If yu prepare yourself in the right way during the offseason, and continue to take care of yourself. It is less likely you will get an injury.
I guess that what he means.
That assumes that Fasth doesn't take care of himself already.
Some people are just more vulnerable to injuries. That's just a fact of life. I'm not sure motivation is really a consideration here. Fasth came to the NHL motivated to prove himself. That didn't stop him from being injured. Repeatedly. Is a contract year really going to change anything?
I'm not going to be comfortable with Fasth until he proves he can stay healthy. It doesn't matter if it's a contract year, or if he tries really, really hard to stay healthy. If he can't stay healthy, it just won't matter. Which is the problem... without Hiller we have Andersen, who is still a question mark given the sample size. We have Gibson, who doesn't have an NHL game under his belt. And we have Fasth, who hasn't been able to stay healthy. That's a big risk for a playoff team.
__________________ "Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice" -- Polonius
On Sojurns point, I'm sure Dipierto has wanted and tried to stay healthy. He is just injury prone. As of right now, I'd say Fasth is injury prone. Maybe not to the extent do Dipietro but injury prone none the less.
Andersen has done well, very well in fact so far. But i'd keep Hiller if possible.Just look at what happened to Steve Mason.
I woudn't worry about potential Mason-parallels. Andersen is older and has a lot more pro experience than Mason had after his Calder. And Mason didn't just become bad. His Calder year, he had Ken Hitchcock's system around him working - the system that got Brian Elliott to a .930+ save-percentage the season before last. He was solid then, but really only that. After that, the Jackets had some of the worst defensive units assembled over the past decade. That was the real problem for Mason, not the quick ascend. He wasn't suddenly playing that much worse, he was getting little help and he eventually lost confidence and then his play actually deteriorated a bit. But that kind of thing can and does happen to goaltenders of many ages, not just the young ones.
The focus with Andersen shouldn't be a Mason-effect, it should be a close eye on how well Andersen is actually playing. Which is very solid, but he has been getting really good help from the team, and rarely had to stand on his head. He's a very solid goalie, plays his size very well. He's obviously a tremendous puck-handler (which is just a treat to see), and his positioning for the first shot is fine, just like his rebound control. He isn't the most technically refined goalie on his skates, though, and ends up out of position a bit more often than your average goalie on certain plays. But from what I saw I was pretty impressed with his reads, which minimized those effects.
Personally, I do not worry about him being some sort of mirage. He has a certain skillset that won't be lost. If we can help him with sound defensive play like so far (or at least reasonably close to that), he won't fall apart for much more than the usual phases young goalies go through.