If Michkov refused to interview with us or gave an intentionally horrible interview, and gave all signs that he wouldn't play for us, how can some still be mad that we didn't draft him?
If [clearly false statement] is true, then I am correct.
The Habs met with him at least once, btw.
Not sure why it’s hard to accept the Habs didn’t like him and preferred Reinbacher. No dogging interviews or conniving to deceive or whatever conspiracy — the Habs preferred the other kid.
The conspiracy stuff is really pathetic at this point.
Rich, coming from you.
I'm not taking an L on anything, all I ever did was repeat the talking points that were coming out around Michkov around the draft and laid it out for everyone because the board was in hysterics over the idea we wouldn't take him.
We weren't going to take him and we didn't. Other teams also didn't take him for the same set of circumstances that were around the player.
I never once said he had bad character. Or he was a bad teammate. How would I know? All I ever said is that it there might be smoke to that due to the fact multiple teams passed on him, and SKA loaned him out, let him cut his contract early and had a plan in place to loan him out again if he didn't make the Flyers.
All of those points made it very odd that a KHL team with that level of control on a player like Michkov would do anything to not have him play for them. Now seeing how they are treating Demidov who didn't even have a vapor of character concerns around him at the draft, it pushes the narrative closer to SKA just being a maniacally weird and stupid organization.
I hope you read this over when you’re off your soapbox and see how many contractions you’ve put out.
Absent evidence, all of you come across as both crazy and hypocritical.
There’s absolutely no need for it anyway. The war is over — the draft is old news, you were right, you were 100% right the Habs didn’t pick Michkov despite how badly so many of us wanted him. You nailed it.
Will Smith was considered a legit 4OA and Reinbacher a legit 5OA. You got it right then and there.
Insisting TODAY that there were other reasons for those picks is a clear bit of post hoc bias. L. Take it and move on.