Jake Allen
- Thread starter Blanick
- Start date
TK 421
Barbashev eats babies pass it on
- Sep 12, 2007
- 6,619
- 6,465
The last thing we need is an uber expensive tender eating up huge cap that also costs good assets imo.
So much of what's going on right now is having 7 new forwards and the resulting getting to know you phase. Other contributors are the coaching staff asking our D to pinch often which is resulting in some ugly odd man rushes against and our defensive zone structure in general. Basically it's tough to get a read right now with so many other factors in play.
I have very little confidence in this coaching staff but I'm somewhat encouraged by the staffs willingness to switch the lines up a bit. This early part of the year should be spent finding the right combinations of players and letting everyone get used to each other. It will be really nice to get Eds and Fabs back.
carter333167
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2013
- 6,958
- 3,120
I'd like to see Ville before we traded major assets for anyone else. I really do think he'll be, at a minimum, a very consistent and predictable goaltender. I'd be pretty shocked if he didn't post .912-.915ish in his first year and he could improve from there.
TK 421
Barbashev eats babies pass it on
- Sep 12, 2007
- 6,619
- 6,465
Woof....
If anyone needs me I'll be in a corner crying and muttering to myself, "It's going to be ok...Husso and stuff...everything is Ohhhhh..K".
izzy
go
free agency but yeah hed probably be a bit expensive
but to give him market value and somehow get rid of allens contrsct would be well worth it. imo bob is the best goalie in the nhl currently
I’m not sure I understand the dataset. If it’s 2 games that’s dumb because that isn’t remotely enough data to draw any conclusion. If it’s more than 2 games I also don’t understand what I’m supposed to be learning from this graphic because the teams are all totally different than they were last year
Good news is that Jake legitimately gives the Blues a shot at a top-5 draft pick next year. Another blue-chipper added to Kyrou/Thomas could be impactful, especially if the Blues could somehow get the nets in order after this season. Husso being the next John Gibson would fix a LOT of what ails this club. I really think the team has lost confidence in their current goalie and their play exemplifies it.
Even with the small sample size, I’d like to know what they are actually measuring. Is it like the expected save rate vs danger of the chances?
carter333167
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2013
- 6,958
- 3,120
To be clear, I'm willing to give Jake 10-20 or so games this year before drawing judgment on whether he has made any improvement over the summer.
That said, to debate "small sample size" at this point seems a bit silly. We have a large sample size and it isn't flattering nor does it mark the consistency needed in a #1 goalie.
Jake has essentially been given a 2 week sabbatical during each of the last two seasons to pull himself together during a bad slump. Let that sink in for a minute. I've NEVER seen that happen before (in over 40 years of watching the NHL) with any other top goalie on any other team. Also, imagine how that affects the team as a whole. Not positively I'm sure.
I'm rooting for him to get it together. At the same time, however, I'm loyal first to the Blues and we need to find an alternative ASAP if St. Louis is just too much for Jake at this point. He may need a fresh start somewhere else to have a chance to pull it together.
That said, to debate "small sample size" at this point seems a bit silly. We have a large sample size and it isn't flattering nor does it mark the consistency needed in a #1 goalie.
Jake has essentially been given a 2 week sabbatical during each of the last two seasons to pull himself together during a bad slump. Let that sink in for a minute. I've NEVER seen that happen before (in over 40 years of watching the NHL) with any other top goalie on any other team. Also, imagine how that affects the team as a whole. Not positively I'm sure.
I'm rooting for him to get it together. At the same time, however, I'm loyal first to the Blues and we need to find an alternative ASAP if St. Louis is just too much for Jake at this point. He may need a fresh start somewhere else to have a chance to pull it together.
izzy
go
jake is just a straight up nut
he needs to get his head straight or find a mentor or his career is going to be over soon
he needs to get his head straight or find a mentor or his career is going to be over soon
mk80
Registered User
- Jul 30, 2012
- 8,219
- 8,830
Submit it to the Blues marketing staff for the next slogan! I like it better than All Together Now.
Captain Creampuff
Registered User
- Sep 10, 2012
- 10,969
- 1,816
Giving up 5 goals in the first 2 opening games of the season on a stacked roster isn't a good start. Doug should already be on the phone right now looking for something.
izzy
go
izzy
go
that carter hutton guy in buffalo has a .942 and had a .930 something last year, could ask about him maybe
Evocable Manager
Registered User
Well if want me to, I'll dig the internet for last year and you'll see it is evidently similar.
I don't think the chart was necessary for anyone to know that Allen is bad but I found it incredible how truly awful he's been.
For anyone who claims the defense hasn't been good, you're right. But Allen has been even worse.
I agree that Allen isnt very good but also, 2 games. If this was 2 random games in the middle of the season nobody would be making a graphic. We are giving more weight to these first 2 games than they deserve. Let’s just give it more time before we try to notice trends
ChuckLefley
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2016
- 1,681
- 1,050
If you give up five goals two games in a town, the goalie is not the only issue you have.
Oh, wait, I forgot this is the Blues, fans always blame the goalie. I remember last season when Allen got shoved out of the crease by an opponent and Blues fans were coming up with every reason possible that the goal scored was his fault.
mk80
Registered User
- Jul 30, 2012
- 8,219
- 8,830
I'm not overly worried with these first two games. The tricky issue is if something doesn't start turning around soon, something has to change (I suspect a coaching change more than a trade or Husso call up) otherwise you get into last year's Coyotes territory starting the year 0-9 and basically having no chance to catch up to make the playoffs late in the season.
For me these two games don't define the season. We played well for 2/3 periods against Winnipeg. I didn't get to watch all of last night's game but the parts I saw we looked good. But sports are results oriented in nature, we can play good in however many games we want to but if we are not winning some change has to be made.
For me these two games don't define the season. We played well for 2/3 periods against Winnipeg. I didn't get to watch all of last night's game but the parts I saw we looked good. But sports are results oriented in nature, we can play good in however many games we want to but if we are not winning some change has to be made.
ChuckLefley
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2016
- 1,681
- 1,050
[mod]
The first part should have said, if you give up five goals in two games, the goalie isn’t the only issue you have.
Trying to type quickly and auto-correct going nuts!
The first part should have said, if you give up five goals in two games, the goalie isn’t the only issue you have.
Trying to type quickly and auto-correct going nuts!
Last edited by a moderator:
Which of those 10 goals do you actually pin on Allen and say "yeah, he's expected to make that save?"
1: We give Winnipeg's best sniper, Laine, the left dot where he gets a shot off that deflects off of Bouwmeester 10 feet from the net. Is Allen expected to stop a puck deflected 10 feet in front of him? Most goalies in the league have trouble stopping Laine from there even without it being deflected.
2: Lowry gets a clean-cut breakaway and scores. Perhaps you could argue that we need Allen to make a big save there to stop the Jets from going up by 2 in the 3rd, but breakaways are one of the toughest saves to make. The breakaway was also caused by an atrocious pass by Steen that Pietrangelo had to dive for. That's a huge defensive mistake that led to a high danger scoring chance against.
3: Dunn makes a huge turnover at the red line to Winnipeg's top line. They go in on a 2-0 where Wheeler has a tap-in goal. What a great pass by Connor. Nothing Allen can do.
4: Connor deflects a point shot 5 feet in front of Allen. I don't know how you can expect Allen to make a save where the puck changes direction 5 feet in front of him.
5: Allen should have had this one.
6: A shot from the top of the circle that Allen was ready to save gets deflected wide by Bozak, bounces off the boards and right in front of the net where Pietrangelo watches Toews tap it in. This was a bit of a fluke bounce. Pietrangelo should have had his man. He kinda just stops at the side of the net where he should have kept covering Toews. This is very much unlike Pietrangelo and the majority of the blame should be on him.
7: We let Chicago's best sniper, Kane, into the middle of the ice where he gets a screen and scores.
8: We give Chicago's best sniper, Kane, a 2 on 1 and Kruger scores on the rebound. What a great shot by Kane to get a pass off pad.
9: A shot from the middle gets deflected TWICE on its way to the goal, it bounces right to Toews who gets a shot from the slot as Pietrangelo again loses coverage of his man.
10. Dunn over-commits in OT which leads to a breakaway by Toews where he scores.
Are you watching the games? Or are you just looking at the scores? I'll be the first person to say I have huge doubts about Allen being the guy for this team, but holy cow I have never seen one player get blamed this badly for mistakes the rest of the team is making. It's actually fascinating to me.
I didn't watch the Jets game so I can't comment on those goals but I will comment on the Chicago ones;
1)The puck deflects and hits the back of the boards dead on, he should expect it to be coming back and hugging the post.
2)Kane is Kane
3)Kane making plays
4)The shots was from the center of the ice, so why was Jake so far to his left? The puck got deflected back towards the center but because Jake was out of position and not in the center of his net he wasn't ready for the deflection and put a rebound back to the slot while he was flopping around
5)Toews had a nice shot.
Bottom line is though, he is an NHL starting goalie, he is expected to make saves. That's his one and only job. Not only is he not really making the hard saves, but he's letting in weak goals as well. 10 goals in two games and a sub .900 SV% to start the year. Everyone knows Jake is getting extremely close to losing his position because of the way he has played over the last couple of years and he isn't helping his case by making saves. If he doesn't get his shit together and start making saves, regardless of whether he had a chance or not, he's going to lose his job and deservedly so.
The bolded is factually incorrect. Jake was in the center of his net as the shot was being taken. He then slid to his left to make the save because the puck was going to his left before being deflected TWICE. Also, Allen never touched the puck in that sequence.
I don't think the point is that he should have stopped all of these, but he could have stopped some. And if he had made even 1 more save in regulation we would have won last night.
Not every skater scores on a breakaway. Towes got a couple easy goals bc Allen overcommitted. When he is at his best he makes himself big, plays calm, takes away angles, allowing him often to make saves on shots that he is screened or doesn't have time to react. That is not the way he played last 2 games. Teams draw confidence from the goalie when he makes the saves they expect and a handful of ones they don't. And when he plays like Shakey Jakey it goes the other way. He has been up long enough we shouldn't be making excuses or lower expectations. He isn't a very good starting goalie and we can't count on him. Again. I'd like to see us ride Johnson and see what he can do. And hopefully Husso will be ready before it is too late.
