Who do you WANT to be the Flames Starting Goalie Next Season [*NEW POLL 12·05·17]

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by DJones

Grubauer really impressed me at the Worlds.

He was impressive today for sure.

[Par]

Originally Posted by DJones

Grubauer really impressed me at the Worlds.

Do you see him as starter in the NHL, can he play 60 games and post a .923+ Save percentage, with a GAA of 2.25. What do you think?

[Calgary4LIfe]

All this talk reminded me of Chicago.

Remember in 2010, Chicago ran with a tandem of Huet and Niemi. Huet got the bulk of the starts, but Niemi took over and became the defacto starter for their playoff run. Was he outstanding? No. He merely provided a dependable level of goaltending. Unspectacular stats of SV% of .910 and 2.63 GAA during the playoffs.

Yet, because he won the cup, his ask was high, and Chicago made some waves by not re-signing him after the cup win. He was one of the more notable players not re-signed that year. What fricken' team doesn't re-sign their newly cup-winning goalie? How crazy is that? In fact, not only did they not re-sign him, they moved on from BOTH their starter and their former #1 who ended playing backup.

Instead, they gave the reigns to Crawford - a guy that was developing in their system for some years, but up until that time only had a total of 369 minutes of NHL time to his resume. They brought in a vet in Turco who proceeded to crap the bed with only 29 starts, a robust 3.07 GAA and a paltry .897 SV%. Crawford's numbers were much better, but not elite (57 starts, a good 2.30 GAA and a respectable but unspectacular .917 SV%).

The next year was the lockout year, an they brought in another established vet at the twilight of his career in Ray Emery. Crawford had the majority of starts (30 vs 21), but had an identical and sparkling GAA of 1.94, with Crawford having a .926 SV% and Emery with a .922 SV%.

Crawford rode that season into the playoffs, and upped his strong numbers to the tune of 1.84 GAA and an elite SV% of .932.

The following season, Crawford was trusted as a #1, and Raanta was brought in as a backup. His numbers declined that year and he posted average numbers - .917 SV% and a 2.26 GAA. Raanta was much worse.

Chicago saw fit to re-sign Crawford to a long contract paying him 6 million a year.

So, what does this tell us? From what I remember, Chicago played a very good defensive structure those years. Crawford made some spectacular saves at times, but I don't ever really remember him losing games. He was a consistently good starter with some game stealing abilities. Compared to Niemi? Crawford I thought was a tier above and Chicago recognized that, and acted accordingly. They dropped Niemi right after he backstopped them to a cup, but re-signed Crawford even though he had a dip in his numbers the season after he backstopped them to a cup.

Compare that to Calgary. What I think SHOULD happen is that Calgary needs to replace Elliott - you simply can not have a goalie lose games for you - at least not lose 'games in a row'. Niemi didn't do this much (IIRC). Elliott - when he is on - can provide you with elite-level goaltending (way better than Niemi's best), but throughout his career has shown that he does have that inconsistency to his game. You need consistently good goaltending to allow you to win a championship at minimum, regardless of how elite you can be at times.

Crawford (until this season) provided that in spades for Chicago. He was consistently good if unspectacular for the most part, but had game stealing ability at times without losing you games. Elliott has a larger variance - both positive and negative - so how does one use that?

Elliott is a tandem goalie. He is a tandem goalie and will always be a tandem goalie until he shows the ability to bounce back and provide his team with consistently good goaltending. Every goalie - Price, Schneider.. heck, even Hasek, Roy and Brodeur - had embarrassingly disgusting goals/games. What they did was bounce back and shook it off. Elliott goes on stretches. If you have another consistent goalie, this may work out well. You play Elliott hard through those good stretches, and play your consistent (if unspectacular) starter as soon as you see a hiccup.

Is that good enough?

Elliott is 32 years old, is a veteran of 375 NHL games, and should be in the prime of his career. He still has 'bad stretches' which make him inconsistent. He is a tandem goalie. The only way the Flames can bring him back is if they upgrade on Johnson. You bring in a Mike Smith or a goalie of that caliber that can give you consistently good stretches at starter level while you wait for Elliott to get on a roll, and then go back to your other starter at the first sign of that hiccup.

That will cost the Flames a 3rd round pick and loads of cash in net. You are more likely to end up in disarray like Dallas (and in no way should Lehtonen be considered - he is a more injury prone, less dependable version of Elliott who has exactly one season of .920 or better in his entire career).

You do like Chicago, and recognize that your investment is better utilized elsewhere. Bring in a solid vet, and re-sign Johnson. Get an average but dependable goaltender like a Niemi (a Niemi that won the cup, not the Niemi of today). Johnson is a dependable backup with an ability to provide consistent performance for stretches as he proved in Calgary earlier this year, and Buffalo before that. Besides, when has Calgary ever had a better backup? Decades...

Or, you roll the dice and you acquire two young but up-and-coming goalies and run them as a tandem, saving you some cap space. Grubauer and Korpisalo, or whatever.

Either way, you have to move on from a goalie with a propensity for losing games, regardless of his propensity to win games. You can win a championship with an unspectacular but consistent record. You can't win one that loses you games. Not when it happens almost every year for stretches.

Chicago didn't remain loyal to the goalie that backstopped them to a championship, but recognized a goalie that was better and paid that goalie accordingly. Pittsburgh remained loyal to a goalie that backstopped them to a championship, and remained unfaltering loyal to the same goalie who then proceeded to implode consistently in the playoffs. How many runs did that prime team waste? Chicago won 3 championships in a short amount of time, while it took an injury to MAF and a new coach to win their second one 7 years apart.

I have no idea who to bring in at this point, but I want it to start with just consistently average goaltending. That's enough for a deep playoff run if a team stays healthy and is playing well. Shaky goaltending can lead to an undeserved 1st round exit.

I have no doubt that bringing back Elliott this season will result in playoffs and probably a fighting chance as the division champs, but I don't feel there is a chance at a long playoff run with him being counted on as the defacto starter. Calgary would need to upgrade on Johnson, so you might as well retain Johnson and acquire someone more dependable to work with Johnson, or just bring in 2 new faces altogether.

[flamesfan1297]

^i didn't have time to read all that but it looks like you put lots of effort into it, so I'll thank it.

Fleury or Murray are the goalies I want.

[Poe969]

I'm setting the bar really high for the goaltending position this year, Elliot clearly doesn't make the cut. I really hope the Flames go out and get a good goalie before the expansion draft and protect him but I also hope they go out and get another good goalie after too. It would be nice if the Flames could be in the position of some of these teams who have more than one good goalie. Having a guy like MAF would be good but I'd still want a guy like Grubauer as the backup if possible. If they can get Murray somehow, then I think they go out and get a take a gamble on a really young guy or someone with a really high ceiling.

Having to hold your breath every time there's a shot on the Flames net really sucks. Even when Elliot was on his hot streak, you were never sure if the next game was the one where he would stink it up and start slumping again. Even if the Flames get a goalie who isn't an all star but is constantly average or good, it would be better.

[TheIronMaiden]

If the Flames extended Elliott, what would his contract look like?

[Poe969]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

If the Flames extended Elliott, what would his contract look like?

a mistake.

Wherever his next contract is, it would be around the same as last seasons you'd think.

[Lil Pedro]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

If the Flames extended Elliott, what would his contract look like?

one year, $2.5-3

[Par]

Originally Posted by flamesfan1297

^i didn't have time to read all that but it looks like you put lots of effort into it, so I'll thank it.

Fleury or Murray are the goalies I want.

The more the Flames wait, the more I think it will be Fleury or Murray.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

If the Flames extended Elliott, what would his contract look like?

$3.5-4 million per season for hopefully two seasons or less.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

$3.5-4 million per season for hopefully two seasons or less.

His last contract was $2.5M per year, and he's done nothing since to earn more than on inflation raise.

[Toonage]

Elliott, regardless of where he lands, likely isn't getting much more than $2.75. I just can't see a substantial raise coming his way.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Itse

His last contract was $2.5M per year, and he's done nothing since to earn more than on inflation raise.

He's going to get an increase on that contract regardless of what you think he earned this season. He still has options as he's better than anything on the Jets roster. Hiller was making $4 million for the Flames and I would expect Elliott will accept a similar deal. Elliott may have stunk things up against the Ducks but he's much better than he's getting credit for in this forum.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

He's going to get an increase on that contract regardless of what you think he earned this season. He still has options as he's better than anything on the Jets roster. Hiller was making $4 million for the Flames and I would expect Elliott will accept a similar deal. Elliott may have stunk things up against the Ducks but he's much better than he's getting credit for in this forum.

Elliotts contract history:
2009-11: 850k
2011-12: 600k
2012-13: 1.8M
2014-16: 2.5M

Hiller:
2008-2009: 1.3M
2010-2014: 4.5M
2015-2015: 4.5M
(Hiller also had a much better ELC.)

Hiller was a starter his whole career and got paid accordingly. (He still didn't get a raise when he signed with the Flames.)

Elliott has always struggled to hold the starters position, and almost lost it again this season.

That's why Hiller got paid more than Elliott. If the Flames give him a major rais and start paying him like a starter, after a season that only adds more question marks to his ability to be a starter, I'll be very disappointed.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Itse

Elliotts contract history:
2009-11: 850k
2011-12: 600k
2012-13: 1.8M
2014-16: 2.5M

Hiller:
2008-2009: 1.3M
2010-2014: 4.5M
2015-2015: 4.5M
(Hiller also had a much better ELC.)

Hiller was a starter his whole career and got paid accordingly. (He still didn't get a raise when he signed with the Flames.)

Elliott has always struggled to hold the starters position, and almost lost it again this season.

That's why Hiller got paid more than Elliott. If the Flames give him a major rais and start paying him like a starter, after a season that only adds more question marks to his ability to be a starter, I'll be very disappointed.

I have no idea where the Flames goaltending search is going to lead them but I can guarantee if they do end up re-signing Elliott you should be prepared to be very disappointed as he's going to get a raise over his current deal.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I have no idea where the Flames goaltending search is going to lead them but I can guarantee if they do end up re-signing Elliott you should be prepared to be very disappointed as he's going to get a raise over his current deal.

Well, we'll find out eventually who has the better crystal ball

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I have no idea where the Flames goaltending search is going to lead them but I can guarantee if they do end up re-signing Elliott you should be prepared to be very disappointed as he's going to get a raise over his current deal.

I tend to agree with this and have been stating tontonthe pro-Elliott crowd that not only will he cost a 3rd to Re-sign but I think he will need a raise.

His play in Calgary is not worth a huge raise but the previous years in St. Louis he was underpaid. I feel he will want at least $3.5-$4M and probably 2-4 years. His season disappointed but if he kept up the play from last year as a Blue he would be seeking a 5x5 deal which is clearly out the window now

[Isikiz]

Obviously save percentage it's a little bit of a simplified way of looking at it, but it kind of shows the inconsistency of both our goalies. For both goalies, it often looked like it would take 3-4 bad games to bounce back from a poor showing.

Carey Price for comparison:


(Green is above 0.920 and red is below 0.900.)

[Mister Yamoto]

^ Yikes, look at Elliots' April. It's not so much that he was bad, it was when he was bad.

Why did they wait until game 4 to give Johnson the net? Hell, they could have given the ball to Gillies.

[Robbob]

Has it been confirmed that he will still cost the Flames a 3rd if he signs after July 1st?