He does make some good points, and he's definitely very creative, but the unyielding stubbornness in admitting he's wrong sometimes is outstanding.
Thanks for the otherwise kind comments.
As to the bold, let us remember that most of all discussions at the Boards are subjective, not objective in nature.
Usually boils down to opinion, so usually there is no definitive wrong to admit by you or me or anyone else.
If someone wants to push it, we can say that based on certain arguments it would arguably be more desirable to take less risk and deal from strength, paying for rental players from a surplus that existed because of an active policy of flipping and building higher and higher potential quality (which led to increases in actual quality), that such approach would be better than being inactive and just overpaying for the same rentals (due to lack of more currency).
That argument was on the floor. I went one way, and cited the Hawks as basis to make the point.
We agree to disagree, respectfully, and that is that.
That should cover everything except for when I said Kreider would soon be more valuable to us than Stepan, and some continue to disagree, as is their right.
