't great right away, although there are a few legendary exceptions.

 

[Celtic Note]

Allen makes some saves that Elliott can't. He has much better rebound control. But he seems to lack the mental part of the game to come back after a bad goal as consistently as Elliott does. Elliott's work ethic is probably among the best in the league. I didn't understand why the team seems determined to groom Allen until I saw the heat charts that were posted last season, showing what percentage of shots relative to the league average each goalie allows from different spots on the ice. Allen has a higher ceiling and if he can learn that mental discipline, he will be the better starter.

In all honesty, I don't know if that kind of thing is innate or can be learned. What did Quick ever do in his early development to demonstrate the playoff toughness he is now known for? Or even his early NHL days? Seems like most of the great goalies weren't great right away, although there are a few legendary exceptions.

Exactly. I have my doubts about Allen being able to step up in the playoffs, but I am not going to throw him off a cliff after one/two bad playoff games where his team didn't give him any chance to win.

I never understood the over the top praise for his initial stint with the Blues. I did get that he came in and instilled confidence enough for the team to start winning. There certainly was some mental fortitude exuded by Allen at that time, which should have tamed down some of the Allen negativity, but not generated inflated praise. He also showed some moxie at the end of last season and helped us beat the Hawks down the stretch. I don't see that mentioned much. We just hear about a couple playoff games where our D looked like crap.

 

[Renard]

I wonder if his playoff flop will affect Allen in the upcoming season.

I still vividly remember the first goal of the Minnesota series, when Zucker took a harmless shot on goal from Allen's right. Allen made the save, but kicked the rebound right back to Zucker, who went behind the goal with it and then turned and scored. Allen was still at the right post, wondering where the puck was.

The crowd went completely silent, stunned, and I'll bet the Blues team felt the same way.

 

[542365]

Allen was pretty meh in the playoffs, but the potential is still there. He's still a very talented goalie, he just needs his head screwed on straight. Elliott is about as steady as they come. He gets the job done. He's not going anywhere until we have a clear, undisputed number 1, and that might not happen until one of Binnington, Husso, or Copley are ready, if at all. There's no reason to pin them against each other. They play for the same team, and they will both get their fair share of starts and I'm sure we'll just play the hot hand again in the playoffs. Jake would have to put together a pretty special season for him to be the undisputed number 1 ahead of Elliott because we know Ells is going to have another very solid season in the cage.

 

[KingBran]

Put me in the camp that considers Elliott to be more consistent than Allen as well. IMO, Allen has better technical skills but so far, he's been pretty up and down IMO. Elliott on the other hand is pretty much always good. Rarely spectacular, rarely horrible, almost always good. If Allen can improve his consistency (which wouldn't be surprising given his young age) then he likely becomes the better goalie of the two IMO.

Except for the stretch in 2013 where he lost 8 of 10 with a 6 game losing streak when Halak went down and he got all the starts.


He is far from "always good" and when he is given the started job he rarely is consistent through more than 10 games.

 

[KingBran]

Brian Elliott. To date, he has the only first round playoff win and owns a few franchise records and has proven to have the highest ceiling. Watch his positioning, the guy has the fundamentals down pat. He has to be given the chance to succeed or fail without interfearance.

The fact is, every other goalie option is one we have to grow in the position and that takes time, and time is something we don't have with our window of opportunity open now. It can take 3-5 years to grow a netminder in. By the time we find out if we have the answer, that window may be closed. Every other position we have players who are ready to take the step and have proven their weight. We shouldn't be handing the reins over completely to players who aren't ready and if we aren't sure about Elliott, then he should be traded. This wish-washy thing Hitch is doing is stupid, especially when he put full faith into Halak, no matter what and only went with Elliott because he had no other option.

They traded in Miller.

They started Allen in the playoffs.

And yet Elliott is the only one to have proven far more than enough to earn a shot. A bad skid is a fact of life for any goalie, it's not enough to bench them. We shouldn't have walked into the playoffs rolling a rookie, but we did and Allen got far more faith and trust on a mere handfull of games towards the end of last season than Elliott ( ever has, and he has past earned it.

If you take Elliott's numbers from when he signed with the Blues onwards, his numbers state his case. He's the guy you go with. Put Allen in the backseat and give him a chance to learn from his mistakes. Let Elliott rule the pipes and give him a shot at winning the Vezina and maybe more.

If all you care about are numbers then you would be singing Allens tune.

Much higher winning percentage and better sv% and GAA in NHL than Elliott.

And if you want to say it's a small sample size then you can't really bash Allen for his NHL play but discount his numbers.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Except for the stretch in 2013 where he lost 8 of 10 with a 6 game losing streak when Halak went down and he got all the starts.


He is far from "always good" and when he is given the started job he rarely is consistent through more than 10 games.

Cherry picking one 10 game stretch from 3 years ago doesn't really strengthen the argument. Elliott has been far and away the more consistent goaltender.

If all you care about are numbers then you would be singing Allens tune.

Much higher winning percentage and better sv% and GAA in NHL than Elliott.

And if you want to say it's a small sample size then you can't really bash Allen for his NHL play but discount his numbers.

What's the point of looking at Elliott's Colorado and Ottawa numbers? He was a different goalie back then. The best way to compare them is to look at his numbers with the Blues, which are better than Allen's.

Since arrivng in St. Louis Elliott is 81-38-10 with a 2.00 GAA and a .923 save percentage.
Allen is 45-31-11 with a 2.28 GAA and a .913 save percentage.

Seems to me that Elliott has put up significantly better numbers on the same team.

 

[bleedblue1223]

They will keep trying to feed the puck to Allen. We can't do what we did before when we had Halak and Elliott and ended up having to move Bishop. Binnington and Copley are going to be ready sooner than later, and we need to know if Allen is someone to hold onto or to move on from. This season and next will be his years to prove it, and if he doesn't, then we maintain a tandem or we try and trade him in the summer when his value will still be pretty good.

It honestly doesn't matter how the games are split in the regular season, it will be a 100+ point team depending on injuries. What we need to do is determine if one of the goalies can carry the load like what they need to do in the playoffs. Let them start a longer stretch of games and let them play after a bad loss. We need to see if Allen or Elliott can play 10+ games straight and come back from a bad performance and shake it off, otherwise they won't be playoff ready.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Even the Blackhawks had to juggle goalies in the post-season, en route to winning the Cup. I think the notion that the Blues have to have one guy become dominant and start every game is a fallacy. If it happens, great. But I think Hitchcock was too slow to give Elliott a game in the series. I think every one of us knew that Allen wasn't ready to play Game 6 before the puck was dropped.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

Even the Blackhawks had to juggle goalies in the post-season, en route to winning the Cup. I think the notion that the Blues have to have one guy become dominant and start every game is a fallacy. If it happens, great. But I think Hitchcock was too slow to give Elliott a game in the series. I think every one of us knew that Allen wasn't ready to play Game 6 before the puck was dropped.

I was wondering the same thing. I think our biggest failure across the board has been that we, as a team, are unable to make changes to the game plan both in-game and between games. I'm not saying that these changes are easy to make or that they are somehow obvious decisions, but I think that our refusal or inability to adapt has turned a 1 game loss into a series loss.

 

[Ranksu]

Even the Blackhawks had to juggle goalies in the post-season, en route to winning the Cup. I think the notion that the Blues have to have one guy become dominant and start every game is a fallacy. If it happens, great. But I think Hitchcock was too slow to give Elliott a game in the series. I think every one of us knew that Allen wasn't ready to play Game 6 before the puck was dropped.

If our coach cannot make right decisions why would players 'buy-in' his system it would work then. I think Blues need change and all goes with Army + Hitch. Meanwhile we are wasting our core players prime years.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Even the Blackhawks had to juggle goalies in the post-season, en route to winning the Cup. I think the notion that the Blues have to have one guy become dominant and start every game is a fallacy. If it happens, great. But I think Hitchcock was too slow to give Elliott a game in the series. I think every one of us knew that Allen wasn't ready to play Game 6 before the puck was dropped.

Obviously we won't live and die by 1 guy, but Hitch manages the goalies completely different in the regular season compared to the post-season. Playing 82 vs a max of 7 will require a little difference in management, but we aren't preparing the goalies mentally for the playoffs.

In the regular season, they have a safety net. If they have a bad game, the other guy will get the next stretch of games until it's there time again. They know they will get their games and they know they will rest. We need our goalies to have a bounce back mentality, whether it's from a bad game or a bad goalie, but the safety net IMO, inhibits that trait.

The other trait is the killer instinct, which they definitely don't have. When Crawford got benched, he had extra motivation to get it back because it was HIS job, does Allen or Elliott or any tandem goalie have that sort of mentality? If Elliott advanced the team, he would have kept playing until his play stalled, we wouldn't have went back to Allen with extra motivation.

We really need to pick a goalie for who will start the majority of the games and when we are in a tight spot, we can rely on getting us out of. We don't have to live and die by them, but we need a clear starter.

 

[Majorityof1]

Cherry picking one 10 game stretch from 3 years ago doesn't really strengthen the argument. Elliott has been far and away the more consistent goaltender.


What's the point of looking at Elliott's Colorado and Ottawa numbers? He was a different goalie back then. The best way to compare them is to look at his numbers with the Blues, which are better than Allen's.

Since arrivng in St. Louis Elliott is 81-38-10 with a 2.00 GAA and a .923 save percentage.
Allen is 45-31-11 with a 2.28 GAA and a .913 save percentage.

Seems to me that Elliott has put up significantly better numbers on the same team.

Don't bother Vladys. Blueton has posted the same nonsense before. Got smacked down by the same logic before. And refused to reply because he had no good comeback before. Let him think it Elliot's stats from a bad Ottawa team matter today.

Original "debate":http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=106067917#post106067917

 

[2 Minute Minor]

If our coach cannot make right decisions why would players 'buy-in' his system it would work then. I think Blues need change and all goes with Army + Hitch. Meanwhile we are wasting our core players prime years.

So just write off this year?

I believe they could win the Cup this season. There are enough talented players for this team to have as good a chance as anyone. They can beat any team....in the regular season. Some of the other contenders have taken a step back, on paper.

I'm going to invest my energy in rooting for Tarasenko magic, and hopefully start to enjoy Fabbri magic, too. I would love nothing better than for Fabbri to be the next "Robbie Hockey" and steal McDavid's god-given right to the Calder.

And also Shattenkirk win the Norris and then re-sign for a team-friendly deal while the rest of HF is drafting ridiculous trade proposals or projecting line-ups where they sign him as an UFA.

And Parayko shoots diamonds out of his ass and frickin laser beams out of his frickin eyes. Why not?

 

[KirkOut]

Don't bother Vladys. Blueton has posted the same nonsense before. Got smacked down by the same logic before. And refused to reply because he had no good comeback before. Let him think it Elliot's stats from a bad Ottawa team matter today.

Original "debate":http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=106067917#post106067917

damn he burned me so hard in there

 

[Majorityof1]

And Parayko shoots diamonds out of his ass and frickin laser beams out of his frickin eyes. Why not?

Why not? Safety of course. The Diamonds would be a real threat to half this board's puckered lips.

Sorry....couldn't resist

 

[Dbrownss]

So just write off this year?

I believe they could win the Cup this season. There are enough talented players for this team to have as good a chance as anyone. They can beat any team....in the regular season. Some of the other contenders have taken a step back, on paper.

I'm going to invest my energy in rooting for Tarasenko magic, and hopefully start to enjoy Fabbri magic, too. I would love nothing better than for Fabbri to be the next "Robbie Hockey" and steal McDavid's god-given right to the Calder.

And also Shattenkirk win the Norris and then re-sign for a team-friendly deal while the rest of HF is drafting ridiculous trade proposals or projecting line-ups where they sign him as an UFA.

And Parayko shoots diamonds out of his ass and frickin laser beams out of his frickin eyes. Why not?

From what people have said, the Blues have changed up schemes, alot more aggressive. The Dallas announcers mentioned how the Stars had zero ability to operate on the PP.

Hitch was quoted with saying he will let the offensive guys do what they want with the puck but when they don't have it, they need to play the way Hitch wants.


This is enough of a philosophy change for me to give Hitch the benefit of the doubt. Along with this team moving back to being a heavy big bodied team (what's made them successful). I'll be happy to sit back and enjoy the season.