Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreal
You understand the meaning of the word “could” right?
You literally contradicted yourself. I didn’t say anything about the players leverage. Detroit wanted certainty and taking on Yamamoto’s baggage proved that they value the player, while retaining their rights.
It doesn’t change the fact that they COULD have had the same player & paid upwards of $400,000 more per season and been at the same place without helping the Oilers.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
|
Yes, I know what words mean, thanks Merriam.
You understand there’s value in changing something from a possibility, or a “could,” to something that can actually be controlled, right? They “could” have had Kostin for the same price, they also “could” have lost out on him entirely, and they “could” have had to sign him for even more than his contract + Yamamoto. They decided the value of avoiding the less desirable “could” situations and paid that value.
Let me know if you still struggle with it and I’ll be happy to explain it again.