Check the save percentage of all the goalies he has signed since being here. In every case they were above average. Elliott was an elite 0.930 last year.
It is a mystery to all of us on CP why Hiller, Ramo, Elliott and Johnson all regressed after being signed here. Sigalet is the only common denominator.
None of those guys being starters elsewhere is also a factor, its tough to be the guy
This is 100% on Sigalet and Treliving, when you look at the short leash most of the goalie coaches get, it's mind boggling that Sigalet was allowed to stay and wreck so many goalies. Treliving get's the blame for sitting by and letting it happen. When he canned Hartley and most of his staff, we were sitting on the worst goaltending in the entire league and had EVERY reason to can him- new coaching staff, new goalies but he made the call to keep him? Someone has pictures of somebody doing something that nobody should see
__________________
"You just got your asses whipped by a bunch of gawddamned nerds" - Coach Harris
C'mon. Elliott sucks monster dong but he was still the best goalie in terms of Sv% last year. Treliving gave up only a 2nd and guess what, the Flames can now walk away from Elliott and are not tied to some ridiculous contract.
Do you know what the odds of a 2nd round pick are? Elliott also saved the regular season and gave you 4 extra games (abiet, all losing games at that). That's magic. What did you think, Treliving would become the goalie coach after acquiring a good goalie on paper?
Some things you just can't see coming
What about 15/16? Remember that mess to start the year.
Elliott didn't show up until December, yes he had a good run but it's been known for years he can't carry the mail on his own. That's now painfully clear to all
of us.
Last summer he had to do something, gambled on a guy St Louis was giving up on. If Elliott was to remain a Flame long term the acquisition cost would be similar to what the Oilers paid for Talbot. According to some Treliving was in on Talbot and Jones but wouldn't pay the price. As A result we are going into year 4 of having huge question marks in goal. He has done a good job building this team but goaltending has been a problem since his arrival. He has failed to properly address it.
__________________
I PROMISED MESS I WOULDN'T DO THIS
The difference in the series was the goaltending at each end.
And in reality, the difference was only at one end.
All a goalie can do is give their team a chance to win.
When the series started, I was hoping that Elliott could steal us a game. As the series went on, I was hoping that he wouldn't cost us each game. We all know how that turned out.
I hope they don't bring back Elliott because of his poor performance but I also felt that he caused the Flames wins in the season with his terrible puck handling skills. Too many give aways behind his net or putting defensemen in bad situations this past year. The Flames should pursue Bishop as he can help the defense with his puck handling skills but I am not sure of his ability to stop the puck is better then Elliott. I hope that they do not overpay with 6 years at $6 million/yr. I hope they sign Bishop for 3 years and give Gillies and Parsons time to develop and take over the starting role.
Unless you're pulling one of the true top flight #1 goalies out there from a team that magically decides they don't need them anymore, I think we should re-sign Elliot for cheap and on a short term until one of the prospects either take over or fail at which point you look for outside help.
Bishop isn't much of a step up and far from immune from bad games. Elliot showed he can be as good of a starter as anyone the Flames will realistically get and a crappy playoffs doesn't change that.
Signing a UFA goalie to a long term big money deal is a terrible idea for this team. Do you remember how confident we all were that Elliot was our solution? Just like some of you are suggesting Bishop is now? Imagine if Elliot was signed for 5 years at 5 million.
That's what you're opening yourself up to. On top of which, if Gillies or Parsons comes up and usurps Bishop (or whoever), you now have a ridiculously overpriced back up.
Sign the devil we know for 1 or 2 years for 3 million and invest the big money on help upfront for little Johnny. We have goalie prospects knocking on the door. We have no 1st liners down on the farm and we're realistically not developing one for years either.
Check the save percentage of all the goalies he has signed since being here. In every case they were above average. Elliott was an elite 0.930 last year.
It is a mystery to all of us on CP why Hiller, Ramo, Elliott and Johnson all regressed after being signed here. Sigalet is the only common denominator.
Did they all regress? Really?
Hiller hadn't been the same since his vertigo issues and was over the hill.
Ramo was unproven in the NHL. Regressed from the KHL or what?
Johnson is a career backup and served the role well here
Elliott maybe regressed but the other 3? Not accurate.
Unless you're pulling one of the true top flight #1 goalies out there from a team that magically decides they don't need them anymore, I think we should re-sign Elliot for cheap and on a short term until one of the prospects either take over or fail at which point you look for outside help.
Bishop isn't much of a step up and far from immune from bad games. Elliot showed he can be as good of a starter as anyone the Flames will realistically get and a crappy playoffs doesn't change that.
Signing a UFA goalie to a long term big money deal is a terrible idea for this team. Do you remember how confident we all were that Elliot was our solution? Just like some of you are suggesting Bishop is now? Imagine if Elliot was signed for 5 years at 5 million.
That's what you're opening yourself up to. On top of which, if Gillies or Parsons comes up and usurps Bishop (or whoever), you now have a ridiculously overpriced back up.
Sign the devil we know for 1 or 2 years for 3 million and invest the big money on help upfront for little Johnny. We have goalie prospects knocking on the door. We have no 1st liners down on the farm and we're realistically not developing one for years either.
figures, the guy the blames the forwards for the series is okay with the goalie
figures, the guy the blames the forwards for the series is okay with the goalie
Elliott also costs a pick to sign
Not okay with the how the goalie played. I believe he had a bad series but I don't have any faith that whoever we can get to replace him will be better.
Anyone who says that it's Sigalet's fault, or Treliving's fault or Gulutzen's fault is completely flat out wrong. It's 100% Brian Elliott's fault. All the bad goals he gave up was due to his poor technical ability. How is that a goalie coaches fault that he gave up peewee level goals in the most important time of the year? He showed all season long that he has a weak glove hand and poor tracking ability. Letting in 1 or 2 soft goals in a series isn't good, Elliott gave up about 7-8.
There's a reason why Ottawa didn't want him and there's a reason why St. Louis didn't want him and even acquired Miller and Brodeur because they lost faith in him. I am very weary of goaltenders who lose their jobs now because there's probably an inherent flaw in them like we've seen from Hiller and Elliott now.
Elliott was always overrated by a large part of this fan base. That is really the only reason why I feel sorry for him. He is a back-up or (1B goalie) at best.
He has rarely been given starting goalie clout throughout his career, and every team he played on where he showed glimpses of being a top goalie, was eager to trade him while his value was high. He makes back-up goalie money for a reason.
It was classic case of putting too much emphasis on player specific stats. He has always been inconsistent and prone to big rebounds and soft goals. And yes, he also shows at times that he can make big saves and win a few games on his own. But that doesn't make up for his inconsistency. Just ask St. Louis and Ottawa which both flirted with trying him as their #1 guy only to rid themselves of him quickly.
The only saving grace is that the acquisition cost (3rd rounder) and his salary were pretty much on par with what he was worth.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Elliott was always overrated by a large part of this fan base. That is really the only reason why I feel sorry for him. He is a back-up or (1B goalie) at best.
He has rarely been given starting goalie clout throughout his career, and every team he played on where he showed glimpses of being a top goalie, was eager to trade him while his value was high. He makes back-up goalie money for a reason.
It was classic case of putting too much emphasis on player specific stats. He has always been inconsistent and prone to big rebounds and soft goals. And yes, he also shows at times that he can make big saves and win a few games on his own. But that doesn't make up for his inconsistency. Just ask St. Louis and Ottawa which both flirted with trying him as their #1 guy only to rid themselves of him quickly.
The only saving grace is that the acquisition cost (3rd rounder) and his salary were pretty much on par with what he was worth.
Sadly, he actually cost us a second rounder. Pick #35 if I'm not mistaken. He costs us another 3rd rounder if we decide to re-sign him. I would rather keep the 3rd rounder at this point.
If you are going the UFA route, you really have four choices:
1. Ryan Miller (would he sign here?)
2. Ben Bishop
3. Steve Mason
4. Brian Elliott
All of them are coming off down years. Mason is the youngest and had 3 good years prior to this one but has also had some terrible years. Bishop has probably the highest upside. Miller's been average to bad since leaving Buffalo. Elliott we all know.
I don't think you'll need to go super long term with any of them.
After that you get into guys who have never really been starters - Bernier, Johnson, Pavelec.
I hope they don't bring back Elliott because of his poor performance but I also felt that he caused the Flames wins in the season with his terrible puck handling skills. Too many give aways behind his net or putting defensemen in bad situations this past year. The Flames should pursue Bishop as he can help the defense with his puck handling skills but I am not sure of his ability to stop the puck is better then Elliott. I hope that they do not overpay with 6 years at $6 million/yr. I hope they sign Bishop for 3 years and give Gillies and Parsons time to develop and take over the starting role.
It never ceases to amaze me that people think you can sign a 30 year old FA goalie to a 3 year deal....This guy is going to have several options of at least 5 year deals. The Flames should not entertain signing any goalie to a deal longer than 2 seasons at this point with all the volatility we've seen at this position since Kipper left.
If you can trade for Gubauer or similar, you do that and deal with losing those assets. Coughing up somewhere in the ballpark of $6M a year for Bishop on a 5 year deal would cripple the teams salary cap and likely leave us only a half step further ahead of where we are with Elliott anyway.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
The Following User Says Thank You to Hot_Flatus For This Useful Post:
