Can Elliott backstop us to a cup this year?

[Toasted Oates]

I've tried not to get too "in the moment" with Allen's play, but the team has certainly played better lately in front of him than Elliott.

Last night Elliott looked awesome and confident up until he took that whack in the head right before the penalty shot. He had some tough luck, but wasn't great either. Is he banged up?

I'm still leaning Elliott because we've seen Allen stand on his head and then regress when the team gives him more responsibility. Big tilt for Jake Sunday @ the Bulls' arena.

[not_a_wings_fan]

I say no, but not anything to do with Els. I don't think he will be able to overcome the shitty play and lack of scoring in front of him.

[Misc. Blues]

I say no, but not anything to do with Els. I don't think he will be able to overcome the shitty play and lack of scoring in front of him.

That's an odd thing to say when the Blues scored 7 in his last game...

[cprice12]

Allen starting tomorrow and Hitch's comment is a little odd. Probably nothing, but it's the first time I've thought there was any chance of a goalie controversy this year. There's something about the way he phrased it that makes me wonder if Allen could steal the job with a lights out performance.

[tweet][/tweet]

I'll be shocked if Allen starts in the playoffs. That would mean Hitch will be starting a rookie with zero playoff experience in a year in which their legitimate goal is to win a cup.
It's just not going to happen unless Elliott is hurt or playing very poorly.

It is interesting that Allen is starting vs Chicago though. Probably just being rewarded for his good play...but this is a huge game. Expect everyone to demand Allen take over the #1 job if he plays well and gets the win. I still think Elliott should be the guy if Allen plays well on Sunday.

[Misc. Blues]

Allen starting tomorrow and Hitch's comment is a little odd. Probably nothing, but it's the first time I've thought there was any chance of a goalie controversy this year. There's something about the way he phrased it that makes me wonder if Allen could steal the job with a lights out performance.

[tweet][/tweet]

I'll be shocked if Allen starts in the playoffs. That would mean Hitch will be starting a rookie with zero playoff experience in a year in which their legitimate goal is to win a cup.
It's just not going to happen unless Elliott is hurt or playing very poorly.

It is interesting that Allen is starting vs Chicago though. Probably just being rewarded for his good play...but this is a huge game. Expect everyone to demand Allen take over the #1 job if he plays well and gets the win. I still think Elliott should be the guy if Allen plays well on Sunday.

I think playing Allen against Chicago is smart for a couple of reasons. The first being not giving them the extra look at Elliot if we end up playing them in the first round. If Allen wins the Hawks lose at home to our backup we will be in their heads. If Allen loses then it's not as big of a deal because he was our backup. I think the team plays different in front of Allen because they want to protect him. Ells has bailed them out many of times over the years and the team takes it for granted that Ells will bail them out again. They will play better for him in the playoffs because it's a different type of season. This is the year...

[Fradi]

I think this is actually a good move, Allen needs some experience in big, playoff-like games as this (especially if there's any plan of him becoming no.1 one day), so unless it turns into a total disaster, it's going to be very beneficial for everyone down the road. Not to mention he was doing well lately, earned his chance against the hawks. Ells can also have some rest, not to mention what happens if, God forbid, he gets injured during the playoffs.

[cardsfan04]

Allen starting tomorrow and Hitch's comment is a little odd. Probably nothing, but it's the first time I've thought there was any chance of a goalie controversy this year. There's something about the way he phrased it that makes me wonder if Allen could steal the job with a lights out performance.

[tweet][/tweet]

I'll be shocked if Allen starts in the playoffs. That would mean Hitch will be starting a rookie with zero playoff experience in a year in which their legitimate goal is to win a cup.
It's just not going to happen unless Elliott is hurt or playing very poorly.

It is interesting that Allen is starting vs Chicago though. Probably just being rewarded for his good play...but this is a huge game. Expect everyone to demand Allen take over the #1 job if he plays well and gets the win. I still think Elliott should be the guy if Allen plays well on Sunday.

Yeah, that's been my stance all along too. I haven't been on Allen's bandwagon that formed recently. I've liked his play, just haven't wanted a switch. And, I think that's still true.

Allen starting surprised me, but Fradi and Misc. make some good points. What really caught my attention too is how Hitch phrased it, but I think I probably read too much into that.

[not_a_wings_fan]

I say no, but not anything to do with Els. I don't think he will be able to overcome the shitty play and lack of scoring in front of him.

That's an odd thing to say when the Blues scored 7 in his last game...

um, kay. So one game, not a playoff game, they score seven goals so suddenly that makes them a 7 goals per game team?

They only scored two for Allen against the hawks last night and he had to stand on his head for us to win that - and it was one of the better games the team has played in weeks.

I think Els would have to give up less than two goals per game to backstop a cup with this team, and we get shut down too often for me to trust consistent scoring in the playoffs.

It's not on Els, it's on the guys in front of him and a defense first system that stymies the talent we have up front.

[Krigloch the Furious]

Elliott can totally do the job.
I'm worried about the rest of the team....and Hitch

[drwoland]

And now Hitch is actually starting Allen against the Jets It's like he reads the Facebook posts.

If I were Elliott, I'd just ask for a trade next season. No other goalie has had as many people breathing in his ear constantly, just WAITING for a weak game or two to slide in some other asshole.

[cprice12]

um, kay. So one game, not a playoff game, they score seven goals so suddenly that makes them a 7 goals per game team?

He didn't say that we're a 7 goals per game team.
He just said it was an odd thing to say after we put up 7 in a game.

They only scored two for Allen against the hawks last night and he had to stand on his head for us to win that - and it was one of the better games the team has played in weeks.

They won.
And we also didn't have our top two offensive weapons in Steen and Tarasenko.

I think Els would have to give up less than two goals per game to backstop a cup with this team, and we get shut down too often for me to trust consistent scoring in the playoffs.

It's not on Els, it's on the guys in front of him and a defense first system that stymies the talent we have up front.

Wha?

Among all of the playoff teams, the Blues are the highest scoring team in the West and 2nd overall in the NHL.

I'm not sure what you want.

And all of this talk about Hitch's system stymieing the talent up front is a bunch of fan-manufactured BS stemming from fans over analyzing things trying to figure out what was wrong when they weren't playing as well over a stretch of 8-9 or so games.
When they follow the system, they win... and there is creativity all over the ice.
Hitch's system allows for plenty of creativity, unless you count cherry picking at the red line as being creative.
Simply watching the games it's easy to see the creative stuff flowing. Hell, a lot of times they are guilty of being too creative and passing too many times down low and passing up a good scoring opportunity to try and make the flashy passing play...like Backes' goal last night in Chicago. That pass was a sneaky low percentage pass at the top of the crease that happened to work out.

Explain to me how exactly they aren't allowed to be creative?
Preaching being responsible defensively is how you win hockey games...and that doesn't mean they are being held down offensively.

Hockey is 90% instinct on the ice and reacting to what is happening around you. Sure, there are places you are supposed to be in certain situations and there is an overall game plan in where we move the puck to in certain situations. But it's always up to the players to make sure that the game plan gets implemented in spite of what the other team wants to do...and quite often it requires high levels of talent and creativity to make sure that happens.

I've said this before...if we let the players do whatever the hell they want out there, we'd get destroyed by a good team playing an actual honest to god system.

[Oaklandblue]

um, kay. So one game, not a playoff game, they score seven goals so suddenly that makes them a 7 goals per game team?

He didn't say that we're a 7 goals per game team.
He just said it was an odd thing to say after we put up 7 in a game.

They only scored two for Allen against the hawks last night and he had to stand on his head for us to win that - and it was one of the better games the team has played in weeks.

They won.
And we also didn't have our top two offensive weapons in Steen and Tarasenko.

I think Els would have to give up less than two goals per game to backstop a cup with this team, and we get shut down too often for me to trust consistent scoring in the playoffs.

It's not on Els, it's on the guys in front of him and a defense first system that stymies the talent we have up front.

Wha?

Among all of the playoff teams, the Blues are the highest scoring team in the West and 2nd overall in the NHL.

I'm not sure what you want.

And all of this talk about Hitch's system stymieing the talent up front is a bunch of fan-manufactured BS stemming from fans over analyzing things trying to figure out what was wrong when they weren't playing as well over a stretch of 8-9 or so games.
When they follow the system, they win... and there is creativity all over the ice.
Hitch's system allows for plenty of creativity, unless you count cherry picking at the red line as being creative.
Simply watching the games it's easy to see the creative stuff flowing. Hell, a lot of times they are guilty of being too creative and passing too many times down low and passing up a good scoring opportunity to try and make the flashy passing play...like Backes' goal last night in Chicago. That pass was a sneaky low percentage pass at the top of the crease that happened to work out.

Explain to me how exactly they aren't allowed to be creative?
Preaching being responsible defensively is how you win hockey games...and that doesn't mean they are being held down offensively.

Hockey is 90% instinct on the ice and reacting to what is happening around you. Sure, there are places you are supposed to be in certain situations and there is an overall game plan in where we move the puck to in certain situations. But it's always up to the players to make sure that the game plan gets implemented in spite of what the other team wants to do...and quite often it requires high levels of talent and creativity to make sure that happens.

I've said this before...if we let the players do whatever the hell they want out there, we'd get destroyed by a good team playing an actual honest to god system.

Remind me once again how regular season performance has translated to the playoffs? It hasn't. Absolutely. Has. Not.

In the regular season we can put up 100+/- points. Who cares? You HAVE to put up 100+/- points to make the playoffs, by playing great teams TWO TO FOUR TIMES A SEASON IF THAT, also play the worst, the mediocre, the pretty good and the contenders over a season of what, 82ish games? That's not a very good barometer to use when you're playing a team in the playoffs 4-7 consecutive times and you either continue on or get bounced out. They made the playoffs, they're at least pretty good and at best near-dominant, right?

When we hit the playoffs it's ZERO points and we start over. If we base it simply on playoff numbers, Hitch should have been fired a long time ago, so yes, it is absolutely..absolutely...can I say it again? Sure, absolutely relevant when we discuss this. Those numbers do not pick up or drop when it matters, so who cares if iTank gets 60 points or whatever or if Ells has got 30 wins or whatever, in the playoffs it's a different animal, so that alone blows the argument out of the water. It is absolutely THE discussion to have when you got a coach who gets us to the door and the door religious drops on us, by the teams, for the majority of the time that take us down, who go on to actually win it all.

What can we do to approach it better? Play to the strengths of the team in the playoffs. Systems give you the floor, they should be the rule, but one with exceptions. NO ONE has said on here not to play without a battle plan, the argument has been that Hitch enlists a very strict battle plan that has kept the goals against low, which it has, but has stunted scoring which leads us to lose games. And that has been the end result of the Hitch Era up to date.

In short, it is THAT creativity that we are missing, and that creativity that Hitch sorely lacks. Our team gets more skilled, more stronger, more rugged. Hitch has the tools to win, due to his track record that we can gauge, can he take the team in to win?

I'd have to say no. But then I remember the Dallas Stars years and how they won the cup. Mind that, that Cup victory was a controversial one in itself.

I'll be honest: I wouldn't mind that.

[cprice12]

Remind me once again how regular season performance has translated to the playoffs? It hasn't. Absolutely. Has. Not.

Sure it has.
More often than not, the teams that finish higher in the standings generally get farther in the playoffs.
Not for us of course, but generally speaking.

In the regular season we can put up 100+/- points. Who cares? You HAVE to put up 100+/- points to make the playoffs, by playing great teams TWO TO FOUR TIMES A SEASON IF THAT, also play the worst, the mediocre, the pretty good and the contenders over a season of what, 82ish games? That's not a very good barometer to use when you're playing a team in the playoffs 4-7 consecutive times and you either continue on or get bounced out. They made the playoffs, they're at least pretty good and at best near-dominant, right?

When talking about teams within your own division, they all play the same amount of games against everyone else.
So that is about as good of a barometer as you can get when comparing how good a team is.

When we hit the playoffs it's ZERO points and we start over. If we base it simply on playoff numbers, Hitch should have been fired a long time ago, so yes, it is absolutely..absolutely...can I say it again? Sure, absolutely relevant when we discuss this. Those numbers do not pick up or drop when it matters, so who cares if Tank gets 60 points or whatever or if Ells has got 30 wins or whatever, in the playoffs it's a different animal, so that alone blows the argument out of the water.

The playoffs are a different animal for everyone. Not just the Blues. Scoring typically goes down, defense tightens up. The competition is tougher...it's like that for everyone. It's not exclusive to the Blues.
They don't say the Stanley Cup is the toughest of all professional sports trophies to win for no reason.

Blues fans should care if Tank gets 30 goals and they should care if Ells gets 30 wins because that means the team should win more games and finish higher in the standings, which means, in theory, an easier first round matchup in the playoffs.

It benefits teams to win the division and to win the conference. And typically the teams who fair better during the season, fair better in the playoffs. But it hasn't happened for the Blues that way, but it's not because of a curse or anything stupid like that. It just hasn't fallen our way in the playoffs. And it doesn't mean those circumstances will always happen that way.

It is absolutely THE discussion to have when you got a coach who gets us to the door and the door religious drops on us, by the teams, for the majority of the time that take us down, who go on to actually win it all.

I'm not saying it's not a discussion to have. I've said that if Hitch can't get the team over the hump this year in the playoffs, his job could be on the line. But it all depends on how the team bows out, if they do. You can't make blanket statements when making personnel decisions. That's not good management. You judge each person individually and analyze why things went the way they did.

What can we do to approach it better? Play to the strengths of the team in the playoffs. Systems give you the floor, they should be the rule, but one with exceptions. NO ONE has said on here not to play without a battle plan, the argument has been that Hitch enlists a very strict battle plan that has kept the goals against low, which it has, but has stunted scoring which leads us to lose games. And that has been the end result of the Hitch Era up to date.

I'll say it again, we are first in the West in goals scored of all playoff teams...and we are 2nd overall of all playoff teams in the NHL.
I'm not sure what you want.
This team's offense has not been squelched by Hitch's system.
They have had a few rough patches this year...but who hasn't? That's just the way it goes...no matter how good your team is.

In short, it is THAT creativity that we are missing, and that creativity that Hitch sorely lacks.

I disagree. I don't see it that way at all.
When this team follows the system, they are dominant and there is a lot of creativity visible on the ice.
I think this "Hitch is restricting the creativity" talking point is being used by people who are just looking for reasons why they may go a handful of games where goals are hard to come by or whatever.
In my opinion...it's a false conclusion to an over analyzed discussion. People look for something/someone to blame, and they go right to Hitch and his system that preaches responsible defensive play first...which most good teams do.

Our team gets more skilled, more stronger, more rugged. Hitch has the tools to win, due to his track record that we can gauge, can he take the team in to win?

I'd have to say no. But then I remember the Dallas Stars years and how they won the cup. Mind that, that Cup victory was a controversial one in itself.

I'll be honest: I wouldn't mind that.

He has been to the finals twice. He won it once.
He has proven he can get the job done.
I'm not going to predict the Blues get to the finals or anything like that (because my prediction doesn't mean anything)...but they most certainly can get there and I am cautiously optimistic about their chances, like I have been the past few years.

[glen a richter]

I don't know what the hell is actually going on. Allen is playing again today? I get riding the hot hand but it'll be wicked strange when he plays today and Saturday and then Hitch goes abruptly back to Elliott to start the playoffs. I'm really beginning to believe Ells is on the outs after the supposedly non-issue incident in that game a couple (few?) weeks ago when he went in for Allen then got pulled. We didn't think much of it then, but evidently it was a big deal.

[cardsfan04]

Maybe he's hurt and they aren't saying anything. I dunno, but this is weird. Somebody suggested that Hitch might be preventing the blackhawks from seeing him a week before the playoffs. Maybe that's it. I'm really perplexed.

[Misc. Blues]

Maybe he's hurt and they aren't saying anything. I dunno, but this is weird. Somebody suggested that Hitch might be preventing the blackhawks from seeing him a week before the playoffs. Maybe that's it. I'm really perplexed.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I thought at the time he had hurt his back or neck in the Dallas game. I expected to here he was hurt but nothing was said and now starting Allen three in a row makes me wonder even more.

[cardsfan04]

Maybe he's hurt and they aren't saying anything. I dunno, but this is weird. Somebody suggested that Hitch might be preventing the blackhawks from seeing him a week before the playoffs. Maybe that's it. I'm really perplexed.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I thought at the time he had hurt his back or neck in the Dallas game. I expected to here he was hurt but nothing was said and now starting Allen three in a row makes me wonder even more.

I've been expecting that too. But, JR said during his chat a few minutes ago that he's not hurt. He's been practicing like normal. He says Hitch is just going with the hot hand and he thinks Allen has stolen the job unless he melts down.

This is a strange situation. That's for sure.

[theohall]

One thing - this is not strange for Hitch. He will ride the hot hand in goal until what looks like the beginning of a melt down (3 goals in less than 2 periods) and then he will switch goaltenders. He's done that most of this season other than back-to-back nights when he switches them up for those games.

[gaijin]

The last time Elliott was "demoted" (which I'm not saying this is), he came back and played lights out the rest of the season. Maybe that is what Hitch is trying to accomplish here.

I honestly think we've gone beyond "riding the hot hand" (so to speak), and we're at the point where we may have to worry about Elliott being rusty when he gets his next start due to lack of playing time.

[ecbm]

Elliott can't be hurt. That would be malpractice by Hitch in such an important stretch of games. If he'd put himself in a position to have NOBODY other than a green-ass kid to play goalie for entire games down the stretch in a tight race it really is time to put him out to pasture.

He's just riding the hot hand.