Re: Elliott and the entire team for that matter. The poop show trying to get things organized and all the players to buy in the first month really drags a lot of the stats down. Yes I understand it was part of the season and cherry picks stats but, since Nov 15 Johnson and Elliott sit 11th and 15th in the league for GAA. 17th and 35th for SV%.
A team will have a learning curve with a new system and I think I would rather it be this year.
Elliott allows less than 0.5 goals against/game than Hiller did last year, and he has earned two more wins in the same number of games. Chad Johnson has won the same number of games as did Rämo last year in six fewer games. They have not been all that great, but are definitely a clear upgrade on what the Flames had in goal last year.
That's because the team plays an infinitely better brand of team defense. Hiller may have looked passable with this team in front of him. Ramo may have looked like a quality NHL goaltender.
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
Johnson is, Elliott is really no different in mind, he's Hiller version 2.0.
Anyway you slice it, we still are getting bottom of the league level goaltending. It's nowhere near good enough, and just being a fraction of a bit better statistically than last year goaltending gongshow is a huge problem and disappointment.
I'll reserve final judgement on Gulutzan until he has a season where this is addressed (and i'm not a fan of Gulutzan either). If it's not addressed this off season, i'll be full on the fire Treliving boat.
Treliving did address the goaltending situation this season, and to most people around the league they thought bringing in Elliott (one of the best GA and save % goalies over the last 5 years) was one of the best moves in the NHL offseason. Johnson was also heralded as a brilliant move. Don't blame the GM for a player not playing up to his potential or even at his regular clip.
__________________
PSN: Diemenz
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Diemenz For This Useful Post:
Treliving did address the goaltending situation this season, and to most people around the league they thought bringing in Elliott (one of the best GA and save % goalies over the last 5 years) was one of the best moves in the NHL offseason. Johnson was also heralded as a brilliant move. Don't blame the GM for a player not playing up to his potential or even at his regular clip.
I disagree. I blame Treliving for not having a time machine at his disposal to look into the future and witness Elliot's mediocre play before deciding to trade for him. What a bum.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Trojan97 For This Useful Post:
I disagree. I blame Treliving for not having a time machine at his disposal to look into the future and witness Elliot's mediocre play before deciding to trade for him. What a bum.
He wouldn't need a time machine to see Elliott was an average goalie playing On arguably the best teams in the league last year. Elliott was handed numerous chances to take over the #1 job in St. Louis and he never could. In 2014 they went out and got Miller, in 2015 they went out and got Brodeur (Allen started playoffs), and last year Allen got hurt the last week of the season which gifted Elliott the playoffs and despite the Blues making it to the Western Final he was quite mediocre. Doesn't look to me like the Blues have had much faith In him the past three years.
Elliott was a one-year stop gap. I'm tired of stop gaps with goaltending. Time to get a permanent solution in here, and that is in the GM.
Johnson was a great signing and continues to be. He should be a backup though and not be in a 1a/1b
Last edited by TheAlpineOracle; 02-08-2017 at 10:42 PM.
He wouldn't need a time machine to see Elliott was an average goalie playing On arguably the best teams in the league last year. Elliott was handed numerous chances to take over the #1 job in St. Louis and he never could. In 2014 they went out and got Miller, in 2015 they went out and got Brodeur, and last year Allen got hurt the last week of the season which gifted Elliott the playoffs and despite the Blues making it to the Western Final he was quite mediocre. Doesn't look to me like the Blues have had much faith In him the past three years.
Elliott was a one-year stop gap that fit into our cap equation. I'm tired of stop gaps with goaltending. Time to get a permanent solution in here, and that is in the GM.
Johnson was a great signing and continues to be. He should be a backup though and not be in a 1a/1b
You got facts nailed down! No one could argue with them!
I remember a few things a bit differently but thats just probably me and relying on real events versus blind opinion.
I remember St Louis bringing in Ryan Miller. They had to do something with Elliott and his paltry .917 save percentage and horrible 2.26 GA. And what a saviour Miller was! He was posting a near godly .903 save percentage and a BRICK WALL 2.47 GA.
Brodeur was 2014, December 2nd actually and then he retired in January of 2015. I wouldn't call signing a goalie to play 7 games while your starter is injured "losing faith". Weird that they signed Brodeur when Allen who was Elliotts backup that year was in perfect health. Probably had everything to do with their faith in Elliott being a starter.....
2016 playoffs, I forgot all about that mediocre .921 save percentage in the playoffs Elliott had, St Louis was lucky to win a single game with that funnel holding down the fort! Now that I think of it i missed those games because I was watching Matt Murray and his AMAZING .923 save percentage march the Penguins to the cup.
__________________
PSN: Diemenz
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Diemenz For This Useful Post:
Historically, the Flames have had the most trouble in identifying and acquiring 2 key positions:
It is not good defence - there has been quite the number of top-notch defencemen organizationally.
It is not great centers either, though there was quite the dry-spell.
Wingers? Nope, tonnes of quality there too.
Goalies? There has been a grand total of 2 quality netminders organizationally. Kipprusoff and Vernon. That's it.
The other 'position' has definitely been coaching. Again, only 2 quality coaches historically - Johnson and Sutter. Other names can be considered 'decent', but not quality coaching year after year.
I do think that the Flames need to settle down and tighten up defensively more. Though I can agree that they have improved, they are still too prone to mistakes. Growing pains. Both goalies have given up softies, but the team defensively have made too many mistakes compounding the issue, and probably making the goalies look worse than they really are.
I can not definitively state that Gulutzan is the right coach or the wrong coach. He has obviously made some positive changes worthy of praise, but he is also deserving of some very valid criticisms as well.
I wouldn't throw Gulutzan in the same category as guys like Gilbert, Hay and Page, but I really don't believe he is a Johnson or Sutter either. However, he simply hasn't been on the job long enough to figure out on which side of the spectrum he belongs in. I disagree that he has thus far been a clear upgrade on Hartley (the team's roster has been unquestionably improved this season, especially in net) and I feel that the Flames have been benefitting from an unexpectedly poor conference, more so than a clear improvement.
We will really have to take a 'wait and see' approach. My main area of concern is centered around the young core and how they are developed. I can not say this has been a strength so far, but it really might be too early to grab the pitchforks and demand change. My position is that there really shouldn't be anyone demanding Gulutzan's head yet, but there really shouldn't be this much praise either as this team seems only marginally improved to my eyes.
Last edited by Calgary4LIfe; 02-09-2017 at 12:25 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Calgary4LIfe For This Useful Post:
I don't think the Flames are sticking with Gulutzen on principle or pride alone. And while Julien probably presents an immediate upgrade, I also am not prepared to concede that Gulutzen has met his own ceiling. Part of taking a "wait and see" approach with Gulutzen is believing that he could be a great coach. Based on what has been said by hockey insiders he is very highly respected around the League, and I take that level of regard as a pretty good indication of Gulutzen's coaching potential—even if it may be as of yet not fully realized.
Take the boat, Calgary.
The Following User Says Thank You to Mike F For This Useful Post:
This only works in the event that there is an exchange to be made. It's quite likely that the Flames don't have an option to upgrade now, and won't until at least the summer. Even if the Flames decided that they wanted to replace Gulutzen now I am highly sceptical that they would manage to hire Julien.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
You got facts nailed down! No one could argue with them!
I remember a few things a bit differently but thats just probably me and relying on real events versus blind opinion.
I remember St Louis bringing in Ryan Miller. They had to do something with Elliott and his paltry .917 save percentage and horrible 2.26 GA. And what a saviour Miller was! He was posting a near godly .903 save percentage and a BRICK WALL 2.47 GA.
Brodeur was 2014, December 2nd actually and then he retired in January of 2015. I wouldn't call signing a goalie to play 7 games while your starter is injured "losing faith". Weird that they signed Brodeur when Allen who was Elliotts backup that year was in perfect health. Probably had everything to do with their faith in Elliott being a starter.....
2016 playoffs, I forgot all about that mediocre .921 save percentage in the playoffs Elliott had, St Louis was lucky to win a single game with that funnel holding down the fort! Now that I think of it i missed those games because I was watching Matt Murray and his AMAZING .923 save percentage march the Penguins to the cup.
Every one of those moves suggested the Blues had no faith in Elliott. A team that was supposed to challenge for the Stanley Cup got rid of a veteran goaltender for a 2nd round pick and went with a guy with 2 years experience to carry the load and a 31 year old with 98 games experience as backup over a ten year career mostly in the AHL.
The Blues didn't think they could win with Elliott despite having a stacked line up, not sure why our GM would think Elliott would step in here and be the answer to our problems on a significantly weaker team.
I understand why it was done though given limited cap space. Treliving thought he was going to get a reasonable goaltender and not have to sacrifice a lot of valuable cap space that we have little of. It's pretty evident to me though that you aren't going to solve a goaltending problem in today's NHL without A) Spending a lot of money or B) Bringing a young guy in the system or trade for one from someone else's system. The problem needs to be corrected though, it's went on for far too long.
Last edited by TheAlpineOracle; 02-09-2017 at 11:05 AM.
This only works in the event that there is an exchange to be made. It's quite likely that the Flames don't have an option to upgrade now, and won't until at least the summer. Even if the Flames decided that they wanted to replace Gulutzen now I am highly sceptical that they would manage to hire Julien.
And now you're just sidestepping the argument. The question: "Would the organization be better off letting go of Gulutzen and hiring Julien, and, if so, do you think they should do it?" doesn't require us to know that the Flames have offered Julien the position or that Julien would accept it.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mike F For This Useful Post:
Every one of those moves suggested the Blues had no faith in Elliott. A team that was supposed to challenge for the Stanley Cup got rid of a veteran goaltender for a 2nd round pick and went with a guy with 2 years experience to carry the load and a 31 year old with 98 games experience as backup over a ten year career mostly in the AHL.
The Blues didn't think they could win with Elliott despite having a stacked line up, not sure why our GM would think Elliott would step in here and be the answer to our problems on a significantly weaker team.
I understand why it was done though given limited cap space. Treliving thought he was going to get a reasonable goaltender and not have to sacrifice a lot of valuable cap space that we have little of. It's pretty evident to me though that you aren't going to solve a goaltending problem in today's NHL without A) Spending a lot of money or B) Bringing a young guy in the system or trade for one from someone else's system. The problem needs to be corrected though, it's went on for far too long.
Your premise is hurt by the fact that you think St. Louis is a good judge of goaltending talent. Miller was terrible for them and a waste of assets to aquire, Brodeur should have been retired, and Allen has been worse than Elliot. It seems like when St. Louis gets good goaltending it's dumb luck, not because they know what they're doing.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to mikephoen For This Useful Post:
Your premise is hurt by the fact that you think St. Louis is a good judge of goaltending talent. Miller was terrible for them and a waste of assets to aquire, Brodeur should have been retired, and Allen has been worse than Elliot. It seems like when St. Louis gets good goaltending it's dumb luck, not because they know what they're doing.
I never said I thought they were a good judge of talent.
If the Blues are so garbage at getting a quality goaltender, why did our GM look to this organization to fix our goalie problem? Seems like it was bound to fail does it not? I didn't need a time machine for that.
Last edited by TheAlpineOracle; 02-09-2017 at 02:05 PM.
Every one of those moves suggested the Blues had no faith in Elliott. A team that was supposed to challenge for the Stanley Cup got rid of a veteran goaltender for a 2nd round pick and went with a guy with 2 years experience to carry the load and a 31 year old with 98 games experience as backup over a ten year career mostly in the AHL.
The Blues didn't think they could win with Elliott despite having a stacked line up, not sure why our GM would think Elliott would step in here and be the answer to our problems on a significantly weaker team.
No.
You are again giving your opinion and trying to dispense it as fact.
Do you know whats coming at the end of this season? There is an expansion draft, one in which all teams are most likely protecting ONE goaltender. A Smart GM holding onto two goaltenders that are seen as 1A/B would get ahead of the rush and move one of them when they have value instead of losing one for free and getting nothing for them. If Armstrong would have kept both Allen and Elliott for this season fans and critics would have had his head for losing Elliott for free at the end of the year. You can bet he would be getting next to nothing at the trade deadline for a goalie that is UFA when Fleury, Bishop, Niemi, Howard, Kuemper, Grubauer and a few others are out there. Anaheim was smart is getting value for their 1B and St Louis was smart in getting value for their 1A.
I get that you don't like Elliott and thats fine. Armstrong had no way of knowing Allen would not be able to handle the job this season and looking at hockey as a business like Anaheim made the correct business decision at the correct time. It is easy to criticize a decision half a year after its made. For that you would need your time machine.
__________________
PSN: Diemenz
Last edited by Diemenz; 02-09-2017 at 05:41 PM.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Diemenz For This Useful Post:
