View Single Post
06-17-2013, 11:31 AM
Knublin' PPs
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 16,408
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by DrinkFightFlyers View Post
Stop-gaps can be bona fide starters. A stopgap, by definition is something that you know is temporary, as in, not a long term solution. Luongo is certainly a bona fide starter. But we all know that in reality the best case scenario is four years. That is a stopgap. We know he is not going to be the franchise goalie. He is going to be here for the last four years of his career, then we are going to be searching again for a starting goalie. I understand that turnover is a part of the game and that other teams go through the same thing, but that doesn't mean that their goalies aren't stopgaps. Just because a lot of teams have to deal with stopgap goalies on their way to a franchise guy doesn't mean they aren't stopgaps. I never said that this was an issue unique to Philadelphia.

Simply put: Luongo would be a stopgap on this team at this stage of his career. I have said from the beginning that this wouldn't necessarily be a bad idea. The only point I have been making is that if the Flyers want to see what they have in Mason, signing Luongo to a bigger and longer contract is not a good idea. If they want to move on from Mason and just go with Luongo, that is a different story, but basically they have to commit to one or the other. They can't say "We want to see what Mason can do as the starter" while signing a better goalie to a longer and bigger contract. This is the only point I am making.

So unless you have a franchise goaltender who spends his entire "x>4" year career with your team, then you have constantly rotating stop-gap goalies? Okay.

I deride your truth handling abilities
CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote