The never ending saga of the Flyers goaltending

[FD19372]

Continuing the Flyers time honored tradition of goaltending, we have another tandem of goaltenders who are average at best, and won't steal a game for us in all likelihood, when it matters. In a somewhat interesting article, Sam Donnellon contends that we don't need a franchise goalie. I think we need to find somehow, some way to sign one. If Hextall brings one in, and he fails, he can at least say he swung and missed. If it's not priority one, it's 1A. We NEED a franchise goalie. The Flyer way since 1975 has not worked. Donnellon uses Tim Thomas and Chris Osgood as examples. To me, however, Thomas was the MAIN reason Boston won the Cup in 2011, so his example is not valid in my estimation. http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20170515_A_No__1_goalie_isn_t_necessary_for_a_Stanley_Cup_run___Sam_Donnellon.html

 

 

[King Knut]

3 hours ago, FD19372 said:

Continuing the Flyers time honored tradition of goaltending, we have another tandem of goaltenders who are average at best, and won't steal a game for us in all likelihood, when it matters. In a somewhat interesting article, Sam Donnellon contends that we don't need a franchise goalie. I think we need to find somehow, some way to sign one. If Hextall brings one in, and he fails, he can at least say he swung and missed. If it's not priority one, it's 1A. We NEED a franchise goalie. The Flyer way since 1975 has not worked. Donnellon uses Tim Thomas and Chris Osgood as examples. To me, however, Thomas was the MAIN reason Boston won the Cup in 2011, so his example is not valid in my estimation. http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20170515_A_No__1_goalie_isn_t_necessary_for_a_Stanley_Cup_run___Sam_Donnellon.html

 

 

This team has 2 potential franchise goalies in the system.  Felix Sandstrom and Carter Hart are amazingly highly regarded.  

 

I don't know that the Flyers need a Franchise goalie.  I believe they would have won the cup in 2010 with an uninjured mediocre goalie. 

Sorry had to hit send before I was ready.  Adding now....

 

In the past 10 years, The Franchise Goalie Model hasn't worked for Tampa, the Rangers, The Canadiens, The Canucks, and last year the Penguins proved that it's unnecessary.

 

The Kings won two with Quick.  The Blackhawks won 3, but I wouldn't call Crawford a necessity to any of them and Niemi won the first (possibly because we were icing an injured Leighton and Injured Boucher) We'll see if the Predators can add anything to the other side this year with Rinne.

 

You need a goalie who can step it up when needed, but if you put all your eggs in one basket, you're going to be in trouble.  

 

But if Carter Hart is the franchise goalie of the next ten years, we won't know for 3 probably.

In the mean time, I do not think it makes a lick of sense to go after a "franchise" goalie now.  Mostly because he will cost too much and the Flyers would have to trade for him because no one in the UFA market could be considered that guy.

 

They need an NHL caliber decent goalie for the next 3 years.  In that time, it's likely the long term guy will have emerged.  

 

 

[AJgoal]

Let's start with, how does one define a franchise goalie?

 

From there, we can identify what goalies are franchise goalies.

 

Then we can look at what it would cost to acquire one, and move on.

 

The "Franchise goalie" is something that teams have to luck into, either through the draft or a trade for a reclamation project that bounces back, or a prospect that starts to tear it up. They're not something you're going to just be able to go out and get a known quantity. Not without completely gutting other parts of your team. Because the teams that have them won't part with them. So yeah, you make do with Mason (Who has been a good goalie for the majority of his Flyers career), or Neuvirth, or Elliot, or whomever until you develop one of your own. Hopefully, like Hart or Sandstrom.

[King Knut]

16 hours ago, AJgoal said:

Let's start with, how does one define a franchise goalie?

 

From there, we can identify what goalies are franchise goalies.

 

Then we can look at what it would cost to acquire one, and move on.

 

The "Franchise goalie" is something that teams have to luck into, either through the draft or a trade for a reclamation project that bounces back, or a prospect that starts to tear it up. They're not something you're going to just be able to go out and get a known quantity. Not without completely gutting other parts of your team. Because the teams that have them won't part with them. So yeah, you make do with Mason (Who has been a good goalie for the majority of his Flyers career), or Neuvirth, or Elliot, or whomever until you develop one of your own. Hopefully, like Hart or Sandstrom.

 

I assume by his definition there are anywhere from 3-4 Franchise goalies in the league at any given time.  I agree with you about Mason and about Franchise goalies.  Of which in this league... Maybe Lundqvist, Rinne, Price and Quick right now?  Schneider seems to be emerging as one in NJ, it's just that NJ has been terrible the duration of his time there so just like Quick at this point, what's a franchise goalie matter if your team is terrible?  

 

HOWEVER, I will add that the "Flyer way since 1975 has not worked" is a confusing statement.  Bernie Parent was an established talent that the Flyers traded, then re-acquired.  It was kind of a cluster, but they got him back in the end and he was their goalie until 1979. But he was really only STELLAR in that return for 2 years or so.  I guess he means that Stephenson took the reigns over a period of years that began in 1975 hen Bernie needed career threatening surgery?  

 

I get what he's saying as the Franchise goalie hasn't seemed like a commitment since Hextall (though they had one who died tragically in between)  BUT As far as Franchise goalies go, Steve Mason is #3 on the Flyers all time wins list.  #3.  Behind Bernie at #2 and Hextall at #1.  He's third in games played and third in Minutes played.

Mason is also #2 on the Flyers all time Save% ranking (behind only Roman, which kinda shows the flaws in that particular stat).

His GAA is under 2.50 and good enough for the top ten.

The only thing Mason doesn't have is playoff success, and frankly, he's been on the flyers for 5 pretty crappy years that were crappy for reasons well beyond his talent.  

 

Like it or not, Steve Mason is by most objective points of view, the third leading "Franchise" goalie the Flyers have ever had.  

 

But like I said, I think what he means is more of a generational goalie.  He wants Brodeur or Roy.  The problem is, there's only ever one Brodeur or Roy caliber guy in the league at a time, if the league is lucky.  

 

If I had to point to Hextall's biggest mistake as GM so far it was brokering that disaster between Berube, Mason and Reese.  Hextall sided with the head coach even though he knew he was going to fire him.

 

Anyway, I have no problems with Mason as our goalie.  I wish Reese was still our goalie coach if Mason was going to come back.  The problem with Mason isn't he softees (we focus on that too much in Philly, every goalie on every team has goals 'he wishes he had back') I've seen Lundqvist give up more than a few.  Lundqvist is better than Mason when he's on, clearly... but he's just as bad when he's off.  He's just off less frequently and he's an edge better when he's on.  Remember two years ago, Mason more or less outplayed Lundqvist in the first round.  The problem was the Flyers had dug into a hole before he came back from injury (because the Penguins (I believe intentionally) ran into him in a pointless game at the end of the season).

 

The problem with Mason is that Mason is good enough to want 4 years or more on a contract of $5million per.  And some team will probably give it to him.  Carolina gave Darling over $4 million for 4 years and Darling has never started more than 27 games in a season and he's the same age as Mason.  Steve Mason will get a good contract.  Most likely from the Flames or Sabres or Jets maybe.  Or hell, maybe even the Golden Knights.  

 

That much money invested for that long just doesn't make sense for the Flyers, right?  It would be different if they didn't have anything in the pipeline, but they've got some magic beans growing in the soil.  Hart may even become the kind of goalie Ron Burgundy is talking about up there) who knows?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Howie58]

Two years ago I posted that Mason's stats were similar to Barrasso and Howard. Supporting cast matters. I think one of the youngins pans out and his supporting youngins grow in tandem.

[King Knut]

20 hours ago, Howie58 said:

Two years ago I posted that Mason's stats were similar to Barrasso and Howard. Supporting cast matters. I think one of the youngins pans out and his supporting youngins grow in tandem.

 

So you think they resign Mason?

[Howie58]

16 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

So you think they resign Mason?

K-Squared, I think he rubs them the wrong way, but I could be wrong.  Maybe the cold shoulder has been a bargaining technique. But my reckoning is something (maybe deflating goals or vocal critique of team) has put him in the dog house. 

 

We shall see.  

[King Knut]

8 minutes ago, Howie58 said:

K-Squared, I think he rubs them the wrong way, but I could be wrong.  Maybe the cold shoulder has been a bargaining technique. But my reckoning is something (maybe deflating goals or vocal critique of team) has put him in the dog house. 

 

We shall see.  

 

Well I know he was vocal about not wanting to be part of a tandem anymore (and frankly, I'm not sure anyone could look at last season and think that).

 

The thing is, he has to know if he was offered a contract when Neuwirth was, that would just have meant he would have been exposed in the Vegas draft as well or instead.  He and his agent have to at least comprehend that signing then would have taken all control of where he ended up out of everyone's hands.  This was definitely the best course of action for the Flyers and for Steve Mason, no matter what happens or where he ends up.  

 

I think at best Hextall has a under the table deal in place with McPhee.  At worst Hextall just didn't want to be racing around competing with the rest of the league to sign a goalie JUST in order to expose him.  

 

No one who thinks about it for more than a split second can really think signing Neuwirth then meant the Flyers had a preference for him.  He got the deal he got most likely because Neuwirth and his agent both knew the same thing and they had Hextall over a LITTLE bit of a barrel.  "You want me to sign now, essentially because you don't care if someone takes me. You're signing me because you don't like me as much.  Fine.  It'll cost you."  It was Neuwirth's best play for a good contract.  He wasn't going to make it on the open market.  His only negotiating stance was, "I'm the  guy you want just because you don't want him" and he used it.  

 

Good for him.  Who cares?  Grow up Mason.  

[Howie58]

Mason is at a sticky point.  At times he has great numbers.  But there are bad stretches.  And while he has never been with a good team, you have to think GM's may not appreciate his limited and poor playoff experience at this juncture of the career. So it is messy.  He is more than a backup.  But his starting credentials aren't stellar.  He can handle 50+ games...but there are bad stretches.  He is a what-if, what now problem child.

 

[radoran]

"bad stretches" from Mason while Rinne is a "franchise goalie"

 

Here's Pekka Rinne from February of this season

Feb 11 - Florida - 8.61 GAA, .750 SV%, pulled
Feb 12 - Dallas - 3.00/.857

Feb 18 - Minnesota - 4.06/.875

Feb 21 - Calgary - 9.52/.692 pulled

Feb 23 - Colorado - 2.00/.909

Feb 26 - Edmonton - 4.00/.875

Feb 28 - Buffalo - 3.82/.875

 

Something of a testament to the Predators that they went 4-3 over that stretch. Rinne put up 3.16/.888 in February.

 

But, wait, there's more. From December of this season:

 

10 games with two in which he had a SV% over .900. (One of them, you guessed it, against the Flyers). He was 3-5-2, 3.44/.875 in December.

 

Every goalie has "bad stretches" - every. goalie.

 

Point being, if a "bad stretch" makes you lose faith in a goalie, you're never going to have faith in a goalie.

[Howie58]

Rad:

 

Rinne may have had a sub-par year for which he is making amends.  But I think he has been something of a pillar for "Smashville."  And in these playoffs--he and Anderson are putting on a clinic.  Mason rates as a B+/A- goalie.  See below:

 

I don't think this has changed much from a  year back.  Mason showed enormous promise as a rookie, rotted out to some extent with a floundering franchise, and had something of a rebirth with us...and at time he has been stellar.  But for some reason, I think he will be viewed as an inconsistent head case.  

[King Knut]

18 hours ago, radoran said:

"bad stretches" from Mason while Rinne is a "franchise goalie"

 

Here's Pekka Rinne from February of this season

Feb 11 - Florida - 8.61 GAA, .750 SV%, pulled
Feb 12 - Dallas - 3.00/.857

Feb 18 - Minnesota - 4.06/.875

Feb 21 - Calgary - 9.52/.692 pulled

Feb 23 - Colorado - 2.00/.909

Feb 26 - Edmonton - 4.00/.875

Feb 28 - Buffalo - 3.82/.875

 

Something of a testament to the Predators that they went 4-3 over that stretch. Rinne put up 3.16/.888 in February.

 

But, wait, there's more. From December of this season:

 

10 games with two in which he had a SV% over .900. (One of them, you guessed it, against the Flyers). He was 3-5-2, 3.44/.875 in December.

 

Every goalie has "bad stretches" - every. goalie.

 

Point being, if a "bad stretch" makes you lose faith in a goalie, you're never going to have faith in a goalie.

 

Wow.  great numbers.  And I totally agree.  

 

I don't mind or hate mason or think he's somehow incompetent.   From my point of view, I just think he has earned a longer term deal than it necessarily makes sense for the Flyers to give him.  But if they are (and it is safer) and it's between Mason and Bernier, I'd totally go with Mason.

 

If there is a rift (which I still kinda doubt), What do people think of Anders Nilsson for a bridge term deal?  Dude's numbers on an atrocious team were phenomenal.  

[radoran]

1 minute ago, King Knut said:

I don't mind or hate mason or think he's somehow incompetent.   From my point of view, I just think he has earned a longer term deal than it necessarily makes sense for the Flyers to give him.  But if they are (and it is safer) and it's between Mason and Bernier, I'd totally go with Mason.

 

I get not signing him (yet). I get the idea that he may "want too much" or "too long" for the Flyers' purposes.

 

But the bird in hand is always worth more than two in the bush. There's no guarantee any of the highly touted goalie prospects pan out (I still remember when Boucher/Oueletter/Pelletier were the "highly touted goalie prospects" and we know how that went*).

 

The facts of the situation are that there simply isn't an obvious upgrade from Mason on the free agent market. If they can reach an accord with Mason on a mid-term deal (even something like 4Y, $20M), there would be worse things that could have happened. Even if one of the HTGP does come in and steal the crease, their salary is not likely to break the cap and Mason is still likely to have some value as a trade chip (especially if the contract's actual pay decreases over time).

 

I don't really expect Mason back (it wouldn't shock me) - but I really don't see Bernier or Miller or Nilsson (or Elliott, Johnson, etc.) as any sort of "upgrade" and could even be a significant step backwards.

 

 

 

* Boucher had flashes but was never really "the guy" if you're talking about legit "franchise keeper"

[OccamsRazor]

26 minutes ago, King Knut said:

Mason and Bernier, I'd totally go with Mason.

 

Yes if it comes down to these two i go with Mason.

[OccamsRazor]

9 minutes ago, radoran said:

Boucher/Oueletter/Pelletier

 

 

Nothing like what the Flyers have now the only similarity is they all wear blockers....that is it. But i get what you're saying it is potential.

 

I think the Flyers go another route besides Bernier or Mason.

[OccamsRazor]

11 minutes ago, radoran said:

even something like 4Y, $20M

 

No.

[King Knut]

6 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I get not signing him (yet). I get the idea that he may "want too much" or "too long" for the Flyers' purposes.

 

But the bird in hand is always worth more than two in the bush. There's no guarantee any of the highly touted goalie prospects pan out (I still remember when Boucher/Oueletter/Pelletier were the "highly touted goalie prospects" and we know how that went*).

 

The facts of the situation are that there simply isn't an obvious upgrade from Mason on the free agent market. If they can reach an accord with Mason on a mid-term deal (even something like 4Y, $20M), there would be worse things that could have happened. Even if one of the HTGP does come in and steal the crease, their salary is not likely to break the cap and Mason is still likely to have some value as a trade chip (especially if the contract's actual pay decreases over time).

 

I don't really expect Mason back (it wouldn't shock me) - but I really don't see Bernier or Miller or Nilsson (or Elliott, Johnson, etc.) as any sort of "upgrade" and could even be a significant step backwards.

 

 

 

* Boucher had flashes but was never really "the guy" if you're talking about legit "franchise keeper"

 

I don't disagree with any of that.  I think if they don't sign Mason, it would be an obvious and intentional temporary downgrade. No one on the market is particularly "better" than Mason.  

 

I think the kind of deal you're describing is probably very likely.  I also think it's quite possible Calgary or someone takes a big swing at him too (though maybe they go Bernier route) just because the might feel like they're more solidly in their window of opportunity. 

 

Long story short, I think mason isn't signed because of the Vegas draft and the Flyers don't HAVE to.  They have the opportunity to protect Stolarz AND still sign Mason on 7/1 not needing to protect or expose him.  However, I also think it's not idea of the Flyers (nothing ever is) or for Mason who might get a bigger offer elsewhere.  I have no problems with him resigning here. $5 million per seems like a bit much.  certainly for 4 years.  For more than 3  years, I'd expect him to hoover around the same salary. Maybe he takes more money for a shorter duration.

 

The thing I meant about Boucher was that he came up through the system, was grown here and took over the starting job and looked fantastic as a rookie.   I may never forgive Clarke and Barber for the Cechmanek problem.  Boosh got hurt and the on ice circus act that was Roman took over.  He made amazing saves and lots of them, but the style and approach to making them stifled the team and killed any sort of transition.  One simple shot turned into 5 crazy rebounds and a lot of chaos.  Roman was amazing at making those saves, but a different goalie would have swallowed up the rebound or directed it to the corners where  his D men could control (the Neilson approach perfected by Beezer and learned by Boohs).  Boosh gave up easier goals once in a while, but Roman made routine saves extremely difficult and it resulted in more chaos in his own end and it destroyed the transition.

 

Boosh remained inconsistent in Phoenix, but set NHL records at the same time.  Maybe remaining in Philly under Reggie wouldn't have helped him even out, but when you think about how that team couldn't get out of their own zone in the playoffs from 2001-2003 and when you think about how they almost made the finals in 2004 with ROBERT FRIGGIN' ESCHE (once they finally jettisoned Cechmanek)... yeah I think keeping Boosh and letting him mature behind that team would have been the way to go.

 

And it might have happened, but Boosh opened his yapper about Hitchcock and Cechmanek and Clarke and Snider would have none of that.

 

 

 

 

 

[King Knut]

10 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Nothing like what the Flyers have now the only similarity is they all wear blockers....that is it. But i get what you're saying it is potential.

 

I think the Flyers go another route besides Bernier or Mason.

 

Boucher was quite good as a rookie and later for Phoenix (if inconsistently so once shipped there).  He was the Matt Murray of 2000, except Lindros came back, almost died on the ice and the rest is history.   

 

We have no idea what we really have in Sandstrom and Hart, but they certainly look like extremely strong pedigree.  Boucher wasn't rated like that, but he was easily on a different tier than Stolarz, Lyon or Madsen.  

 

Which to be fair, Stolarz has only done well in the NHL.  Limited exposure as it is, he has only done quite well.

[radoran]

10 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

Nothing like what the Flyers have now the only similarity is they all wear blockers....that is it. But i get what you're saying it is potential.

 

I think the Flyers go another route besides Bernier or Mason.

 

I'm saying that at the time people were very high on those three as the future of the franchise. Boucher and Ouelette were first round picks and Pelletier was #30 overall. They were all picked higher than any of the current Highly Touted Goalie Prospects.

 

Pelletier and Ouelette played a combined 19 NHL games. And we all know the Boucher Saga.

 

10 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

I think the Flyers go another route besides Bernier or Mason.

 

I'm not at all against "another route" as a concept. It's the execution of it that concerns me.

 

3 minutes ago, King Knut said:

I may never forgive Clarke and Barber for the Cechmanek problem.  Boosh got hurt and the on ice circus act that was Roman took over. 

 

That era/team had a library of issues that were conveniently arranged into volumes. Cechmanek was one of them, but hardly the most important. It wasn't Cechmanek's 1.85/.936 that cost them the Ottawa series in 01-02 - it was the team scoring two goals.

 

We're not going to re-litigate that

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

That era/team had a library of issues that were conveniently arranged into volumes. Cechmanek was one of them, but hardly the most important. It wasn't Cechmanek's 1.85/.936 that cost them the Ottawa series in 01-02 - it was the team scoring two goals.

 

We're not going to re-litigate that

 

Actually, I don't think re-litigating that issue is a terrible idea.  I hope the Flyers are.  Because to a certain degree because the patient seems to have the same symptoms now.  The Defense can't control the puck and so too many of the forwards have to come back and help out, this destroying their transition and limiting the offense to low percentage shot attempts from the perimeter.

 

However in 2001-2003 I believe the cause of the symptom was the defense's inability to get on the same page with Roman (and vice versa) and his inability to control a rebound or stay in his crease to make a save whereas in 2016-2017 I believe the problem is the Defense was easily ridden off the puck for rebounds and too slow getting too relatively easily controlled rebounds and a general inability to maintain basic coverage that results in higher quality shots than they should be giving up.

 

 

 

[King Knut]

10 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I'm saying that at the time people were very high on those three as the future of the franchise. Boucher and Ouelette were first round picks and Pelletier was #30 overall. They were all picked higher than any of the current Highly Touted Goalie Prospects.

 

Pelletier and Ouelette played a combined 19 NHL games. And we all know the Boucher Saga.

 

 

Sorry, should have addressed this previously.  but what the heck it's a different thought.  I see what you're saying.  Moving beyond the draft positions, Ouelette and Pelleteir's hype died down at that point.  Sandstrom and Hart's respective hypes have only thrived since being drafted.   

 

Again, maybe neither one turns into anything, afterall being a 2 x WHL goalie of the year isn't exactly a ticket to greatness, (just ask Chet Pickard who also won it twice in a row... right?  Chet who?)  but Cam Ward, Carey Price, Martin Jones, Josh Harding and the aforementioned Brian Boucher have all won it, so it's not nothing either.  We have reason to hope... which we did not when we were forced to shelf Jeff Hackett due to Vertigo and went all in on Martin Biron.  

 

 

[OccamsRazor]

24 minutes ago, King Knut said:

 

Actually, I don't think re-litigating that issue is a terrible idea.  I hope the Flyers are.  Because to a certain degree because the patient seems to have the same symptoms now.  The Defense can't control the puck and so too many of the forwards have to come back and help out, this destroying their transition and limiting the offense to low percentage shot attempts from the perimeter.

 

However in 2001-2003 I believe the cause of the symptom was the defense's inability to get on the same page with Roman (and vice versa) and his inability to control a rebound or stay in his crease to make a save whereas in 2016-2017 I believe the problem is the Defense was easily ridden off the puck for rebounds and too slow getting too relatively easily controlled rebounds and a general inability to maintain basic coverage that results in higher quality shots than they should be giving up.

 

 

 

 

 

Checkmaniac wasn't the problem and even i remember at the time i was on his side for calling out his team. He was unstable no arguements there but he did what he was suppose to do stop the puck. It was the rest of the team that was the issue.

[OccamsRazor]

35 minutes ago, radoran said:

I'm not at all against "another route" as a concept. It's the execution of it that concerns me.

 

 

The main reason i would be against it as a 4 year deal and Mason has already said he doesn't want no part of a tandem.

 

So what do you do 2 years into it when say he gets outplayed in camp by Hart (just for arguments sake) and is unseated now you have a goalie whom is a backup (no less an expensive one) and is a disgruntled employee.

 

Sure they can trade him and get fleeced because they would have no leverage for a 30 year old goalie who has lost his job and is under contract for 2 more year at 5 mill per..they would have to eat salary to get it done more like half.

 

No thanks. See that before....since they won't be a Cup contender next or the next i go the cheap patch work route for a goalie.

 

Might not be the popular way but it would be my choice!

[King Knut]

4 minutes ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

 

Checkmaniac wasn't the problem and even i remember at the time i was on his side for calling out his team. He was unstable no arguements there but he did what he was suppose to do stop the puck. It was the rest of the team that was the issue.

 

More or less the rest of THAT team went to game 7 of the ECF's the following year with Robert Esche.  Robert Esche.  

Roman was the problem.  And NOT because he couldn't stop the puck. He was amazing at stopping the puck.  But saying a goalie's job is to "Just stop the puck" is simplistic and inadequate.  If stopping the puck was all it were about the Flyers would have won 4 cups with Roman and 2 with Bryzgalov.  Both were very very good at stopping the puck.  

 

 

[King Knut]

1 minute ago, OccamsRazor said:

 

So what do you do 2 years into it when say he gets outplayed in camp by Hart (just for arguments sake) and is unseated now you have a goalie whom is a backup (no less an expensive one) and is a disgruntled employee.

 

Sure they can trade him and get fleeced because they would have no leverage for a 30 year old goalie who has lost his job and is under contract for 2 more year at 5 mill per..they would have to eat salary to get it done more like half.

 

No thanks. See that before....since they won't be a Cup contender next or the next i go the cheap patch work route for a goalie.

 

Might not be the popular way but it would be my choice!

 

You trade him, tell him to suck it up the way they made Beezer suck it up in 2000 when he got outplayed by Boosh, or you waive him.  

 

If he hasn't established himself as a viable and tradable #1 goalie in 2 years of being declared the #1 goalie outright then he can sit down on the bench and have a nice warm cup of shut the hell up and hopefully, maybe someday finally beat the damn devils.

 

(and he has been the #1 his entire time here, he just got hurt a couple of times and Neuvirth didn't stink horribly his first season here so we called Mason our 1A).