Joe McGrath
Registered User
- Oct 29, 2009
- 18,174
- 38,292
Luke was trying to give Francis credit for signing Rask long term when we *all* expected a bridge deal. Nobody expected Rask to get six years, but RF gave it to him for no obvious reason. Luke has been very consistent with his criticism of RF giving out long-term deals and not maximizing his leverage in the CBA. He's also been willing to give credit when a signing looks good.
We all agreed the long-term deal for Rask looked good for a while, when Rask was playing well. Now, we all agree it doesn't look as good. All Luke is pointing out is that Francis took a risk when he signed Rask long term, that risk looked good for a while, but now clearly was a bad idea. Your bias against Luke is showing when you criticize him for saying the same things we're all saying.
The Rask contract was unnecessarily rich, looked good for a while despite that fact, but now is clear was a big mistake. Not exactly a hot take.
I probably should have just said, I agree with most of the article, especially Faulk as an “alleged”captain.