Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
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.
|
Great, now use your finely tuned analytical skills to evaluate how the word “not” applies to the word “could”.
I asked a yes/no question.
“Could Yzerman have secured him for nothing (no assets) or not?
You replied, not.
Followed up with some rambling disconnected rationalizations to the question.
Yzerman obviously did the Oilers a favour and it’s nonsense to think he didn’t.