Earlier this summer, Calgary Flames GM Brad Treliving acquired Mike Smith in effort to solidify the team's goaltending and upgrade over what they had last season.
I'm not Smith's biggest fan but, despite lesser overall numbers, he's proven to be much better than Brian Elliott at stopping high-danger shots.
Over the last five seasons, Smith has stopped 85.1% of the high-danger looks he's faced at 5v5 while Elliott has stopped 82.1%. That's a sizable difference.
Some would argue high-danger save percentage is the most telling goaltending statistic in terms of overall talent. The logic is simple: it's very hard to stop high-end shooters from dangerous areas so, if you do it at a good rate, it's probably not a fluke.
For the sake of argument, let's say Smith and Elliott stop high-danger shots next season at the same rate they've averaged over the last five seasons.
Let's also assume the Flames, who allowed ~4.9 high-danger looks per game at 5v5 last season, are better defensively with the addition of Travis Hamonic and trim that down to, say, 4.7 per game.
If Smith/Elliott were to start 50 games and the Flames allowed 4.7 high-danger shots per, they'd face 235 in that span.
If their averages over the last five years held, Elliott would allow 42 high-danger goals while Smith would allow 35.
Seven goals may not seem like much, but it's no small difference.
This doesn't factor in low and medium danger shots, where Elliott has been better in recent years, but one would think it's easier/more likely a goaltender can make noticeable improvements stopping low-danger shots than shots of more difficulty.
If that's the case, perhaps the Flames made a reasonable bet with Smith.
Recent posts: The Flames shouldn't bring back Iginla