Goaltending

[travel_dude]

11 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

many of those "facepalms " were stoppable .. Talbot  is keeping the Oilers in a series they have no right to be in, we did enough to beat them with better tending  

 

Facepalms like Bouma's deflection?  How about Brodie taking a penalty with less than 5 minutes in a close game.  Or Bouma's goalie interference after killing off a penalty.

How about screening the goalie?  

 

Talbot has looked ordinary at times.  He stops the pucks he can see.  I would say he is a better goalie than Elliott, but I doubt we would have won with him in net.  Maybe 2 games.  Maybe none.  The Ducks are winning the game because they don't stop coming at you.  If you can't help the goalie out, you are not going to win.  

 

[phoenix66]

1 minute ago, jjgallow said:

 

100% agree.    Elliot is a fantastic fit here right now, one of the only smart moves I've seen this team make in the goaltending department.

 

It is embarrassing how he was blamed for what was clearly a team not ready to challenge for the cup.    

 

Yes, he struggled in the playoffs with everyone else.   If anything, this is All the more reason why he's a good fit here, he can be signed on the cheap.   We need to start developing future goalies.   Elliot at a good price is the best we could ever hope for in the transition.  Anyone thinking there's an available goalie out there who could have taken us deep into the playoffs is gravely mistaken....even including the overpriced ones.

Why is nobody seeing WE DID NOT PLAY BADLY!

on the ice, we matched them , they were ripe for the picking . we did not get outplayed on the ice 

Mistakes happen in every game.. Anaheim made them too..only difference is our mistakes wound up in the back of the net 

Last time, we were a badly mismatched team and Ramo gave us a chance to not be thoroughly embarrassed

Ramo's .908  would have gotten us past  Anaheim this time,   the .880 Elliot gave was not enough

 

even with all his Bashing , Ramo gave us  .909 his final full season  that year .. Elliot's .910 was not much better , and yet we couldn't wait to get Ramo out here (his injury meant we didn't have to make that decision).. but in the end Elliot gave us Ramo goaltending and we are all ok with it now?

[DirtyDeeds]

26 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Yes, for 2 rounds.. then he was average / below average against San Jose and Voila, his team was out 

Let me ask you .. at 2-3 years , likely 3-3.5 Mill  are you still eager to make that commitment ?

easily yes.

 

less than a handful of teams make it past 2 rounds and goaltending is not the only reason they go farther. I would not hesitate to make that 2-3 year commitment at that  bargain price for 2 years if it meant making it into the 3rd round.

[DirtyDeeds]

4 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Why is nobody seeing WE DID NOT PLAY BADLY!

on the ice, we matched them , they were ripe for the picking . we did not get outplayed on the ice 

Mistakes happen in every game.. Anaheim made them too..only difference is our mistakes wound up in the back of the net 

Last time, we were a badly mismatched team and Ramo gave us a chance to not be thoroughly embarrassed

Ramo's .908  would have gotten us past  Anaheim this time,   the .880 Elliot gave was not enough

 

even with all his Bashing , Ramo gave us  .909 his final full season  that year .. Elliot's .910 was not much better , and yet we couldn't wait to get Ramo out here (his injury meant we didn't have to make that decision).. but in the end Elliot gave us Ramo goaltending and we are all ok with it now?

All we can claim is we skated with them. We did not play equal to them they outclassed us, we were out coached by a long shot, and they intimidated us at will.. They hacked and slashed much better than us and we were outplayed in the end. 

[phoenix66]

6 minutes ago, travel_dude said:

 

Facepalms like Bouma's deflection?  How about Brodie taking a penalty with less than 5 minutes in a close game.  Or Bouma's goalie interference after killing off a penalty.

How about screening the goalie?  

 

Talbot has looked ordinary at times.  He stops the pucks he can see.  I would say he is a better goalie than Elliott, but I doubt we would have won with him in net.  Maybe 2 games.  Maybe none.  The Ducks are winning the game because they don't stop coming at you.  If you can't help the goalie out, you are not going to win.  

 

Bouma's deflection is the only one I'll give him .. on the subsequent goals he was out of position..

 

what really sold it for me , was the garbage day interview.. (also sold me that Sigalet needs to go ).. when he said he "would have chosen the same save selection "

this tells me he bases his tending on situational position .. one of the reasons Burke was such a successful Goalie and Coach , is he teaches player reading / tracking 

Modern goalies who are successful dont track the puck. they read the player . yes there are certain positions that lower the odds, .. much like how batters read a pitcher

[phoenix66]

4 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

easily yes.

 

less than a handful of teams make it past 2 rounds and goaltending is not the only reason they go farther. I would not hesitate to make that 2-3 year commitment at that  bargain price for 2 years if it meant making it into the 3rd round.

Anaheim, Nashville, Pittsburgh , Rangers (maybe Ottawa, we'll see after today )....whos getting .880 goaltending?

[MAC331]

19 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Why is nobody seeing WE DID NOT PLAY BADLY!

on the ice, we matched them , they were ripe for the picking . we did not get outplayed on the ice 

Mistakes happen in every game.. Anaheim made them too..only difference is our mistakes wound up in the back of the net 

Last time, we were a badly mismatched team and Ramo gave us a chance to not be thoroughly embarrassed

Ramo's .908  would have gotten us past  Anaheim this time,   the .880 Elliot gave was not enough

 

even with all his Bashing , Ramo gave us  .909 his final full season  that year .. Elliot's .910 was not much better , and yet we couldn't wait to get Ramo out here (his injury meant we didn't have to make that decision).. but in the end Elliot gave us Ramo goaltending and we are all ok with it now?

How much difference is there actually between .880 and .909 or for that matter .910 and .920 the mark everyone loves to hold out there as the cross over to a great goaltender. You are correct in that we were in every one of those ANA games losing by 1 goal, why did our skaters not get us more goals ? Constantly blaming Elliott for losing this series is so wrong. Talbot with EDM has had the season of his life and if EDM doesn't get past ANA will it all be on Talbot ?

[MAC331]

Just now, DirtyDeeds said:

All we can claim is we skated with them. We did not play equal to them they outclassed us, we were out coached by a long shot, and they intimidated us at will.. They hacked and slashed much better than us and we were outplayed in the end. 

Outclassed is so inappropriate when talking about ANA.

[jjgallow]

12 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Why is nobody seeing WE DID NOT PLAY BADLY!

 

Because they're looking at the whole series, not just the last two games.

 

We were just man-handled on faceoffs (it wasn't even close) and possession in the first two games.   We had very low quality scoring chances, and were only even in shots for/against.

 

We took stupid penalties consistently through the series and especially in the first two games, while being out-hit.

 

Anaheim deserved to win the first two games, and we deserved to lose, and we did.   

 

So we're down 2-0.   We played better in the last two.  Whoopty.   A cup contender doesn't play badly enough to fall behind that much.    

 

You can't have watched the first two games and blamed the series on Elliot.   We were simply out-played.  Did we get better?  yes.  Better enough to recover from that deficit?  No.   Even if we tied up the series, we still would have lost it.   The better team won, and they made that clear from the first faceoff.

[MAC331]

Just now, jjgallow said:

 

Because they're looking at the whole series, not just the last two games.

 

We were just man-handled on faceoffs (it wasn't even close) and possession in the first two games.   We had very low quality scoring chances, and were only even in shots for/against.

 

We took stupid penalties consistently through the series and especially in the first two games, while being out-hit.

 

Anaheim deserved to win the first two games, and we deserved to lose, and we did.   

 

So we're down 2-0.   We played better in the last two.  Whoopty.   A cup contender doesn't play badly enough to fall behind that much.    

 

You can't have watched the first two games and blamed the series on Elliot.   We were simply out-played.  Did we get better?  yes.  Better enough to recover from that deficit?  No.   Even if we tied up the series, we still would have lost it.   The better team won, and they made that clear from the first faceoff.

Have you been watching these second round games to make such a claim about contenders ? LOL you might want to re-think that comment

[DirtyDeeds]

6 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Outclassed is so inappropriate when talking about ANA.

Okay.. Wrong use of that word.  

 

They got under our skin.. We did not respond well to that.... did not turn the other cheek and did not make them pay when the refs did give us a chance for payback.

[phoenix66]

4 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

How much difference is there actually between .880 and .909 or for that matter .910 and .920 the mark everyone loves to hold out there as the cross over to a great goaltender. You are correct in that we were in every one of those ANA games losing by 1 goal, why did our skaters get us more goals ? Constantly blaming Elliott for losing this series is so wrong. Talbot with EDM has had the season of his life and if EDM doesn't get past ANA will it all be on Talbot ?

again , its not all on Elliot .. he's one of a few things that needs to improve..and No this was the difference I stated,   Talbots team is letting him down .. last night was one of the greatest goalie performances I have ever seen..60 shots?

 

12 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

easily yes.

 

less than a handful of teams make it past 2 rounds and goaltending is not the only reason they go farther. I would not hesitate to make that 2-3 year commitment at that  bargain price for 2 years if it meant making it into the 3rd round.

then we wont  ever see the 3rd round.. again we;re not talking about a young goalie whos going to learn and get better .. this is a 32 yr old vet who is what he is .. there was a question mark about what that was, we brought him in to find out ..and what he is is streaky, unable to carry a load 

 

In my mind its all Moot, i dont think the Flames will re- sign him .. BT got crucified for gambling on Ramo the next year . I think he covers himself and gets a name 

[phoenix66]

8 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

You can't have watched the first two games and blame the series on Elliot. 

he allowed Soft goals in both those games.. but you are right this is where the team needed better secondary scoring , but in the playoffs soft goals kill

not saying  you need highlight reel nights and the goalie needs to steal it, but the easy ones gotta be stopped 

[DirtyDeeds]

10 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

again , its not all on Elliot .. he's one of a few things that needs to improve..and No this was the difference I stated,   Talbots team is letting him down .. last night was one of the greatest goalie performances I have ever seen..60 shots?

 

then we wont  ever see the 3rd round.. again we;re not talking about a young goalie whos going to learn and get better .. this is a 32 yr old vet who is what he is .. there was a question mark about what that was, we brought him in to find out ..and what he is is streaky, unable to carry a load 

 

In my mind its all Moot, i dont think the Flames will re- sign him .. BT got crucified for gambling on Ramo the next year . I think he covers himself and gets a name 

Nope.. sry Talbot has had 2 bad games too. 

 

They are about to burn and crash too. 

or should that read crash and burn?

[Flyerfan52]

9 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

again , its not all on Elliot .. he's one of a few things that needs to improve..and No this was the difference I stated,   Talbots team is letting him down .. last night was one of the greatest goalie performances I have ever seen..60 shots?

 

then we wont  ever see the 3rd round.. again we;re not talking about a young goalie whos going to learn and get better .. this is a 32 yr old vet who is what he is .. there was a question mark about what that was, we brought him in to find out ..and what he is is streaky, unable to carry a load 

 

In my mind its all Moot, i dont think the Flames will re- sign him .. BT got crucified for gambling on Ramo the next year . I think he covers himself and gets a name 

That's what he is. Unless he has a Tim Thomas turn around what we saw is what we get. Streaky (nice way of saying unreliable) so you have no idea if you are getting the good (not great) Elliott any given night.

We need better.

***************************************************************

BTW, Johnson & an AHLer (Comrie) seem to be the b/ups for TC.

Was Elliott invited but turned it down? That's just a question with no hidden meaning as I'm curious.

 

The question is probably moot as TC will probably upgrade 1 of the 2 when round 2 of playoffs end. I doubt Talbot or Holtby has the energy left but Jake Allen might get a phone call.

[phoenix66]

8 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

 

Was Elliott invited but turned it down? That's just a question with no hidden meaning as I'm curious.

 

 

The only TC requests they reported were  Brodie(turned it down- family reasons ), Monahan (injury declined) and  Giordano (was thinking about it obviously turned it down ) and  Johnson 

 

I gotta say Brodie continues to disappoint me there.. I think he has declined every time..probably cost him a shot at the World Cup last year . BT was also the WC  GM, that couldn't have left a good impression when 4 people turned him down last year 

[DirtyDeeds]

8 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

The only TC requests they reported were  Brodie(turned it down- family reasons ), Monahan (injury declined) and  Giordano (was thinking about it obviously turned it down ) and  Johnson 

 

I gotta say Brodie continues to disappoint me there.. I think he has declined every time..probably cost him a shot at the World Cup last year . BT was also the WC  GM, that couldn't have left a good impression when 4 people turned him down last year 

I am now of the opinion that it is Gio who makes his partners look much better than they are. Can't argue with how lackluster both Brodie and Hamilton play when not partnered with Gio.

 

Edit: Jbo did the same for a partner named Chris Butler a few years back. Took him from a 5D at best and made him into a top pairing partner. Not a top pairing D just a top pairing partner.

[jjgallow]

42 minutes ago, MAC331 said:

Have you been watching these second round games to make such a claim about contenders ? LOL you might want to re-think that comment

 

Unless you are claiming that the Flames were a contender this year, I think you misread.

[jjgallow]

25 minutes ago, Flyerfan52 said:

That's what he is. Unless he has a Tim Thomas turn around what we saw is what we get. Streaky (nice way of saying unreliable) so you have no idea if you are getting the good (not great) Elliott any given night.

We need better.

***************************************************************

 

We need a Lot of better things if we're talking about going deep in the playofs, imho.    

 

And the only way we're going to get that type of goalie without totally destroying our cap, is through either random chance (Kipper style), or good drafting and prospect development.   I blab a lot on here about good prospect development and a focus on our pipeline, and it upsets people who want things "now".  Which I get.  But to be honest, I've not heard a better alternative.

[DirtyDeeds]

55 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Anaheim, Nashville, Pittsburgh , Rangers (maybe Ottawa, we'll see after today )....whos getting .880 goaltending?

The first round matchups were pretty much decided by teams who were on a roll going into the playoffs. Good or bad goaltending was only a small part of that performance level of teams.

[jjgallow]

10 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

I am now of the opinion that it is Gio who makes his partners look much better than they are. Can't argue with how lackluster both Brodie and Hamilton play when not partnered with Gio.

 

Have been saying for 3 years now that our biggest problem on the ice is D.   All people see is the goalie when the puck's in the net, sigh.  Hamilton showed a lot of improvement this year.   But it's not nearly enough on its own.

[phoenix66]

I think what is really frustrating in this whole Elliot discussion , is that we seem to have a double standard for some reason.

All the PRO arguments to keeping Elliot are the same arguments that were debated about Ramo ..and we couldn't wait to get the guy out of town.

In the end , we got a Ramo season from Elliot

 

- we argued the team needs to play better in front of Ramo..but no , he's just a bad goalie.. but now the argument is that the team didn't play well in front of Elliot

- Ramo and Elliot both got off to very shaky starts, people called for their heads..  but Elliot saved our season and got us to the playoffs.. well, until his injury Ramo was on a streak that had us back in playoff position 

- We improved the team and play in front of the goaltender .. and yet Ramo finished with a .909 / 2.63  and Elliot got .910/2.55  Elliot did get 10% more wins from his starts though

- in a Flames jersey Ramo was much better in the playoffs 

 

 I was one of the people stating back then there was no point in breaking the bank on a star since the team in front didnt warrant and also we didn't have the cap room to gamble. I'm not saying we dont still have work to do in front , but the team in front on Elliot was leaps ahead of the team in front of Ramo 

 

Just curious why the opposition to upgrading the position , when we clearly got the same results from our #1 guy?

 

[jjgallow]

1 minute ago, phoenix66 said:

- we argued the team needs to play better in front of Ramo..but no , he's just a bad goalie.. but now the argument is that the team didn't play well in front of Elliot

 

Just curious why the opposition to upgrading the position , when we clearly got the same results from our #1 guy?

 

 

Actually, that was your arguement, and your double standard.   I never liked Ramo but I never blamed Ramo.  The problem all along was the team, that was really clear.   And that was argued on here by many people including myself.

 

Not all of us agreed with the "fire the coach and get a new goalie" approach.   It's literally the dumbest move you can make in hockey and has been proven time and time again.

 

It's not about a double standard.  It's that we are just the latest team to prove to the world just how dumb "fire the coach and get a new goalie is"...

 

And for a brief moment, we've learned our lesson.   It's a rare and positive thing.

 

Don't get me wrong, history suggests you'll still get your way before this is over.

[phoenix66]

2 minutes ago, DirtyDeeds said:

The first round matchups were pretty much decided by teams who were on a roll going into the playoffs. Good or bad goaltending was only a small part of that performance level of teams.

did you watch the St Louis Minnesota series??  St Louis had no right to win that series aside from Allen .. to a lesser degree the same can be said of Nashville

11 minutes ago, jjgallow said:

 

Unless you are claiming that the Flames were a contender this year, I think you misread.

I say quite confidently we beat Anaheim we make the Conference finals  by maintaining just average goaltending 

[DirtyDeeds]

2 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

I think what is really frustrating in this whole Elliot discussion , is that we seem to have a double standard for some reason.

All the PRO arguments to keeping Elliot are the same arguments that were debated about Ramo ..and we couldn't wait to get the guy out of town.

In the end , we got a Ramo season from Elliot

 

- we argued the team needs to play better in front of Ramo..but no , he's just a bad goalie.. but now the argument is that the team didn't play well in front of Elliot

- Ramo and Elliot both got off to very shaky starts, people called for their heads..  but Elliot saved our season and got us to the playoffs.. well, until his injury Ramo was on a streak that had us back in playoff position 

- We improved the team and play in front of the goaltender .. and yet Ramo finished with a .909 / 2.63  and Elliot got .910/2.55  Elliot did get 10% more wins from his starts though

- in a Flames jersey Ramo was much better in the playoffs 

 

 I was one of the people stating back then there was no point in breaking the bank on a star since the team in front didnt warrant and also we didn't have the cap room to gamble. I'm not saying we dont still have work to do in front , but the team in front on Elliot was leaps ahead of the team in front of Ramo 

 

Just curious why the opposition to upgrading the position , when we clearly got the same results from our #1 guy?

 

I have to disagree totally .

 

Ramo was here for 3 seasons before we let him go and it was pretty much a career ending injury that did him in.

 

There is no way to compare this to Elliott who has only been here 1 season starting with a coaching and new team style of play.

 

Totally unfair to make this comparison at this stage.