Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinny01
Thanks. Using that site showed me Elliott has had a sub .900 save % in 3 of the 6 seasons he played in the playoffs and only 1 with a .920. Fleury has 3 over a .920
|
And 6 under .900. But you also have to account for the difference in playoff appearances. Fleury has been in the playoffs nearly twice as much and (unsurprisingly) his number of good seasons and number of bad seasons are nearly double Elliott in both categories. They are similar.
Cherry pick it however makes you comfortable with Fleury. The biggest single improvement he'll give you over Elliott is name recognition. That's not enough for me.
Fleury, just last year, put in two dismal games on a cup winning squad in the playoffs. This year's chapter isn't finished, but he's been sub .900 in 4 of his 11 games so far in what everyone would consider a "great" playoffs for him. He's also been above .950 in a good number of games. But you have to recognise both.
Again, I won't shed a tear if Fleury comes in next year. I think he's one of the better options. But anyone who thinks he's a legit solution has no idea who MAF is, because he's got an equal likelihood of being a disaster and being run out of town in two years.
Fleury is not anymore guaranteed to be the saviour as Grubauer or Raanta, so why pay more for him? If you can produce an answer as to why Fleury is worth the cost that doesn't involve "well, if you take out his bad play he's been good" because I haven't seen it. That's Fleury, he's incredibly good and incredibly bad. You don't just get incredibly good Fleury because you're the Calgary Flames, you also get incredibly bad Fleury. Looking at both sides of the coin, I'm not sure why I'd send over assets and pay almost 6mil for that.