View Single Post
06-23-2014, 10:59 AM
Grave Before Shave
DrinkFightFlyers's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,976
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to DrinkFightFlyers
Originally Posted by Curufinwe View Post
By focusing on Mason's performance in his early 20s instead of the .920 SV% in 70 games he has as a Flyer, emphasizing the "doubts" around Stolarz' future when there are doubts around every goalie his age, and by criticizing the team for not having a goalie who's a "franchise player". Only one team in the league has a goalie who's their franchise player - New York.
It's not really focusing on his early 20s, it mentions that throughout his career he has been inconsistent and a question mark...which is 100% accurate. Even at times last year people worried that "the old Mason" was coming back. Does everything that happened prior to the trade get wiped clean because he played well last year (and for a handfull of games the year before)?

I'm not saying (and I don't think the blogger was saying) that Mason is not a capable starter, but that the future of the goalie situation in Philly remains somewhat unclear. Mason is the starter, no doubt. But it is certainly worth noting that aside from his most recent and his first season, he hasn't been all that great. The idea behind the article seems to be that at some point a goalie should be drafted because after Mason's contract ends we are again at a crossroads in goal. I don't think he was advocating for a goalie to be taken at 17, but I don't think anyone wold complain if a goalie is selected somewhere in the draft.

DrinkFightFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote