Confirmed with Link: Jake Allen (4 years @ $4.35m)

[2 Minute Minor]

Yeo's decision to switch back to zone D was huge. Pucks are being kept out of the center of the ice and funneled to the perimeter now. The number of pucks that ended up between the circles, 10 feet out with no defender within sticks reach, were ridiculous before the change. No goalie in the league is going to do well when your coughing two or three of those up a game. I think the improvement is as much a team effort as effort by any one individual.

I recall Hitchcock referencing trying to bring in something that Minnesota did, that seemed to have to do with the neutral zone play and where on the ice turnovers were forced. I'm really not sure if the man to man defense had anything to do with that, but I took it as an effort to increase the breakaway offense opportunities. Maybe someone else can find some virtue in man to man that accounts for Hitchcock running it.

But he also had said something like, "If its not working, later in the year we can switch back to the old way." Was he thinking about switching back to zone? I find it hard to understand why he would be so stubborn about such a poorly executed defense, when that's always been his calling card.

Is this a case where the change was necessary, partly for the actual mechanics of the change, but partly just for the team to psychologically have something to grab onto to justify a change? The players needed a reason to expect something better to happen.

 

[TruBlu]

I recall Hitchcock referencing trying to bring in something that Minnesota did, that seemed to have to do with the neutral zone play and where on the ice turnovers were forced. I'm really not sure if the man to man defense had anything to do with that, but I took it as an effort to increase the breakaway offense opportunities. Maybe someone else can find some virtue in man to man that accounts for Hitchcock running it.

But he also had said something like, "If its not working, later in the year we can switch back to the old way." Was he thinking about switching back to zone? I find it hard to understand why he would be so stubborn about such a poorly executed defense, when that's always been his calling card.

Is this a case where the change was necessary, partly for the actual mechanics of the change, but partly just for the team to psychologically have something to grab onto to justify a change? The players needed a reason to expect something better to happen.

I'll be interested to see what changes Yeo makes in camp. I know he mentioned in his press conference when he took over that he wasn't going to make huge changes, due to the season being 2/3 over already. In any case, Jake has his confidence back and is one of the best in the league when he's confident. The team is more confident as well and I'd say that, all that together, is what is making this team feel like they can win any game against any team. I'm tickled pink we are going to get to see some playoff hockey. I don't think for a second that we will do any real damage (second round at best); only because we have a team in transition and a lot of young guys on the roster. I think their inexperience at the NHL level is going to be exposed, especially against the best teams in the league. I will say that I am really excited about this young cores' chances in the next few years. A couple of key acquisitions and a season or two of experience for guys like Parayko and Fabbri and this could be a cup caliber team.

 

[542365]

I hope he doesn't make too big of changes with how well the team has played since he took over. Maybe some adjustments here and there, but nothing substantial.

As for Jake...he's been fantastic since Yeo took over. We've seen really good stretches like this out of him before though. If he continues this(relatively speaking, I know he's not going to maintain a 1.5 GAA or whatever crazy number it is for an extended period) into and through the playoffs I'll be satisfied that the Blues chose the right goalie. If he lays another egg in the playoffs it's time to look elsewhere.

 

[TK 421]

I hope he doesn't make too big of changes with how well the team has played since he took over. Maybe some adjustments here and there, but nothing substantial.

As for Jake...he's been fantastic since Yeo took over. We've seen really good stretches like this out of him before though. If he continues this(relatively speaking, I know he's not going to maintain a 1.5 GAA or whatever crazy number it is for an extended period) into and through the playoffs I'll be satisfied that the Blues chose the right goalie. If he lays another egg in the playoffs it's time to look elsewhere.

I would like to just see some improvement in his composure in the PO's, that would be an encouraging enough sign for me to be comfortable moving forward. I'm already happy with the changes he's made so far and goalies on average tend to start really putting their game together around his age so hopefully Jakes best is right around the corner.

 

[542365]

I would like to just see some improvement in his composure in the PO's, that would be an encouraging enough sign for me to be comfortable moving forward. I'm already happy with the changes he's made so far and goalies on average tend to start really putting their game together around his age so hopefully Jakes best is right around the corner.

Yeah, it's not 2010 Halak-level or bust for me. He doesn't need to be unbelievable in the playoffs, he just needs to be solid for me to feel comfortable. The "big" games we've had in the regular season(Winter Classic, Blackhawks in Chicago, against Ells for the first time) he's been great for the most part. That's what we need out of him.

 

[jcbeze]

any word on whether or not Allen gets the nod tonight?

 

[KingBran]

Yeah, it's not 2010 Halak-level or bust for me. He doesn't need to be unbelievable in the playoffs, he just needs to be solid for me to feel comfortable. The "big" games we've had in the regular season(Winter Classic, Blackhawks in Chicago, against Ells for the first time) he's been great for the most part. That's what we need out of him.

Was he even really that bad in 2015? Yes, game 6 he let in a softie but the Blues couldn't score in that series to save their lives. You take out the one game the Blues dropped 6 and they were only scoring 1.6 goals a game. I am sorry but Roy in his prime could have been the Blues goalie that series and they weren't getting past MIN.

 

[542365]

Was he even really that bad in 2015? Yes, game 6 he let in a softie but the Blues couldn't score in that series to save their lives. You take out the one game the Blues dropped 6 and they were only scoring 1.6 goals a game. I am sorry but Roy in his prime could have been the Blues goalie that series and they weren't getting past MIN.

This is revisionist history if I've ever seen it. Allen was unquestionably awful. Absolutely awful. And he's been awful in every playoff/World Junior he's ever been in. It's a legitimate concern.

 

[jura]

any word on whether or not Allen gets the nod tonight?

 

[KingBran]

This is revisionist history if I've ever seen it. Allen was unquestionably awful. Absolutely awful. And he's been awful in every playoff/World Junior he's ever been in. It's a legitimate concern.

I am sorry, do the stats not correlate with your hategenda? The Blues could not score vs Minny. In their 4 losses to Minny the Blues scored 2, 1, 1, 0 meaning Allen would have been REQUIRED to have at least one shutout to win just one of those games and could have allowed just ONE goal on the game the Blues scored 2. That's the worst he could have performed for the Blues to win 2 of those games needed to advance. The Blues sucked at scoring.

Allen had one bad game that series. I have stats to back up what I said. You just have hate. Keep the blinders on kid.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Blaming Allen for the Minnesota series isn't much different than blaming Elliott for the Los Angeles series.

 

[542365]

I am sorry, do the stats not correlate with your hategenda? The Blues could not score vs Minny. In their 4 losses to Minny the Blues scored 2, 1, 1, 0 meaning Allen would have been REQUIRED to have at least one shutout to win just one of those games and could have allowed just ONE goal on the game the Blues scored 2. That's the worst he could have performed for the Blues to win 2 of those games needed to advance. The Blues sucked at scoring.

Allen had one bad game that series. I have stats to back up what I said. You just have hate. Keep the blinders on kid.

Nowhere did I say he was the only reason we lost. Our team, as a whole, was bad. Allen is included in that.

Want some stats? .904. ****ing horrendous, yet the best he's ever posted in a playoff or tournament appearance since the U18s.

He faced just over 20 shots a game and still found a way to **** the bed.

Quality start percentage= 50%. So he had 3 bad games out of 6. Not just one. He also had 0 quality starts out of 4 last playoffs, and once again fell short of .900 save percentage. 60% is considered average, and he's sitting at a solid 37.5% for his playoff career.

GSAA= -2.17. 0 is average.

That's how bad he was. Go back and read the game day threads and literally everyone, even guys who like Allen quite a lot, were admitting that he was downright terrible in that series. Again, he's not the only reason we lost, but he certainly did his fair share.

Stay in the kiddie pool. Come back in a couple years when you're ready to discuss like an adult.

 

[KingBran]

Blaming Allen for the Minnesota series isn't much different than blaming Elliott for the Los Angeles series.

Well Allen did have a better GAA in 2015 than Elliott had in 2016.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Everyone sucked that series, and while Allen played bad himself, it also made him look worse when the play in front of him sucked. Many of the goalie stats are really just teams stats in my view. Goalies shouldn't get all the credit when times are great, and they shouldn't get all the blame when times are bad.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Of the 30 goalies with 36 starts or more, he is now tied for 17th among sv%. He is 19th of 35 with 30 or more starts.

His save% is 94.2% in 20 starts since the all-star break.

 

[Oberyn]

Everyone sucked that series, and while Allen played bad himself, it also made him look worse when the play in front of him sucked. Many of the goalie stats are really just teams stats in my view. Goalies shouldn't get all the credit when times are great, and they shouldn't get all the blame when times are bad.

Agreed, Allen wasn't good in that series but neither was the rest of the team. There were definitely some goals allowed that Allen should have stopped, but there were also plenty of chances where the Blues forwards should have scored but they couldn't. The team as a whole failed that series.

 

[542365]

Well Allen did have a better GAA in 2015 than Elliott had in 2016.

And yet Elliott had a SUBSTANTIALLY better save percentage, so he was facing far more shots per game. Elliott was also playing two of the best offenses in the league, while Jake Allen played a painfully mediocre Wild squad.

 

[542365]

Agreed, Allen wasn't good in that series but neither was the rest of the team. There were definitely some goals allowed that Allen should have stopped, but there were also plenty of chances where the Blues forwards should have scored but they couldn't. The team as a whole failed that series.

That's exactly what I'm saying. It's almost never just the goalie, but the goalie can certainly play a role. Just because the offense sucked doesn't excuse the goalie for a terrible performance. They're open to criticism just as the skaters are. It's fair game.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And yet Elliott had a SUBSTANTIALLY better save percentage, so he was facing far more shots per game. Elliott was also playing two of the best offenses in the league, while Jake Allen played a painfully mediocre Wild squad.

Do we blame Elliott for the 11/12 Kings series? That was basically the same result as the Wild, sure the Kings were a better team, but the result was the same. Elliott let some softies in, but the team completely sucked, except for one or 2 guys.

I defended Elliott then, like I will for Allen. Elliott got his chance to redeem himself, partially the year after, but not completely until 15/16. Allen deserves his chance. He either succeeds or he fails, but he should only get the bulk of the blame when he fails when the play in front of him is at least solid. If that happens, then we need to move on from him.

 

[KingBran]

Everyone sucked that series, and while Allen played bad himself, it also made him look worse when the play in front of him sucked. Many of the goalie stats are really just teams stats in my view. Goalies shouldn't get all the credit when times are great, and they shouldn't get all the blame when times are bad.

Pretty much this. I am not saying Allen was great, he had one game I would consider a bad game. But he wasn't awful overall and he would have had to post a couple of shutouts for the Blues to move on. The team couldn't score or pick him up.

 

[KingBran]

And yet Elliott had a SUBSTANTIALLY better save percentage, so he was facing far more shots per game. Elliott was also playing two of the best offenses in the league, while Jake Allen played a painfully mediocre Wild squad.

sv% != goals allowed.


Goals allowed = actual game stat that determines the outcome of a game. I think you need to look up the word "substantially" too.

 

[jcbeze]

give the man a rest tomorrow, Hutton has been excellent on the road

 

[Brian39]

Nowhere did I say he was the only reason we lost. Our team, as a whole, was bad. Allen is included in that.

Want some stats? .904. ****ing horrendous, yet the best he's ever posted in a playoff or tournament appearance since the U18s.

He faced just over 20 shots a game and still found a way to **** the bed.

Quality start percentage= 50%. So he had 3 bad games out of 6. Not just one. He also had 0 quality starts out of 4 last playoffs, and once again fell short of .900 save percentage. 60% is considered average, and he's sitting at a solid 37.5% for his playoff career.

GSAA= -2.17. 0 is average.

That's how bad he was. Go back and read the game day threads and literally everyone, even guys who like Allen quite a lot, were admitting that he was downright terrible in that series. Again, he's not the only reason we lost, but he certainly did his fair share.

Stay in the kiddie pool. Come back in a couple years when you're ready to discuss like an adult.

I have a number of issues with this post, but my primary issue is that advanced stats (and frankly most goalie stats) are borderline meaningless over a 6-8 game sample size. My second large issue is that Allen started 2 games in last years playoffs, not 4.

But my biggest issue is your discussion about quality starts. It is either woefully ill-informed or intentionally disingenuous. For starts, 60% is not even close to an average QS/GP ratio. Last year there were 6 goalies with 50+ starts who were sitting at 60% or higher in QS/GP. The stat column itself on Hockey Reference even says that 53% is average. I think quality starts is useful to analyze which goalies are largely hot/cold vs consistently pretty good, but that's about it IMO. However, even using it as a standalone stat like you are, you need to at least accurately represent what it means. 60% isn't close to average and there is a huge gap between a 'bad game' and failing to earn a quality start.

Here is why a small sample size is such a big deal. Of his 8 playoff starts, he was 1 shot away from turning a 'bad game' into a quality start in 2 games. And I don't mean converting a goal to a save. I mean facing 1 extra shot and it being a save (which is by far the statistically most likely thing to happen with one additional shot). Let's say in game 3 against Minnesota he stopped 22 of 24 instead of 21 of 23. Suddenly his QS/GP in that series is 66% instead of 50%, which is among the best in the league. Literally one shot swings his stats that wildly.

I don't think a single person is saying Allen was good in game 5 and 6. But using such small sample sizes with advanced stats is idiotic to make blanket statements like he was 'downright terrible' that series. I don't see how anyone can say with a straight face that stopping 21 of 23 for a .913 is downright terrible. He was brutal in games 5 and 6. But he was very good in our game 1 loss and played decent in our game 3 loss.

 

[Halak Ness Monster]

I am sorry, do the stats not correlate with your hategenda? The Blues could not score vs Minny. In their 4 losses to Minny the Blues scored 2, 1, 1, 0 meaning Allen would have been REQUIRED to have at least one shutout to win just one of those games and could have allowed just ONE goal on the game the Blues scored 2. That's the worst he could have performed for the Blues to win 2 of those games needed to advance. The Blues sucked at scoring.

Allen had one bad game that series. I have stats to back up what I said. You just have hate. Keep the blinders on kid.

He was terrible in Games 5 and 6. Zero doubt about that. Just terrible.

Don't even bother responding to me either. You will never convince me he wasn't. I watched it live and have seen the highlights plenty since then. He...was...terrible.

We had Minnesota on the ropes in period one in Game 5 and Allen let them back in with a weak goal. He completely took the wind out of the Blues sails in the remainder of the 1st and 2nd period. He let in 4 goals in that game and 2 were jokes. Then Hitch pulled his ass quickly in Game 6.

I don't know what stats you claim to have that suggest he was only terrible in one game. Those stats don't exist.

With the series knotted at 2-2, one goalie stepped up and one goalie crumbled. That's a real fact.

BTW, I can still be a Blues and Jake Allen fan AND acknowledge that Allen was in awful in Games 5 and 6 at the same time. They aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[Renard]

I don't think Allen's past failure in the Minnesota series tells us much about how he will do in the 2017 playoffs.

For you guys who keep reminding us of Allen's past failures, it seems to me that you are forgetting how life works. Success doesn't always come to people all wrapped up in a bow. Sometimes you have to overcome failure, dedicate yourself and keep at it till you succeed.