- Sep 28, 2014
- 76,856
- 123,518
There isn’t a single player who was taken who couldn’t have been protected if they were vital to their team. Every player exposed was judged to be more expendable than his peers on that team by their GM. Clearly the teams didn’t think the player was indispensable, otherwise someone else would have been exposed.
In other words, every skater exposed was judged to not be one of the three best defensemen or 7 best forwards (unless there was a NMC complication).
You don’t have to be happy a player was picked to judge him advance expendable... it just means that the player wasn’t vital to the team.
For example, if for some odd reason we somehow had to lose one of Couturier, Patrick, or Laughton, I’d choose Laughton but I wouldn’t be happy about it. I just judge him to be expendable compared to the other options.
We are having a semantics argument and those are a waste of time so im out lol