There’s no initiation needed. You either are good enough or you’re not. If you want to give a tiebreaker to a player with a very good career already in the NHL, I won’t even disagree, but if someone produces worse, doesn’t look as good, and is less talented than an NHL rookie, the rookie might be better. Rookies absolutely need to be in consideration, if they’re good enough.
As I said, not top three yet, in my opinion, but to not even list him and instead list the Rangers third goalie makes no sense.
If that's the case, you can argue Demko is better than him, because he displayed goaltending most goaltenders will never achieve in the NHL against the Knights [if sample size is irrelevant]. Merzlikins could be put in front of him as well for recently having a solid regular season.
If it's based on ability you still need to have Rask, Vasilevsky, Price, Gibson, Lehner, Hart, Markstrom, Bishop comfortably in front of him. Nothing he did in those 12 regular season games and one playoff loss has him in front of any of those goalies. Thats also assuming two time Vezina winner Bobrovsky does not bounce back. If two goalies look similar in ability, and one has played hundreds more games doing so, you always go with the goaltender who has experience.
Like I said, if his 12 games are valid, Demkos recent stint against the Knights should be considered, because on pure ability, it was some of the best goaltending I've ever seen.
If its based on what you've seen from Shesterkin you can argue he is currently a border line top-10 talent in goal. Even based on ability, you cannot realistically rank him top-3 or close to it, given the number of net minders who have the same or better ability over much larger samples.