Quote:
Originally Posted by gunnner
but in general I dont agree with this "no risk" comment that gets tossed around on here when evaluating any and every possible signing.
|
IMO the "risk" is so low that objecting to the term borders on nitpickery. I don't have an issue with labeling something that's an extremely low risk as "no risk"... although I do find it annoying when people append to that declaration a "reward" level as "high".
These guys are no/low risk lottory tickets... if they wash out you shrug because it barely cost anything, if you get a serviceable NHL'er you consider yourself lucky, if you hit a Panarin sized jackpot you do the Meposian dance of joy.