You keep on not getting it.
The first thing I read just now is you replying to Nils on him mentioning the fact that the Subban and Couture point you made is invalid because you're comparing Stepan to Subban right now as opposed to Subban when he signed that deal a year ago, before his breakout year and to Couture years ago before he solidified his reputation.
You ignored that entirely.
You said that he has his own opinion and you have your own.
The problem is that you keep on dismissing what's being said against your argument as opinion (or simply ignoring it). It's a matter of fact and logic. This isn't grade school. Opinions can be wrong and even more so, facts and logic is not mere matters of opinion.
You first ignore the comparable of Giroux and Stepan's point production in their respective first 3 years. Then you put forth a comparison between the playoff production of Couture and Stepan. You can't cherry pick logic.
Also, the reason why everyone is disagreeing with you is not because you're inherently wrong. It's mostly because you're being difficult with facetious remarks and facetious use of exclamation marks.
It's not a cop out to point out the lack of offensive production of a team that suffered from systematically stifled offensive production in the playoffs. There's validity to that. It's only a partial defense to Stepan's poor playoff performance but it's valid and worth considering which you obviously don't care for.
