Brian Elliott is the backup goalie today, tomorrow, and next season.

Prior to this season he signed a 3 year 7.5 million dollar deal. Do you keep him around at 2.5 million for the next two seasons to be your backup/insurance for Allen or do you look to move him and what is his value?

Dubynk fetched a 2nd rounder from the Wild and this was when he hadn't done anything. I have to think Elliott has SOME trade value.

Thoughts?

If I were GM, I certainly keep him around next season at the very least. We have to remember that Allen has not yet started even half a season at the top level and will likely run into some cold streaks (as most young goalies do).

Depending on how Binnington progresses next year, maybe look at moving Moose after next season or at the deadline.

$2.5 million for a "known" insurance policy like Moose isn't the worst thing in the world.

You're right though, I like to think Elliott could probably fetch something at the deadline next year for a team dealing with injuries but still on the bubble.

I think we hold onto Ells for awhile.

I mean...we don't have anything in the pipeline that's ready to go do we?

To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

That's pretty much my thoughts right there as well. He isn't breaking the bank in terms of salary and we don't have anything in the pipeline. Secondly, while Allen is playing awesome now you want to make sure he isn't just going on a run and can keep playing at a consistently high level now and next year before you look to trade Elliott. Unless Ells makes a huge stink in the locker room - which I think he's too much of a pro to do - you keep him around, maybe through the whole contract if possible. It's not every team in the league that has a Jennings winner coming off the bench.

edit: The only thing I'd be worried about is if Ells has a lingering injury that will need to be cleaned up in the offseason from Cole pushing a guy on top of his knee.

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

I believe Allen is an RFA after this year...Someone can correct me if I'm mistaken.

wizard pork sword wrote:

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

I believe Allen is an RFA after this year...Someone can correct me if I'm mistaken.

Oh, you're right, he is.

wizard pork sword wrote:

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

I believe Allen is an RFA after this year...Someone can correct me if I'm mistaken.

You are correct. Short of winning a Cup this year, I expect his next deal will be a 2-year bridge at around the same money Ells is making.

Regarding the original topic, I expect him to be traded this offseason to a team that can use him as a starter. He has been nothing but a stand up guy his entire time here, and Army seems like a guy who will feel like he owes it to the player to put him in a better position if the right deal comes around. Not saying Army will dump him for peanuts just to get rid of the distraction, but there are teams out there like Edmonton or Buffalo or even San Jose who would love to have him as their #1. A deal will be there.

MissouriMook wrote:
Regarding the original topic, I expect him to be traded this offseason to a team that can use him as a starter. He has been nothing but a stand up guy his entire time here, and Army seems like a guy who will feel like he owes it to the player to put him in a better position if the right deal comes around. Not saying Army will dump him for peanuts just to get rid of the distraction, but there are teams out there like Edmonton or Buffalo or even San Jose who would love to have him as their #1. A deal will be there.

I see a big Blues - Edmonton trade coming this off-season.

I don't think we have to do anything but I think it would be smart to trade him. There will be cheaper backup options available I would think, and also if we are assuming he will be a backup moving forward his trade value is going to be highest now coming off a season where he was essentially a starter and put up good numbers. I think he's going to want to be a starter and won't be happy here playing second fiddle personally. Edmonton could be a good partner-we could possibly trade Elliott, Gunnarsson, Berglund, for someone and Scrivens with them retaining part of Scrivens cap hit. A trade with Edmonton might make sense. Buffalo maybe too.

IMO, it's still way too early to even bother thinking of "what to do with Elliott". For all we know, Ells might regain the net in a later round and be great. We can't predict the future.

In the event Allen really grabs hold of the starter's role though, I would still likely want to keep Ells...as long as he was up for it. If Ells really wanted to be a starter and wouldn't be happy in a backup role, then I look to trade him and bring in a vet backup to replace him. Binnington is doing well for the Wolves but I wouldn't be comfortable with a super young tandem like Allen-Binnington...at least not next season.

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

Allen is out of his entry level deal this year. He's on his first RFA contract now.

I think that if Allen stays the starter, then Ells will want out of here. He can start for a lot of teams, and be very good for a team that's not so hot and cold defensively as the Blues.

I think that even if Allen goes into next year as the number 1, Elliott sticks around and gets a lot of work. Even if Allen is great and has a deep, shut down run in the playoffs (knock on wood), I don't think they're going to want to give him more than 50-55 starts next year. This staff seems to like to keep both goalies sharp.

Dave's a mess wrote:I think that even if Allen goes into next year as the number 1, Elliott sticks around and gets a lot of work. Even if Allen is great and has a deep, shut down run in the playoffs (knock on wood), I don't think they're going to want to give him more than 50-55 starts next year. This staff seems to like to keep both goalies sharp.

I don't know that the staff fully wants a time share just as much as they haven't felt they had a goalie situation that didn't warrant the time share. I believe when Miller was brought in he played pretty much every game.

I think they would be okay with Allen taking on 60-65 starts if he continues to play like a true #1.

wizard pork sword wrote:

Dave's a mess wrote:I think that even if Allen goes into next year as the number 1, Elliott sticks around and gets a lot of work. Even if Allen is great and has a deep, shut down run in the playoffs (knock on wood), I don't think they're going to want to give him more than 50-55 starts next year. This staff seems to like to keep both goalies sharp.

I don't know that the staff fully wants a time share just as much as they haven't felt they had a goalie situation that didn't warrant the time share. I believe when Miller was brought in he played pretty much every game.

I think they would be okay with Allen taking on 60-65 starts if he continues to play like a true #1.

That's a good point, but I wonder if part of the reasoning with Miller was giving him time to get used to playing behind a new team without a ton of time left in the season. Either way seeing Allen play 60-65 would likely mean he took the job and ran with it, which would be a great for the team.

STL fan in IA wrote:IMO, it's still way too early to even bother thinking of "what to do with Elliott". For all we know, Ells might regain the net in a later round and be great. We can't predict the future.

In the event Allen really grabs hold of the starter's role though, I would still likely want to keep Ells...as long as he was up for it. If Ells really wanted to be a starter and wouldn't be happy in a backup role, then I look to trade him and bring in a vet backup to replace him. Binnington is doing well for the Wolves but I wouldn't be comfortable with a super young tandem like Allen-Binnington...at least not next season.

I agree with this. For all we know, Allen or Els or both could win us a cup this year!

Battra wrote:

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

Allen is out of his entry level deal this year. He's on his first RFA contract now.

Really? Hmmm.

d--train wrote:

Battra wrote:

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

Allen is out of his entry level deal this year. He's on his first RFA contract now.

Really? Hmmm.

This is correct. He is in the final year of his 2nd deal this year, which was a 2-year deal with the first year being 2-way. He will be an RFA again this summer and will likely get another bridge deal since his ELC and his first bridge deal were primarily in the AHL. The only way I see him getting an extension for big money that buys some of his UFA years is if Army meets with him following "the Market Street Parade."

I'd trade him in the offseason. He really doesn't seem happy with a backup role so get what we can for him and sign a cheaper backup option. IMO.

MissouriMook wrote:

d--train wrote:

Battra wrote:
Allen is out of his entry level deal this year. He's on his first RFA contract now.

Really? Hmmm.

This is correct. He is in the final year of his 2nd deal this year, which was a 2-year deal with the first year being 2-way. He will be an RFA again this summer and will likely get another bridge deal since his ELC and his first bridge deal were primarily in the AHL. The only way I see him getting an extension for big money that buys some of his UFA years is if Army meets with him following "the Market Street Parade."

I know. I was just being a smart ass. I responded to WPS right after I posted the first one.

d--train wrote:To me it's the perfect scenario. Young cheap goalie on his entry level deal with an inexpensive known quality backup.

My thoughts exactly. Let's look at this from Brian Elliott's perspective. He's under contract for two more years at 2.5M per season. If I'm Elliott would I want to get traded to a bottom feeder looking for a starter, knowing full well that I've been given numerous opportunities in my career to take the starter's job and hold it and never have been able to.

Or,

Do I stay with a Cup contending team for those seasons and get about 25 starts a season and a real shot at getting my name on the Cup.

Remember the money is the same no matter where he goes. Good backup goalies aren't exactly an expensive commodity and neither are borderline starters.

I know where I would like to play if I was in his skates.

Wow, a civil, honest, intelligent and insightful discussion about the goalies. I don't think we are in Kansas anymore, Toto.

[youtube][/youtube]

Rink Rat wrote:Wow, a civil, honest, intelligent and insightful discussion about the goalies. I don't think we are in Kansas anymore, Toto.

Even Kansas is better than the shit-hole you are vaguely comparing this forum to.