Blues @ Flames: Bring your parents and ridiculous stick saves!

[sbet1998]

Playing Elliott is a waste of time. He sucks unless he's playing behind a dominant D and facing weak shots. I don't care what anybody says, he and Halak benefited greatly last year by the Blues smothering D. I don't want to hear about their save % either. They were facing weak shots on a nightly basis. Halak is average and Elliott is below average. Allen is the only one with elite potential.

Perfectly said. Allen is the starter until proven otherwise. Elliot can't keep his team in the game. Its obvious that the team plays better in front of Allen and Halak.

Elliot getting a start shouldnt happen unless both of Allen and Halak give each other mono, fall off a 100 story building or get kidnapped. Elliot has a history that is well known. Halak can rebound and Allen is a rising prospect. You would have to have a brain injury or a major disease to let Elliot anywhere near the net at this point. I have more faith in the Blues brass than that.

 

[PocketNines]

We must have.

We spent a lot of time in their offensive zone and, in my opinion, did not frequently challenge Kipper. This team does not utilize the slot, an odd man rush, or the one timer well enough to challenge a big, solid, positional goaltender like Kipper and that's why his stats are great against us.

It was nice to see someone finally standing in front of the net most of the game. That doesn't happen often.

The Blues never let off the gas and put constant pressure on, but when you're taking low percentage shots and kept to the outside while your in the offensive zone, it's really not going to matter how uneven the zone time is with a keeper like Kipper.

Go to NHL.com, check the game recap, click "ice tracker" and shots. Fast forward through any replays that aren't shots on Kiprusoff, sit through a small handful of short ads, and it'll be obvious the game I saw was the one that actually happened. Virtually every shot is from either right in close or at least between the dots in the slot. Just totally the opposite of what you're saying, and there's easy video evidence if you care to look.

You don't have to be convinced one way or the other. Just pointing out where the clear proof is of what we all just watched if this debate really matters.

 

[Linus]

Kiprusoff always plays very well against the Blues. It's always frustrating to play against him, especially when they should've won the game like tonight.

It seems like the Blues goaltending troubles will never end. Allen needs to play as much as possible. Halak should only play to keep him from tiring.

Another thing about Halak, not sure if this has been discussed in the thread, but his past two games were against Edmonton and Calgary. I think this speaks volumes to the amount of trust Hitch has in him. I'm not trying to disrespect either team, because they both have good PPs and offensive weapons, but Allen is getting all of the starts against the bigger threats. I can't blame Hitch for playing Halak tonight because I expected him to play well. I was wrong.

 

[Mike Liut]

The team defense is starting to play better and limited the high % shots like they have most of the season. I think Elliott would be an OK backup if somebody wants to over pay for Halak. I would definitely consider it. Like somebody said, his glove is weak. He's also mentally frail. I like him, and like him more than Elliott, I just like Allen way more. I would play Allen most games from here out.

 

[sbet1998]

Kiprusoff always plays very well against the Blues. It's always frustrating to play against him, especially when they should've won the game like tonight.

It seems like the Blues goaltending troubles will never end. Allen needs to play as much as possible. Halak should only play to keep him from tiring.

Another thing about Halak, not sure if this has been discussed in the thread, but his past two games were against Edmonton and Calgary. I think this speaks volumes to the amount of trust Hitch has in him. I'm not trying to disrespect either team, because they both have good PPs and offensive weapons, but Allen is getting all of the starts against the bigger threats. I can't blame Hitch for playing Halak tonight because I expected him to play well. I was wrong.

I agree with most of that. Halak isnt showing that he wants that NO 1 job ATM. Allen has played better and for whatever reason the team plays well in front of him.

Elliot is basically just there for depth at this point and I dont get why. Allen has earned his spot and Halak has been good enough to make him releasable. Still wondering why Elliot is on the roster if not for anything else other than Armstrong not wanting to realize he made a mistake and reacted too quickly with giving Elliot an extension.

 

[PocketNines]

Liked the post up until you mentioned Elliot getting a start over Halak. When you have Allen, you dont give starts to Elliot until Allen is letting the team down. I kind of get the idea of what you're saying, but Allen and Halak have outperformed Elliot by a large margin.

Its all about the mentality and right now the Blues as a group have no confidence in Elliot whatsoever.

Halak has not outplayed Elliott by that large a margin. They've both sucked. It's binary – you either suck or you give the team a chance to win. Halak failed at giving the team the chance to win. Arguing whether .88 is significantly better than .85 is myopic. Both are just unacceptable.

All .88 vs. .85 is, is that the .88 gets to prove himself first. Ok, Halak, you had your shot at rebounding, you still aren't getting it done, now give the next guy in the line a chance. I'm not saying Elliott would improve, but they would've waived the guy if they'd already made that determination that he never gets a shot in net. Halak had an opportunity to cement a Halak/Allen or Allen/Halak tandem and he effed the dog. What if Elliott comes back and plays really well. You cannot say it can't happen. Elliott has played poorly in the NHL previously and rebounded to post the greatest regular season of all time. That's certainly evidence that it's possible. Why does Halak get all the 2d chances and Elliott get none? That doesn't make sense to me. Unless the plan is to play Allen every single game, I'd rather Elliott get a shot before Halak. Maybe they can have a competitive battle to see who gets to be the backup.

 

[Mike Liut]

I don't even think Halak was that bad tonight either. He just looks like a very good #2 goalie to me and we need better than that. It's time to find out if Jake is the answer. I think he is. Even listening to his interviews, he's as cool as a cucumber. The dude just has the "it" factor. I love how if he gives up a bad goal, it doesn't affect him at all. When Jaro gives up a bad one, I notice his eyes looking over at the bench. He just doesn't have the "it" factor and I'm not willing to pay a #2 or a 1B goalie 4 mill per year when we have so many RFA's to sign. It will piss me off not locking up Petro, Shatty, Berglund, Stewart, Sobotka to long term deals because we can't afford it and Jaro is sitting there making 4 mill.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

You guys can't deny that Elliott stole some very key games last year. I would run with Allen/Elliott until both suck so bad Jaro can claim his job back, because he has been no better than Elliott and gets paid more than twice as much.

 

[sbet1998]

The team defense is starting to play better and limited the high % shots like they have most of the season. I think Elliott would be an OK backup if somebody wants to over pay for Halak. I would definitely consider it. Like somebody said, his glove is weak. He's also mentally frail. I like him, and like him more than Elliott, I just like Allen way more. I would play Allen most games from here out.

See, thats the opposite side of the coin and I get it.

Allen has impressed but Im not going to jump on that bandwagon until sufficient time has passed and he keeps that level up. You have to keep Halak just based on the fact that he is a proven above average GT that has had success on a contending team. Elliot, however is expendable. Very expendable.

 

[PocketNines]

Playing Elliott is a waste of time. He sucks unless he's playing behind a dominant D and facing weak shots. I don't care what anybody says, he and Halak benefited greatly last year by the Blues smothering D. I don't want to hear about their save % either. They were facing weak shots on a nightly basis. Halak is average and Elliott is below average. Allen is the only one with elite potential.

That's just not true. We're now reinventing last season. Elliott was awesome last season. You literally cannot post a .940 over nearly 40 games without being incredible in your own right. There were breakaways and odd man rushes last year too. I remember reaching the point with him last year seeing a breakaway and not even considering that a goal would be scored.

The notion that it was all the D last year is a convenient fiction. That's just not what happened. It's literally the same argument as the Blues being successful last year because of "the trap." But now we're adopting the fiction because it fits an "Elliott has always sucked" argument more smoothly? Nuh-uh, sorry, didn't happen that way. I watched every single game last year. I've never seen a better regular season from a Blues goalie including Liut '81 and I went to my first game in the mid-70s.

 

[sbet1998]

You guys can't deny that Elliott stole some very key games last year. I would run with Allen/Elliott until both suck so bad Jaro can claim his job back, because he has been no better than Elliott and gets paid more than twice as much.

Elliot let in 4 or more goals for 6 straight games. Halak was never that bad. Look at the GAA.

 

[Mike Liut]

Halak has not outplayed Elliott by that large a margin. They've both sucked. It's binary – you either suck or you give the team a chance to win. Halak failed at giving the team the chance to win. Arguing whether .88 is significantly better than .85 is myopic. Both are just unacceptable.

All .88 vs. .85 is, is that the .88 gets to prove himself first. Ok, Halak, you had your shot at rebounding, you still aren't getting it done, now give the next guy in the line a chance. I'm not saying Elliott would improve, but they would've waived the guy if they'd already made that determination that he never gets a shot in net. Halak had an opportunity to cement a Halak/Allen or Allen/Halak tandem and he effed the dog. What if Elliott comes back and plays really well. You cannot say it can't happen. Elliott has played poorly in the NHL previously and rebounded to post the greatest regular season of all time. That's certainly evidence that it's possible. Why does Halak get all the 2d chances and Elliott get none? That doesn't make sense to me. Unless the plan is to play Allen every single game, I'd rather Elliott get a shot before Halak. Maybe they can have a competitive battle to see who gets to be the backup.

What is funny is, even though as you said Elliott had the greatest regular of all time, and if wasn't for Jaro getting hurt, Hitch wasn't going to play him in the playoffs last season. It just shows you how they feel about him. In my opinion, he makes the ordinary saves but never the spectacular ones that will steal games. Both Allen and Jaro have the ability to do that. Elliott just doesn't do it for me. He seems like an average #2 all the way. We saw how he gets lit up behind a D that isn't smothering.

 

[BlueOil]

Go to NHL.com, check the game recap, click "ice tracker" and shots. Fast forward through any replays that aren't shots on Kiprusoff, sit through a small handful of short ads, and it'll be obvious the game I saw was the one that actually happened. Virtually every shot is from either right in close or at least between the dots in the slot. Just totally the opposite of what you're saying, and there's easy video evidence if you care to look.

You don't have to be convinced one way or the other. Just pointing out where the clear proof is of what we all just watched if this debate really matters.

Maybe if I get the time, I'll pop open GCL and rewatch the game. But from what I saw, the few shots from close in or from the slot, went right into Kipper's belly or right into his glove (and it's not like he was stretching or even moving much to grab the puck). Lines #1 and #3 spent far too much time stuck to the boards. I may very well be forgetting some better chances, but I turned off the TV after the game feeling like we had full control and just counldn't figure out a way to finish. Kipper was the reason they won, but I don't think he was challenged much on most of those 38 shots simply because he was in decent position most of the night.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

Elliot let in 4 or more goals for 6 straight games. Halak was never that bad. Look at the GAA.

Halak was injured for almost the whole time the Blues broke down as an actual team, a lot of the goals were Elliott's fault, but there was at least 1-2 goals nearly every game down that stretch that was just due to the Blues playing poorly as a team.

 

[Mike Liut]

That's just not true. We're now reinventing last season. Elliott was awesome last season. You literally cannot post a .940 over nearly 40 games without being incredible in your own right. There were breakaways and odd man rushes last year too. I remember reaching the point with him last year seeing a breakaway and not even considering that a goal would be scored.

The notion that it was all the D last year is a convenient fiction. That's just not what happened. It's literally the same argument as the Blues being successful last year because of "the trap." But now we're adopting the fiction because it fits an "Elliott has always sucked" argument more smoothly? Nuh-uh, sorry, didn't happen that way. I watched every single game last year. I've never seen a better regular season from a Blues goalie including Liut '81 and I went to my first game in the mid-70s.

Last nights game vs the Oilers is a perfect example how a goalie can have a great save % behind the Blues D. The Blues can clamp down and the goalies can face low % shots all night. This is exactly how it was last year.

 

[sbet1998]

What is funny is, even though as you said Elliott had the greatest regular of all time, and if wasn't for Jaro getting hurt, Hitch wasn't going to play him in the playoffs last season. It just shows you how they feel about him. In my opinion, he makes the ordinary saves but never the spectacular ones that will steal games. Both Allen and Jaro have the ability to do that. Elliott just doesn't do it for me. He seems like an average #2 all the way. We saw how he gets lit up behind a D that isn't smothering.

I think most still have confidence in Halak. He doesnt steal the show but he can be steady for this team when they are playing to their level.

Elliot on the other hand cant keep from giving up 2 soft goals to go along with never making a timely save. Halak is having problems making the timely saves but the Blues are always in the game when he's in net.

People seem to forget Elliots past and that the Blues were down 2 or 3 goals in every game he started at the end there.

 

[sbet1998]

Halak was injured for almost the whole time the Blues broke down as an actual team, a lot of the goals were Elliott's fault, but there was at least 1-2 goals nearly every game down that stretch that was just due to the Blues playing poorly as a team.

True, but he was giving up 5 on average at that point. A couple softies every game.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

Last nights game vs the Oilers is a perfect example how a goalie can have a great save % behind the Blues D. The Blues can clamp down and the goalies can face low % shots all night. This is exactly how it was last year.

Brian Elliott had enough highlight reel saves last year to fill out an 8 minute YouTube video. I'm sure if we looked at the GDT's from last years games the opinions of Elliott's play last year would be completely different.

 

[Mike Liut]

I think most still have confidence in Halak. He doesnt steal the show but he can be steady for this team when they are playing to their level.

Elliot on the other hand cant keep from giving up 2 soft goals to go along with never making a timely save. Halak is having problems making the timely saves but the Blues are always in the game when he's in net.

People seem to forget Elliots past and that the Blues were down 2 or 3 goals in every game he started at the end there.

I'm fine with Halak. He's average to slightly above average, just not elite. I still think Allen has the higher upside. Halak can definitely keep them in it if the Blues play shut down D, which is very possible. Blues just faced a hot goalie tonight.

 

[Mike Liut]

Brian Elliott had enough highlight reel saves last year to fill out an 8 minute YouTube video. I'm sure if we looked at the GDT's from last years games the opinions of Elliott's play last year would be completely different.

I was here for every game. Don't remember many highlight reel saves.

 

[PocketNines]

What is funny is, even though as you said Elliott had the greatest regular of all time, and if wasn't for Jaro getting hurt, Hitch wasn't going to play him in the playoffs last season. It just shows you how they feel about him. In my opinion, he makes the ordinary saves but never the spectacular ones that will steal games. Both Allen and Jaro have the ability to do that. Elliott just doesn't do it for me. He seems like an average #2 all the way. We saw how he gets lit up behind a D that isn't smothering.

Another fiction. They were going to continue the same battle in the playoffs as in the regular season. They were both stellar and both feeding off the other. We know this is Halak's M.O., needing the competition, but Elliott was definitely getting the tougher starts last regular season, so that inverts your argument fully.

But, IMO we're getting too deep in the weeds on this one. Let's take a giant step back and the 30,000-foot view. The goaltending position for the St. Louis Blues is still wide open. I think we can all agree on that. Everyone has different shades of trust for different guys. We'll never settle those gut feelings. The very fact that they're carrying three goalies, to me, is evidence the Blues feel the spot is still open for the seizing. Another high-level view ... each one of these three goalies has looked good behind the team at different points in the last ~120 games, and each one has been spotty. Even Allen was winning early while looking kinda meh, though the team won behind him through fortuitous goal support and ultimately he seemed to grow into the role and was legitimately playing very well. He's also very young and by far the most inexperienced which does count against his chances of being the playoff starter.

So again, with the high-level view, it's basically up to whoever DOES get the starts (which won't be determined by any of us) that they know it's a constant audition from now until the end of the season.

My own personal view is I don't think Halak has closed the door on Elliott, and I've said why I think Elliott should get another chance (on a back to back) and there's reasoning behind it, just as there's reasoning behind those who say he shouldn't. I just am pushing back on the retroactive determination that Elliott's performance last year wasn't real by virtue of his performance this year. That isn't being honest IMO.

 

[sbet1998]

We cant save Elliot people. I know he played well last year and set records, but dont let the fog of that make you think he is some elite goaltender on a bad stretch.

Even the best in the lulls of their careers didnt allow that many goals. This team is trying to win a cup, not get Elliots career back on track.

He got a great opportunity last season and he made some money and set a record. Stop feeling sorry for him. Does anyone here really want him starting a playoff game for the Blues?

 

[Captain Creampuff]

We cant save Elliot people. I know he played well last year and set records, but dont let the fog of that make you think he is some elite goaltender on a bad stretch.

Even the best in the lulls of their careers didnt allow that many goals. This team is trying to win a cup, not get Elliots career back on track.

He got a great opportunity last season and he made some money and set a record. Stop feeling sorry for him. Does anyone here really want him starting a playoff game for the Blues?

No one is saying Elliott is elite. We are saying that he is still a serviceable backup.

 

[PocketNines]

Maybe if I get the time, I'll pop open GCL and rewatch the game. But from what I saw, the few shots from close in or from the slot, went right into Kipper's belly or right into his glove (and it's not like he was stretching or even moving much to grab the puck). Lines #1 and #3 spent far too much time stuck to the boards. I may very well be forgetting some better chances, but I turned off the TV after the game feeling like we had full control and just counldn't figure out a way to finish. Kipper was the reason they won, but I don't think he was challenged much on most of those 38 shots simply because he was in decent position most of the night.

I certainly won't disagree that Kiprusoff was in excellent position all night. With the Blues swarming (winning almost every offensive zone board battle throughout the night), he absolutely had to be at his sharpest and he was. Guys did have certain opportunities to finish that they didn't (there was one Stewart had where he chipped it into Kipper's glove from directly on the doorstep that would have been an easy goal fivehole). But even that one example I don't blame Stewart as it was pure instant reaction rather than having time to notice what was open. Tarasenko had some chances, that one where Kiprusoff went prone on the ice to make a great save is one that comes to mind, the opportunisitic shot off the faceoff was another, but those are close in shots, all of em. And it wasn't like the Blues hung their heads, they attacked in waves all night. That 4th line didn't get tons of ice time but that was the best 4th line night of the season IMO. They were relentless. Reaves needs to sit awhile, because Schwartz-Nichol-Porter works for me.

 

[Mike Liut]

Another fiction. They were going to continue the same battle in the playoffs as in the regular season. They were both stellar and both feeding off the other. We know this is Halak's M.O., needing the competition, but Elliott was definitely getting the tougher starts last regular season, so that inverts your argument fully.

But, IMO we're getting too deep in the weeds on this one. Let's take a giant step back and the 30,000-foot view. The goaltending position for the St. Louis Blues is still wide open. I think we can all agree on that. Everyone has different shades of trust for different guys. We'll never settle those gut feelings. The very fact that they're carrying three goalies, to me, is evidence the Blues feel the spot is still open for the seizing. Another high-level view ... each one of these three goalies has looked good behind the team at different points in the last ~120 games, and each one has been spotty. Even Allen was winning early while looking kinda meh, though the team won behind him through fortuitous goal support and ultimately he seemed to grow into the role and was legitimately playing very well. He's also very young and by far the most inexperienced which does count against his chances of being the playoff starter.

So again, with the high-level view, it's basically up to whoever DOES get the starts (which won't be determined by any of us) that they know it's a constant audition from now until the end of the season.

My own personal view is I don't think Halak has closed the door on Elliott, and I've said why I think Elliott should get another chance (on a back to back) and there's reasoning behind it, just as there's reasoning behind those who say he shouldn't. I just am pushing back on the retroactive determination that Elliott's performance last year wasn't real by virtue of his performance this year. That isn't being honest IMO.

Halak started games 1 and 2 before getting hurt. I think that shows you who Hitch felt was the #1 and who he had more confidence in.