I still haven't heard a credible argument explaining "Why Miller and not Halak?"
Considering both are expensive UFAs (All three are UFAs, including Elliott), so technically that question is invalid, at least to me. After this season the only netminder we're left with on contract is Jake Allen and the front office has not been in any hurry to sign either Halak or Elliott which speaks louder than words.
But if we could choose one or the other with the cost being somewhere in the neighborhood of a pick:
* Miller is 15-22-3 with a .923 and 2.72 with 1,303 Saves and 108 GA
* Halak is 24-8-4 with a .915 and 2.26 with 885 Saves and 82 GA
That tells the tale.
What tale does it tell?
Halak has a better record and a lower GAA? Miller has a higher Save %?
Which metric is more accurate and can you call it apples and apples with the different teams that play in front of them?
Would Miller's GAA and record be better than Halak if Miller was in the 'note? If Miller has the same save percentage listed in your comparison and you apply it to the shots Halak has faced in 36 contests it's a 1.88 GAA - and I bet we win more of those games.
tl;dr - What are you trying to say with your numbers?
I deserve that. I didn't finish my thought, my bad. What I am saying:
Halak and Miller are about even money with ONE major difference.
Halak plays for the second BEST team in the league.
Miller plays for the WORST team in the league.
And yet they have comprable stats.
No one would blame Ryan Miller for deciding to give up and tank, yet he's rolling stats as good as the starter for the second best team in the NHL working with the worst.
There is a point where Halak doesn't have any excuses. Him and Ells have played this year like backups. Miller is a genuine starter.
I think the big question is, if price was not a concern and it was all even money, would Halak or Elliott still be here?
I'd have to say no. Neither of them being resigned says alot about the confidence of the Front Office. Had we a player in goal along the lines of a Pie or a Schwartz, you'd better believe the multi-year contract would have been signed months ago. It hasn't.
I think we have seen Halak's ceiling and I'm not going to knock the guy, but I don't think he's our solution.
Elliott's ceiling has been insane and if you hit him at the right time with the right circumstances and the right mental toughness, he could hit .940 again because he's hit it before and when he's in sync, you ain't stopping him. BUT...he's a backup at best because he's not reliable but he has been our rock at goal.
It's going to be interesting to see how this turns out either way. While after all is said and done that I'm against Miller due to concerns that it'll cost us too much of the team to have him, thus negating any positives and breaking even, I like how it seems that we may have the mental advantage as a great deal of posters are genuinely in arms about the idea of us getting Miller as they seem to think that if we do, the Cup is ours.
I don't know if I'd entirely buy that, but I like how it scares people. That might be the kind of get-in-your-head stuff that we need.