lancer247
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2007
- 4,781
- 888
Oh, sarcasm! Sure.
And, now you're misusing the term "strawman". It actually looked like you didn't know, because if you did know, this sentence wouldn't make much sense:
And then you say this:
You're acting like either (1) they were on the team at the same time and taking up both top 4 RD spots, so Ghosts ONLY option was 3rd pair, OR (2) the 2nd pair doesn't exist. I assumed the former was more likely than the latter.
Again, as I said in my last post, even if they wanted Niskanen or Ellis on the top pair and didn't think Ghost was even an option to play there (they were proven incorrect, but whatever), Ghost could still be a top 4 D by putting him on the 2nd pair. Problem solved.
i used the term perfectly but I won’t debate grammar on a sports chat board.
they could have done a lot of things but at the end of the day they did not believe ghost was an option in the top 4 and too expensive for bottom 2
We’ll see how it works out. Hopefully they are correct or lucky. Either way, I am deciding to give some credence to the fact that every GM passed on Ghost for free. We’ll see if they were all wrong. As i said I like ghost but I question whether a team can go deep with him in their top 4 for various reasons.