HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Ottawa Senators
Notices

Brian Elliott

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-10-2012, 11:27 AM
  #76
PeterSidorkiewicz
Original *** allstar
 
PeterSidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 14,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beville View Post
The same Elliott with 29 wins, a .909% and 2.57GAA...

Yeah, not really a highlight is it.. Jose Theodore had a better season with 7 less games

Chris Mason, of the Blues at the time, also had a better season.

as did 15 other goalies... Therefore showing that's he a middle of the group (of 30) goalie... Nothing special, but not exactly gash.

Simply put, he's not a capable starter... You bring him back here, and he'd get lit up.

I don't care if I sound hypocritical, cos he is better than me no doubt, but for an NHL standard player... He's nothing special. He's not exactly a game winner.
I guess were arguing semantics at this point then, because I agree a lot with you, but don't really think "crap" is a good word to describe him. I'm not even arguing for him to be a starter, he's a backup who can play a lot of games if need be and step in due to injuries, like he did with STL and like he did with us and Pascal Leclaire. I'd take Anderson over him any time, but I'm also a massive Anderson fan.

PeterSidorkiewicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 11:32 AM
  #77
Pietraneglo222
WwWwW
 
Pietraneglo222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Gatineau
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post

Craig Anderson won 8 playoff games in the minor leagues. He lost 22. At the NHL level he has won 5 and lost eight. And this makes him a great pressure goalie how?
I think you should have changed your mind about Anderson instead of cherry-picking a stat that has nothing to do with his individual performance. Unless you're being intentionally irrational...

Pietraneglo222 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 11:37 AM
  #78
PeterSidorkiewicz
Original *** allstar
 
PeterSidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 14,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Immanuel View Post
I think you should have changed your mind about Anderson instead of cherry-picking a stat that has nothing to do with his individual performance. Unless you're being intentionally irrational...
Wins and Losses is a great indicator, because that's not a team statistic.

PeterSidorkiewicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 12:37 PM
  #79
Beville
#ForTheBoys
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Engerlanddd!
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz View Post
I guess were arguing semantics at this point then, because I agree a lot with you, but don't really think "crap" is a good word to describe him. I'm not even arguing for him to be a starter, he's a backup who can play a lot of games if need be and step in due to injuries, like he did with STL and like he did with us and Pascal Leclaire. I'd take Anderson over him any time, but I'm also a massive Anderson fan.
Ok crap may be a bit harsh,

but I feel he's far from the superstar status everyone seems to give him

Beville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 12:43 PM
  #80
ChocolateLeclaire
Registered User
 
ChocolateLeclaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beville View Post
Ok crap may be a bit harsh,

but I feel he's far from the superstar status everyone seems to give him
I wouldn't say everyone. I'd say it's reserved to delusional Blues fans and Ed Wood. Everyone with two eyes and a brain could see that Elliott's numbers were grossly inflated by the play of the team in front of him. Seriously, ask a Blues fan to pull together a video of Elliott's fantastic saves of 2011-2012. You'd get about 12 seconds of great saves and 4 minutes of shots hitting him square in the chest.

Can anyone honestly remember one highlight reel save from Elliott this season. Even his greatest save as a Senator came from his own misplay behind the net.

ChocolateLeclaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 03:32 PM
  #81
mcnorth
Registered User
 
mcnorth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,635
vCash: 500
Well, tbf, getting hit in the belly and chest is a sign of good goaltending as much as it is a sign of a poor shot, the point of the position is positioning and being square, and doing something spectacular, other than a nice lateral move on a two on one or something, often means you were out of position a second ago.

mcnorth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 04:59 PM
  #82
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,820
vCash: 500
Brian Elliott allowed 1.28 goals per game less than Craig Anderson did this year. His save pct. was .940 compared to .913 for Anderson. You can delude yourselves all you want that it was all about coaching styles but no coach in history can explain away that kind of a differential. The question this thread asks is would we take back the goalie with the superior numbers. It doesn't ask what we'd be prepared to give up to get him. The question, as asked, sounds like we'd be getting him for nothing. Bit of a no-brainer I thought.

The truth is I've never advocated trading Anderson or giving the job to someone else. I really hope he's pulling a Tim Thomas, Johnny Bower type late blooming deal for us. At the same time I find it incredibly petty that so many fans find it necessary to belittle Brian Elliott on the heels of one of the most statistically impressive seasons in NHL history. It's interesting that when Elliott and Anderson were traded for one another last year neither of them really had any trade value. I think it's great that both have turned their careers around to the point where both would warrant attractive offers on the trade market. They're two classy guys and I'm happy for both.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 05:03 PM
  #83
DylanSensFan
Walk On!
 
DylanSensFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,443
vCash: 1470
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beville View Post
Ok crap may be a bit harsh,

but I feel he's far from the superstar status everyone seems to give him
Neither was Osgood, nor is Howard... but they have stanley cups or have been close to it.

DylanSensFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 06:44 PM
  #84
BonkTastic
"Small Sample Size!"
 
BonkTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bogor, IDN
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
Brian Elliott allowed 1.28 goals per game less than Craig Anderson did this year. His save pct. was .940 compared to .913 for Anderson. You can delude yourselves all you want that it was all about coaching styles but no coach in history can explain away that kind of a differential.


I haven't signed in literally since Game 3 or 4 of our series against NYR, but this one quote made me log back in. Take that for what it's worth.

Clearly, you have not followed Ken Hitchcock's career closely.

Highlights of Hitchcock's coaching resume over the past decade:
2008-09, Columbus: Steve Mason's career year (so far), under Hitch.
2007-08, Columbus: Pascal Leclaire's career year, under Hitch.
2006-07, Columbus: Frederk Norrena's career year, under Hitch.
2003-04, Philly: Robert Esche posts a 2.04 GAA and a .915sv%. ROBERT ESCHE. Under Hitch.
2002-03, Philly: Roman Cechmanek posts his career year under Hitch. 1.83 GAA and .925sv%. He never played for Hitchcock again, and was out of the NHL LITERALLY one season later.

Ken Hitchcock coaches a radically defensive system, which SIGNIFICANTLY boosts goalie's numbers. I'm sorry, but stats don't lie. Go ask Esche, Leclaire, Norrena or Cechmanek if they'd want Hitch coaching them again. NOT TO MENTION the fact that he groomed Marty Turco to be the beast that he was until his post-lockout meltdown.

Give Hitch the credit he deserves, here. He's made a CAREER out of making goalies look good. Elliott wasn't the first goalie to post ridiculous numbers in a Hitchcock system, and he surely won't be the last.

You want Elliott back? Don't make the same mistake the LA kings did when they dealt a 2nd rounder for Cechmanek, only to find out he was a truly, TRULY awful goalie whose flaws were expertly managed by one of the most talented defensive coaches in the past 20 years (possibly THE best defensive mind in the game over the past two decades, after Lemaire).

BonkTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-10-2012, 06:55 PM
  #85
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonkTastic View Post
I haven't signed in literally since Game 3 or 4 of our series against NYR, but this one quote made me log back in. Take that for what it's worth.

Clearly, you have not followed Ken Hitchcock's career closely.

Highlights of Hitchcock's coaching resume over the past decade:
2008-09, Columbus: Steve Mason's career year (so far), under Hitch.
2007-08, Columbus: Pascal Leclaire's career year, under Hitch.
2006-07, Columbus: Frederk Norrena's career year, under Hitch.
2003-04, Philly: Robert Esche posts a 2.04 GAA and a .915sv%. ROBERT ESCHE. Under Hitch.
2002-03, Philly: Roman Cechmanek posts his career year under Hitch. 1.83 GAA and .925sv%. He never played for Hitchcock again, and was out of the NHL LITERALLY one season later.

Ken Hitchcock coaches a radically defensive system, which SIGNIFICANTLY boosts goalie's numbers. I'm sorry, but stats don't lie. Go ask Esche, Leclaire, Norrena or Cechmanek if they'd want Hitch coaching them again. NOT TO MENTION the fact that he groomed Marty Turco to be the beast that he was until his post-lockout meltdown.

Give Hitch the credit he deserves, here. He's made a CAREER out of making goalies look good. Elliott wasn't the first goalie to post ridiculous numbers in a Hitchcock system, and he surely won't be the last.

You want Elliott back? Don't make the same mistake the LA kings did when they dealt a 2nd rounder for Cechmanek, only to find out he was a truly, TRULY awful goalie whose flaws were expertly managed by one of the most talented defensive coaches in the past 20 years (possibly THE best defensive mind in the game over the past two decades, after Lemaire).
My point stands. Not one of the above goalies ever posted numbers similar to what Elliott did this year nor did any goalie who ever played for Jacques Lemaire, who, I agree, was an even better defensive coach than Hitchcock.

Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 04:08 AM
  #86
Beville
#ForTheBoys
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Engerlanddd!
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 3,515
vCash: 500
Please explain to me this then.

He sucked for Ottawa and then sucked for Colorado.

How did he become a superstar in 3 months?

Beville is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 07:40 AM
  #87
ChocolateLeclaire
Registered User
 
ChocolateLeclaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
My point stands. Not one of the above goalies ever posted numbers similar to what Elliott did this year nor did any goalie who ever played for Jacques Lemaire, who, I agree, was an even better defensive coach than Hitchcock.
He posted those "impressive" stats over 38 games. Proving that he is nothing more than a back-up goalie who plays well knowing someone else can bail him out. That someone was Halak - who also posted career numbers. UNDER KEN HITCHCOCK.

ChocolateLeclaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 07:43 AM
  #88
HSF
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,079
vCash: 500
fool me once (Leclaire under Hitchock) shame on you...fool me twice shame on me (Elliott)



Ppl still dont get it eh

HSF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 11:13 AM
  #89
BonkTastic
"Small Sample Size!"
 
BonkTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bogor, IDN
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
My point stands. Not one of the above goalies ever posted numbers similar to what Elliott did this year nor did any goalie who ever played for Jacques Lemaire, who, I agree, was an even better defensive coach than Hitchcock.
That wasn't the point. The point WAS that the numbers that goalies produce under Hitch are clearly unsustainable in a non-Hitchcock system.

Steve Mason went from rookie stud to total washout post-Hitchcock. Leclaire's GAA jumped from 2.25 to 3.83, then to 3.20 here with us in his first season. Freddy Norrena couldn't even CRACK THE NHL in a non-Hitchcock system.

Robert Esche's GAA jumped from 2.04, to 2.97, to 4.32, to out of the league.

Cechmanek's GAA went from 1.83 (close to Elliott's), to 2.53, to out of the league in less than two years.

The point was that almost every Hitch team (except in years when he gets fired, and the team has completely tuned him out), goaltenders have the best years of their career. It's been proven time and time again.

If you personally choose not to acknowledge this phenomenon, that does not discredit the phenomenon. Sorry.

BonkTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 12:18 PM
  #90
TSA0402
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,116
vCash: 500
If Elliott was such a goaltending stud why do you think he was so eager to sign a contract extension for about 2 million per season?

His numbers would warrant closer to 7.

TSA0402 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:18 PM
  #91
Ed Wood
Registered User
 
Ed Wood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonkTastic View Post
That wasn't the point. The point WAS that the numbers that goalies produce under Hitch are clearly unsustainable in a non-Hitchcock system.

Steve Mason went from rookie stud to total washout post-Hitchcock. Leclaire's GAA jumped from 2.25 to 3.83, then to 3.20 here with us in his first season. Freddy Norrena couldn't even CRACK THE NHL in a non-Hitchcock system. It's not completly unheard

Robert Esche's GAA jumped from 2.04, to 2.97, to 4.32, to out of the league.

Cechmanek's GAA went from 1.83 (close to Elliott's), to 2.53, to out of the league in less than two years.

The point was that almost every Hitch team (except in years when he gets fired, and the team has completely tuned him out), goaltenders have the best years of their career. It's been proven time and time again.

If you personally choose not to acknowledge this phenomenon, that does not discredit the phenomenon. Sorry.
Do you honestly believe I was saying that Elliott could post a 1.57 GA playing in Ottawa? My point was that the Hithcock system alone couldn't account for the huge disparity in the GA of Elliott vs the GA of Anderson. A factor for sure but people need to acknowledge that Elliott did something special this year no matter who his coach was. It's not completly unheard of in the history of hockey for a player to actually improve from one season to the next.

St Louis got lucky in that Elliott signed his contract fairly early in the season when the Elliott haters on this site were saying there was no way he could sustain his excellent start.

The flat out hatred for a former Sens player who honored his contract and was always respectful to the media and the fans absolutely boggles my mind.


Last edited by Ed Wood: 05-11-2012 at 01:29 PM.
Ed Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:54 PM
  #92
BonkTastic
"Small Sample Size!"
 
BonkTastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bogor, IDN
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
Do you honestly believe I was saying that Elliott could post a 1.57 GA playing in Ottawa? My point was that the Hithcock system alone couldn't account for the huge disparity in the GA of Elliott vs the GA of Anderson. A factor for sure but people need to acknowledge that Elliott did something special this year no matter who his coach was. It's not completly unheard of in the history of hockey for a player to actually improve from one season to the next.

St Louis got lucky in that Elliott signed his contract fairly early in the season when the Elliott haters on this site were saying there was no way he could sustain his excellent start.

The flat out hatred for a former Sens player who honored his contract and was always respectful to the media and the fans absolutely boggles my mind.
No hate at all, simply trying to explain why statistics carry a very valid argument. In fact, "Flat out hatred"... That's not even hyperbole: literally nobody here expressed any personal dislike towards Elliott. You're ignoring very valid points and fabricating arguments that aren't there.

Posts like this remind me why these boards are insufferable to participate in, however. It's like being in junior high all over again. Thanks for the reminder of why I rarely post anymore. It's appreciated more than you know.

BonkTastic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 01:59 PM
  #93
Ice-Tray
Registered User
 
Ice-Tray's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
Do you honestly believe I was saying that Elliott could post a 1.57 GA playing in Ottawa? My point was that the Hithcock system alone couldn't account for the huge disparity in the GA of Elliott vs the GA of Anderson. A factor for sure but people need to acknowledge that Elliott did something special this year no matter who his coach was. It's not completly unheard of in the history of hockey for a player to actually improve from one season to the next.

St Louis got lucky in that Elliott signed his contract fairly early in the season when the Elliott haters on this site were saying there was no way he could sustain his excellent start.

The flat out hatred for a former Sens player who honored his contract and was always respectful to the media and the fans absolutely boggles my mind.
No one here is saying they hate him, I'm not sure where you're getting that from. What people are saying is that he's not as good a goaltender as his personal stats bared this year. Fundamentally people are saying that they don't want him back. Anderson is a better starting goaltender, and Bishop and Lehner are young tenders with lots of potential. There is no room, or stomach for another round of Elliot here.

See, we've all seen him play here, and what most are saying, in a level headed and non-hateful way I might add, is that Elliott is a backup goaltender. His numbers last year in split duty under a celebrated defensive system are inflated.

He is not as good a goaltender as Anderson, and simply looking at stats will rob you of the awesome job Anderson did for us this year. Can you imagine what Elliott's stats would be if he was our tender this year? I can, think of last year, but with less D. Without Anderson we don't make game 7, or even the playoffs for that matter. Without Elliott, the Blue's starter would have played more, and Bishop would have had a chance to shine. Without Elliott they may have fared better against LA as he was roundly criticized for his play in that series. Also keep in mind that it was Halak that was supposed to start in the playoffs.

Elliott is fine, and I wish him the best going forward. His great season stats for his 38 games should get him a good contract, but what I like most about Elliott is that we got Anderson for him, and then his good start allowed us to get Bishop from St. Louis. I look forward to what he'll help us get next!

Ice-Tray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 02:10 PM
  #94
ChocolateLeclaire
Registered User
 
ChocolateLeclaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,650
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Wood View Post
Do you honestly believe I was saying that Elliott could post a 1.57 GA playing in Ottawa? My point was that the Hithcock system alone couldn't account for the huge disparity in the GA of Elliott vs the GA of Anderson. A factor for sure but people need to acknowledge that Elliott did something special this year no matter who his coach was. It's not completly unheard of in the history of hockey for a player to actually improve from one season to the next.

St Louis got lucky in that Elliott signed his contract fairly early in the season when the Elliott haters on this site were saying there was no way he could sustain his excellent start.

The flat out hatred for a former Sens player who honored his contract and was always respectful to the media and the fans absolutely boggles my mind.
Congratulations on completely ignoring what others have stated about Halak's equally impressive numbers in the same system and going straight to hysterics about how we all "hate" him. You started this ridiculousness by stating that you would take Elliott back and he would become the starter. He is not a starter quality goaltender on all 30 teams. Because he cannot assume the workload of a starter. Period. End of discussion.

ChocolateLeclaire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2012, 02:18 PM
  #95
PeterSidorkiewicz
Original *** allstar
 
PeterSidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 14,602
vCash: 500
Both sides make valid points on Elliott, just combine the main points on each side of the fence and you have a nice summary of Elliott.

1. He had a great season and he still deserves credit no matter who the coach is or what team you have, you play with the hand you are dealt.
2. Most likely, Elliott is not a legit #1 goalie and serves well as a backup who can play a fair amount of games. This is why Halak makes more than Elliott and Elliott re-signed for less than Halak, he is a backup to him/1b goaltender.
3. A player CAN get better, despite what age he is, and especially when it comes to the goaltending position, eventually it can just "click" at that level and mentally you finally "get it."

And finally, lets just see how Elliott does in the coming seasons and if he can keep it up, he will write his own NHL career.

PeterSidorkiewicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:16 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.