15
Photo Credit: Sergei Belski-USA TODAY Sports

FlamesNation Player Evaluation: Brian Elliott

Brian Elliott did not come as advertised.

This was a goalie coming off of a .930 (!) save percentage over the course of 42 games, and maintaining that level of play into the third round of the playoffs. Elliott had put up decent to outstanding numbers in the five years he spent with St. Louis, and though he’d never been a true starter – the most he hit with the Blues in one season was 46 games – a trade to the Flames was supposed to be his chance to prove he could be.

After all, he was already posting some of the NHL’s best numbers, and had been an All-Star a couple of times. It was as good a bet as any to make – and ultimately, it kind of did pay off.

2016-17 season summary

Alright! The three-headed goalie monster from the season before was all out of the NHL, and the Flames had brought in two guys with a history of posting pretty good numbers to take over instead. Goaltending was one of the Flames’ biggest woes in 2015-16, but considering Elliott’s pedigree, it was sure to no longer be a problem– aaaaand he has a .778 SV% to start the season.

It was rough for a bit, but in Elliott’s fourth game of the season – the Flames’ seventh – he earned his first win, with a .939 SV% to boot. After being denied the chance to face off against his former team, he was the Flames’ starter for their first game in St. Louis, and showed off with a .958 SV% and a near shutout. October had been rough for the Flames, Elliott included, but they were finally turning the corner– aaaand a series of sub-.900 SV% games saw him lose his starting job by mid-November.

Elliott spent much of the season with a save percentage under .900, a far cry from pretty much anything he’d done in St. Louis. It took all the way until February for him to reclaim the starter’s net, and that wasn’t necessarily entirely through his own merit: Chad Johnson had finally hit a really rough patch of his own, the entire team was floundering (again) and something needed to be done, and Elliott had the first start of the brief “win and you’re in” campaign. (It was brief because eventually, when he did lose, his overall play was going so well it wouldn’t have made sense to not give him the next start.)

Suddenly, in late February, Elliott looked like the guy the Flames thought they were getting. He conquered a personal best with 11 wins in a row, and dragged his save percentage up above .900, something that had seemed to be impossible only a few weeks before. The Flames rode Elliott to the playoffs, during which he was outstanding in the first game– aaaaaaaaand then they were swept in part thanks to his netminding, his season ending upon being pulled just 5:38 into Game 4 when he gave up a goal while already on a short leash.

Compared to last season

Let’s be up front: there’s no way in which Elliott’s season looks good. He went from a .930 SV% to .910, and that included a Herculean effort filled with tons of great performances to end up with that ultimately mediocre save percentage. He went from playing 18 playoff games – although the St. Louis team in front of him certainly had their part in that – to getting swept. It was a downgrade in every possible way.

Via Corsica’s rolling average feature:

Elliott did recover a bit towards the end, but he couldn’t quite match what he posted towards the end of his time with the Blues, even when he was playing much better.

Then again, an earlier look at this – and looking further back in his season – continues to suggest that goalies might be, well, voodoo. He’s fluctuated throughout his career; it’s just that this year happened to be a down one.

Where did the goals come from?

Among goalies with at least 1,500 5v5 minutes played, Elliott was 23rd out of 36 in 5v5 SV% with 92.12%. That’s almost a full percentage point above the worst goalie (Cam Ward, 91.28%), and almost two back of the best (Craig Anderson, 94.04%). It’s not that he had the worst save percentage ever, but he just barely avoided staying out of the bottom third of this group.

Switch to just low-danger SV%, and Elliott’s 97.82% was 25th. His medium-danger SV% was 93.25% – 10th. And his high-danger SV% of 79.13% was 29th. Via Corsica, we can look at where he faced shots, and where he gave up goals, throughout the season:

It’s no surprise to see most of the goals that went against him appear to have come from the slot, but there are a handful of oddities there, including some point shots and that weird centre ice goal I’m pretty sure was from that 2-1 Canucks overtime loss right before the 10-game win streak. The major downside to this is a lot of these goals come from seemingly anywhere and everywhere – even if they weren’t that frequent, there’s enough of them grouped together in those little outer locations to raise some concerns, especially when it comes to Elliott’s low-danger SV%.

It seemed to be something of an issue in 2015-16, too, though not as bad:

Those types of goals will happen – but for the Flames this season, the slot seems to have been a more concentrated area to score on Elliott. That’s partially on him, but may be on his defence, as well (his high-danger SV% in 2015-16 was 86.22% – an over 7% increase. His low-danger SV% was about the same between seasons).

What’s next?

Elliott, who carried a $2.5 million cap hit this past season, is approaching free agency.

Maybe the Flames will re-sign him.

Then again, maybe they’ll target somebody else.

As things currently stand, the Flames have no NHL-ready goaltenders under contract for 2017-18. Thanks to both the expansion draft and free agency, they should have quite the number to choose from, and Elliott is included among that group.

Those final three playoff games – well, two and change – may have cost him his chance at the big money contract he was working his way towards earning over March. That’s unfortunate for him, but fortunate for whatever team he ends up signing with, as he likely won’t carry that big of a cap hit – and may go back to providing extremely valuable goaltending yet.

It was a down year for Elliott, there’s no questioning that. The question is, is that who Elliott will be for the rest of his career? Or will the goalie who put up those elite numbers in the seasons beforehand make a comeback?

… And will it be with the Flames?


Welcome to this offseason’s Flames player evaluations!

Over the next month we’ll be breaking down these guys’ 2016-17 seasons. As long as he finished the season as a Flame and played at least a quarter of the season for them, he’ll be included in these.

We’ll be going in order by player number, so Elliott got the first draw; tomorrow will be Mark Giordano, and so on and so forth. Enjoy!

  • buts

    BE’s stats in st louis were aided by a defensive system. Goalies with great numbers are sometimes mis-leading due to few high quality chances from the teams system. Look at the good goalies playing today, they challenge, they track. There’s lots of good ones available this summer, I hope BT stops the carousel in net and fills the most important position on any team with a competent trustworthy tender. By the way if this years ping ping balls were used at last year lottery draft the flames would have got Matthews.

  • HOFer_dirty30

    Just about every team eliminated is complaining about there goaltending. If you think you can bring in a backup to stand on his head and be an elite goaltender, good luck. It can happen but you risk throwing away another season. Keep Elliott and bring in that backup (ex. Grubuaer ) and let them compete. There is no denying Elliott was an elite goalie for part of the season. We need to build around the crease. Get that #4 blueliner.

    • everton fc

      Haven’t read all the comments yet, but hopefully someone pointed towards our goalie coach??

      I could live with;

      1. Elliott/Rittich
      2. Elliott/Johnson
      3. Fluery/Elliott (unaffordable, though – but only to move Brouwer)
      4. Fluery/Rittich (only to move Brouwer)
      5. Fluery/Johnson (ditto)
      6. Elliott/Grubuer

      Everyone seems to want Johnson back. I like Johnson. Great guy. But the second part of the season when the team record improved was not due to Johnson.

      • Flint

        If you’re going to try and move a bad contract to get a goalie with a fairly bad contract why not look to Halak? 1yr vs 2yr. He’s a career .923evsv% goalie (13th of 31 – those with over 8500evSA) vs Fleury .920 (27th of 31). Plus the Islanders have something crazy like 22 or 23 players under contract for next year, they missed the playoffs, they gotta make changes, and they have like 7 UFA’s including Tavares coming up after next year. Give them Brouwer, and get a better goalie than Fleury.

        • Flint

          Oh wait… we can’t trade Brouwer can we? FFS. Anyway. Halak has better career stats then either of Fleury or Elliott and the Islanders don’t want him at all. If the money works he’d be a better 1B than Johnson. Does anyone understand his contract though? Is he a 2,4 hit next year or a 4,7? Anyway, I’m sure the Isle would eat some of his salary… or maybe make a trade to move some of their huge mass of signed players.

  • buts

    We don’t need a goalie to stand on his head, just one that doesn’t let in wrist shots from the boards in 3 different playoff games. A hot stretch mid season does not define “elite”. Playoffs are where it counts.

    • JoelOttosJock

      That wouldnt be such a bad thing..Burke is a donkey and Treliving isnt much smarter..I cannot think think of one great move made by dumb and dumber..

  • jakethesnail

    I don’t want the Flames to start the season with another new goalies who need to get acclimatized to the city, new teammates, coach, defense….. Bring one back, likely Johnson. The one goal hook by coach in the fourth game sealed Elliot’s fate.

  • Flint

    As with every player decision a big part of it is going to come down to the dollars.

    Elliot came here to CGY after being let go in favor of other options in StL. He came to CGY on the last year of a damn fine contract and Elliott will have been thinking that the next contract needs to be the big one. I don’t think Elliott had as many trade suitors last year as he maybe thought he would, or maybe StL thought. Now, he’s come off a poor year by his standards and a terrible, terrible playoffs. And CGY’s systems/D didn’t seem too flawed – he’s only a career .920evsv% goalie.

    If you or I am the GM are we upping his salary? No way. Plus, re-sign him and we lose a pick, so of all the 31 teams CGY has the most to lose resigning Elliott. The only way I take another risk on him is if he comes very cheap. But even then, the numbers I would want he likely won’t take. I’d hardball him. Go somewhere else if you can get better than 2.2mil x 1-2 years. And that wouldn’t be the first offer I would put on the table, not with the glut of goalies available.

    • kipper2004

      As mentioned above, i think Halak is a good bandaid until Gillies and or Parsons get their chance. Halak has good pedegree for a starter who is undervalued (compared to Bishop who will be overvalued). But if the flames are looking for a younger guy with potential to be the next great starter then Raanta and Gruebauer have potential with Condon and Dell having good numbers for a backup that can steal a couple games. Fluery makes the most sense due to his remaining contract term and experience as a #1 goalie most of his career. Flames cant get cought flat footed with another Ramo/Hiller type combo.

  • If the issue here is that Elliott shone in St. Louis’s defensive system, and it’s one that Calgary doesn’t play, what you’re really saying is that you need a goalie that can perform at a high level in a system that’s going to give up more chances.

    That means you’re looking for Carey Price. If you can get an affordable Carey Price next season, be my guest. If not, are you realistically going to find a better option in net than Brian Elliott? I don’t think you are. I think you have to gamble on last season being the outlier for him and see at least somewhat of a return to form.