Hopefully he's available for Game 2. I think Hitch was putting Halak in net Game 1 regardless. If he struggles though, he won't hesitate to put in Elliott.
Just thought I'd come here and see if you'd volunteer some of your thoughts...
Elliott: 6'3" 205lb
Halak: 5'11" 185lb
Elliot has a serious height and weight advantage over Halak and takes up more space in the net. Thinking back to Havlat's GWG in OT in game 1, I'm wondering if Elliot eats that puck up as that shot just snuck in between Halak's chest and arm...
On top of all that, I just think Elliott is the better goalie. Any thoughts on who you'd guys rather have in net the rest of the way presuming Halak isn't seriously hurt?
__________________
"I hate books; they only teach us to talk about things we know nothing about."
-Jean Jacques Rousseau
Just thought I'd come here and see if you'd volunteer some of your thoughts...
Elliott: 6'3" 205lb
Halak: 5'11" 185lb
Elliot has a serious height and weight advantage over Halak and takes up more space in the net. Thinking back to Havlat's GWG in OT in game 1, I'm wondering if Elliot eats that puck up as that shot just snuck in between Halak's chest and arm...
On top of all that, I just think Elliott is the better goalie. Any thoughts on who you'd guys rather have in net the rest of the way presuming Halak isn't seriously hurt?
I prefer Elliot, but it doesn't seem wrong to go with either. Both are more than capable.
I have a few reasons for favoring Elliot. The guy has been rock solid between the ears. Even when shots are coming from every which way, he remains calm and collected. That really helps instill defensive composure when the team gets off course. He also doesn't seem to fall out of focus anywhere near as often as Halak (not that Halak has an issue with this aspect of the game). When the Blues dominate play for a long time and then hit a rut, Elliot is still just as aware and focused as he would be when getting peppered with shots all game (not that we see a lot of that).
Another factor is related to the kind of goal scoring we see in the playoffs. Most of the goals come off rebounds or screens. Elliot has a greater ability to control rebounds than Halak. I don't think many will debate that. Elliot also has the bigger body as you noted, which allows him to cover more of the net. This is important to stopping both rebounds and screened shots. In terms of rebounds Elliot can cover more of the net regardless of his awareness of where the puck is on the ice (something he seems to be slightly better at than Halak). His big body also helps in this aspect when facing screened shots. THere is a greater chance that will see the puck because he can look over players and, if he can't see, then having a big body is useful because it takes up more of the net.
Who knows if Elliot will retain his form next year, but this year he has been excellent and it doesn't seem to be changing in the near future.
I prefer Elliot, but it doesn't seem wrong to go with either. Both are more than capable.
I have a few reasons for favoring Elliot. The guy has been rock solid between the ears. Even when shots are coming from every which way, he remains calm and collected. That really helps instill defensive composure when the team gets off course. He also doesn't seem to fall out of focus anywhere near as often as Halak (not that Halak has an issue with this aspect of the game). When the Blues dominate play for a long time and then hit a rut, Elliot is still just as aware and focused as he would be when getting peppered with shots all game (not that we see a lot of that).
Another factor is related to the kind of goal scoring we see in the playoffs. Most of the goals come off rebounds or screens. Elliot has a greater ability to control rebounds than Halak. I don't think many will debate that. Elliot also has the bigger body as you noted, which allows him to cover more of the net. This is important to stopping both rebounds and screened shots. In terms of rebounds Elliot can cover more of the net regardless of his awareness of where the puck is on the ice (something he seems to be slightly better at than Halak). His big body also helps in this aspect when facing screened shots. There is a greater chance that will see the puck because he can look over players and, if he can't see, then having a big body is useful because it takes up more of the net.
Who knows if Elliot will retain his form next year, but this year he has been excellent and it doesn't seem to be changing in the near future.
Thorough assessment.
It is for all the reasons stated above,
AND (1)that Elliott jumps on loose pucks and gathers them in better (and much more often) than Halak (who is prone to rather knock them outward for a juicy rebound or let them bank off his pads or body(for a rebound);
AND; (2) that Elliott is more steady, with Halak being better at his best (almost impossible to beat), but he plays that way only 10-15% of the time and is very beatable at other times). While Elliott is always the same, always alert, in good position, bigger in net, leaving few rebounds.
I'd rather have Elliott in goal (at least the way he is playing this season).
I prefer Elliot, but it doesn't seem wrong to go with either. Both are more than capable.
I have a few reasons for favoring Elliot. The guy has been rock solid between the ears. Even when shots are coming from every which way, he remains calm and collected. That really helps instill defensive composure when the team gets off course. He also doesn't seem to fall out of focus anywhere near as often as Halak (not that Halak has an issue with this aspect of the game). When the Blues dominate play for a long time and then hit a rut, Elliot is still just as aware and focused as he would be when getting peppered with shots all game (not that we see a lot of that).
Another factor is related to the kind of goal scoring we see in the playoffs. Most of the goals come off rebounds or screens. Elliot has a greater ability to control rebounds than Halak. I don't think many will debate that. Elliot also has the bigger body as you noted, which allows him to cover more of the net. This is important to stopping both rebounds and screened shots. In terms of rebounds Elliot can cover more of the net regardless of his awareness of where the puck is on the ice (something he seems to be slightly better at than Halak). His big body also helps in this aspect when facing screened shots. THere is a greater chance that will see the puck because he can look over players and, if he can't see, then having a big body is useful because it takes up more of the net.
Who knows if Elliot will retain his form next year, but this year he has been excellent and it doesn't seem to be changing in the near future.
I totally agree, Halak is a good goalie but one reason he was so successful in the playoffs with Montreal, is that the team in front of him played shutout defense and severely limited scoring chances, rebounds, blocked shots etc... The Blues aren't built quite the same way and the western conf is full of team like San Jose, Vancouver, and Detroit with some big forwards that crash the net hard looking for dirty goals.
Halak did okay in game #1 and stopped some good chances, but also got bailed out by some good plays from the Blues D to sweep the puck away. In some of the scrambles he did not appear to be the sharpest and appeared to not have been tracking the puck in the scambles that well. Also despite a bit of a pick set in the second overtime, Halak should have had the Sharks game-winning goal. It was a one-time shot from high in slot but not hit as rapidly as some one-timers.
Elliott seems much more relaxed in those situations and seems to be able to track the puck better through traffic and from rebounds. The Blues have a better chance to go deeper into the playoffs if Elliott plays more games.
