Do we bring back Tre ?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by polak

This love affair with Bishop is ludicrous.

Bishop is firmly in the same tier as Elliot. One can be had for super cheap now while the other will cost an arm and a leg.

No he's not. Bishop has put up elite numbers shouldering a starters workload of 60+ games three straight seasons and his playoff numbers are top notch.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

No he's not. Bishop has put up elite numbers shouldering a starters workload of 60+ games three straight seasons and his playoff numbers are top notch.

Where have I heard this before.

[PeteMoss]

The only concerning part about this is the similarities to the Jays and Anthopulous.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by polak

Where have I heard this before.

I don't know. Where? Tell me please, I can't stand the suspense.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by polak

Where have I heard this before.

I dunno, do tell.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I dunno, do tell.

Okiee

Originally Posted by jayswin

I'm in the sign him now camp. Especially when you look at what top-flight goalie are going for these days.

Imo, we got the best deal imaginable:

-Has clearly taken the step up to strong NHL starter
-Showed glimpses of being a top end NHL goalie, coming off a strong playoffs
-Politely stated he feels he's a starter and doesn't want to be a tandem
-Blues see this as a chance to get something for him and avoid a goalie issue going forward

Originally Posted by AC

Darren Haynes‏ @DarrenWHaynes
No surprise Elliott reportedly in extension talks already. Body of work is there, .925 SV% since 2011-12 is second to Cory Schneider (.926).

Darren Haynes‏ @DarrenWHaynes
Top 5 in SV% since start of 2011-12 season (min 50 gm):
1. Schneider, .926
2. Elliott, .925
3. Talbot, .924
4. Rask, .924
5. Lundqvist, .923

This stat always comforts me. I think we have a beauty in Elliott.

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

In the last three years, Allen has gone .905, .913, .920. Over that same time, Elliott is .922, .917, .930. They both play in the same system. Jake Allen's best NHL GAA in the last three years is 2.28. Brian Elliott's worst GAA over the last three years is 2.26.

We got a very good goalie for very little - it would save money to extend him now, but I don't see him getting more than 3/$18 if he really has a great year.

3/$15 - make it happen, Brad.

Originally Posted by AC

@robvollmanNHL
Elliot, last 3yrs, rank:
6th in SV%
3rd in home plate SV%
13th in Adj. SV%
6th in Quality Start%
10th in xGS
... and now 30th in Cap Hit

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Over the past five seasons, there is one goaltender (Cory Schneider) that has played at least 150 games and posted a save percentage better than Elliott's .925 mark.

that's a great, and positive, stat... http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-spea...oalie-1.515149

There's 30+ pages of it.

[flamesfan1297]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I'm with a firm no.

Did not execute on a proper goalie, failed at free agency with Brouwer and Gg

It wasn't really his fault Elliot sucked. That trade looked like a steal at three time. Gulutzan wasn't a bad hire and Brouwer admittedly was disappointing.

I thought you were going to cheer for the Oilers anyways?

[AC]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

No he's not. Bishop has put up elite numbers shouldering a starters workload of 60+ games three straight seasons and his playoff numbers are top notch.

Originally Posted by polak

Okiee

There's 30+ pages of it.

Except you intentionally ignore the caveat.

Elliott had great numbers, but played 31, 46, and 41 with STL.
Bishop played 63, 62, and 61.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by polak

Okiee











There's 30+ pages of it.

I don't necessarily want Bishop, but I don't understand your point. Are you saying we shouldn't sign goalies who have a history of putting up good numbers, because Elliott was a let-down?

[ResAlien]

Did I miss where Elliott ever played 60+ games?

[blankall]

I think a lot of posters underestimate how hard it is to find a consistent starting goaltender. At least 1/3 of the teams in the league do not have one.

[dino7c]

Elliott has never been a starter...he had the chance and blew it

I expected better like most others did, turns out he can't be the guy

[GreenLantern]

The thread title just has Eminem rapping in my head. "Forgot about Tre.."

[Ashasx]

What are we arguing about? Mad at Treliving for taking Elliott over Bishop?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

What are we arguing about? Mad at Treliving for taking Elliott over Bishop?

No, now Eeyore doesn't want Bishop because he's going to be bad as well.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

No, now Eeyore doesn't want Bishop because he's going to be bad as well.

All he was really trying to say is that Elliott and Bishop aren't that far apart, and when you consider what Tampa was asking for him on draft day, it's a pretty silly thing to be upset about.

[Anduril]

So we should be looking for a goaltender without a good resume and hope for the best instead.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Mass_nerder

I don't necessarily want Bishop, but I don't understand your point. Are you saying we shouldn't sign goalies who have a history of putting up good numbers, because Elliott was a let-down?

I'm saying we shouldn't sign any old UFA goalies long term who haven't posted much better numbers than Elliot did before coming here.

So unless Bishop will sign a two year contract, just stay the course with Elliot, sign him for cheap and on a short term deal and don't let three bad games erase half a season of spectacular play.

We have a good goalie prospect on deck.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by blankall

I think a lot of posters underestimate how hard it is to find a consistent starting goaltender. At least 1/3 of the teams in the league do not have one.

Yep. The Flyers have been trying to find one since they traded Hextall 25 years ago.

[Moneyhands23]

Tre should get a 3 year deal.