The point is that you are arguing that everything has the same impact to everything.

The point was that you argued win % is irrelevant and shouldn't be used to judge a goalie.

My point is that SV% and GAA are also impacted by many other on ice actions that are not entirely within the goalies control.

Think about systems of play, quality of team mates, defensive breakdowns.

Both the stats you mention consider every shot to be equal and that's bullshit. There are dangerous shots and there are routine saves. If you want to argue that stat's 'even out' over time, then the same principle should apply to wins. A goalie is instrumental in a win and I think it is a relevant stat to assess their performance. It's not perfect, and I didn't say it was, I just said GAA and SV% are also flawed and I don't take them as be all end all.

See it seems you cherry pick context left and right. After this I'm done with you because you hunt doom and gloom and refuse to accept that.

It's easy to criticize. This is a truism of life. Anyone can go online and find evidence that supports their point of view. I'm just asking you to internally reflect, not immediately find something contrary.

Now you say that Lack is one of the youngest starters, I show you 12+ other younger goalies that are already starters in this league, and you disregard that.

You say Lack pays for training out of his own pocket, as if that is unusual and you are an expert on the other 60+ goalies training regimens. How do you expect me to believe you are an expert on offseason goalie routines? You obviously follow Lack on twitter, see a few pics of him in gear in the offseason and think he's a fucking hero?

You say Markstrom bounced between the NHL and AHL, his "whole professional career", which started at 20 years old, and this means he's worse than Lack. No regard for the fact Markstrom was mismanaged in FLA, hasn't had a goalie coach until now, or was able to break into the professional leagues younger than Lack. (break in age has been used by you several times before to disregard other player, but it conveniently doesn't fit your narrative here, so it's irrelevant?)

We've gone way past the point here: You're looking for an argument and not really trying to understand that your stats of choice are flawed by the same measure that mine are. That's fine, but I have a real job and don't have time to argue with children.