1) I didn't say he wasn't worth his contract
2) You using examples of times he didn't hit 30 or 40 pts doesn't really help your argument. Common sense says if he hasn't done it, through injury or other reasons, then he's not a lock.
Waoh you know what, i guess you really did win the argument. Your brain power is impeccable, congrats! Is that what you're looking for? Because it seems like it..
1 of your arguments is that you didn't say he's not worth his contract, yet you're literally replying to my post where the main point of it was his contract and his current production. So maybe the issue here is your reading comprehension, improving that would save you a lot of worthless/time wasting arguments in the future (unless that's what you're looking for?!?!). Nitpicking on small/useless details doesn't make you smart, it says something else about you
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/495f1/495f185fc1f2d2bd459ec9ded3ca2eb67b513d95" alt="laugh :laugh: :laugh:"
.
And if you REAAAAAAAAAAAAALLY wanna be nitpicky, in my main post i said he's "PRETTY MUCH" a lock to hit 30-40 pts, what does pretty much mean? If you can read between the lines it means i know he hasn't done that yet but you can PRETTY MUCH safely assume that it's attainable. It means I'm not willing to argue about dumb nitpicky semantics like you (because that's not the main point of my post), except if we get into a scenario like this of course
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/10d90/10d9034f00ff93d62711ca9ed1272c292dc0dd91" alt="Wink ;) ;)"
. Don't isolate my statements just to make nitpicky arguments, if you do that you'll miss the context buddy.
My main point is he's getting paid to produce 30 pts a year so he's already paid fair value.. so how can we be 7 pages in and have people argue that this isn't a good contract? It's just illogical, we're getting his upside for free. If you think he's gonna stay a 30 point player for the next 4 years then you can say it's an ok deal (not good or bad, but then the trade would be bad). I still wouldn't categorize the CONTRACT as a big gamble or anything.. that's all. The overarching point of my post is this thread is where it's at because HF gonna HF, arguments are made due to team/fan bias, not logic. Exhibit A: you arguing for the sake of arguing.