Let me see if I understand this logic coming from the majority of you guys. Marky comes back to Utica to get some playing time in order to get sharp once again. Can't have him playing rusty.
Jokie who was rusty and was thrust back into action as such, when Marky was recalled, struggled his first couple of starts. He is now back in last year's excellent starter form (he was first star and played fantastic in their 2-1 OT loss in Chicago Wednesday) and now he goes up to Vancouver and sits for ever how many games.
Marky gets it back together and returns to Vancouver and Jokie goes back to Utica at the crungh time pre-playoffs to start again for the Comets covered in rust once again. In all of this Lack just keeps playing. How exactly does that work out to the best for the Comets? They get a rusty Marky, lacking in confidence according to all I read, lose a playing well Jokie, then lose Marky when he is good again, and get a rusted over Jokie in return once again.
So in short, Vancouver loses nothing while riding Lack and the Comets go down the road during the toughest part of their season riding two goalies who are trying to regain their game form for one of the weakest scoring teams in the AHL.
The smarter path here is to make a decision on who they want. Keep him and give him a start or two until Miller gets back. Leave the other guy in Utica and let the team ride him at his best just like Vancouver rides Lack. That gives both teams the best chance to finish the best they can. Both teams make the playoffs and take their chances going forward with their best chance between the pipes. Seems like sound managerial franchise logic to me.