Tnuoc Alucard
🇨🇦🔑🧲✈️🎲🥅🎱🍟🥨🌗
- Sep 23, 2015
- 8,115
- 1,930
If the hypothesis is we decided in Feb to trade him and the proof you offer to rebut it is "what if he accepted the offer, we'd be stuck with him", you can't turn around and say the offer would have had a retro-active NMC when somebody points out the obvious, that we'd trade his with a contract, because had we decided that trading him was our play, the offer we made certainly would not have included the retro NMC.
Is it possible that Dorion and company decided to rebuild in Feb, but took until after the deadline to decide that a key part of that rebuild would be trading Karlsson, sure. That's pretty much an admission that Dorion is either negligent in his job, or incompetent, soI suppose it's possible.
YES, that's what I've been saying.
PD has stated that they decided in Feb, to do the rebuild. He clarified that yesterday on TSN 1200, as some people who were calling in ( and some people here) were misquoting him and saying that he decided in Feb to trade EK65.
This is what I've been trying to get across today ........ but some people just say "well he was lying" I suspect to save face, and keep their narrative alive.
So I challenged that (false) logic, and asked then why did they not trade him at the peak of his value to the teams that were interested at the deadline ..... no one has been able to answer that, and prove that the plan was hatched, in Feb, to trade EK65, but to wait until yesterday to pull the trigger, when value (in a trade) was much much lower.