It's not semantics. It is sheer stupidity. It is as stark a contradiction as you can find.


But that is not anything particularly unusual. Everybody contradicts themselves, everybody makes mistakes, especially in a casual board like this.

What sets the guy apart is that he will, approaching the age of 60, find it important enough to endlessly debate the indefensible behind an anonymous facade, hour after hour, day after day, instead of just saying aw shucks...

That is what makes one worry
- PT21

Hey I admit I could’ve been wrong. I said back then I didn’t see coots becoming more than maybe a 2c at best. I wanted him moved for a young goalie. I said coots would only top out as a 3c maybe average 2c.

He turned out a great 2c possibly a lower end 1c and moving him for a young goalie( bernier) was type goalie I gave as example almost certainly would’ve been wrong.


It’s not hard to admit when wrong. Except for mjl

Y’all do realize he’s not responsible for the Flyers signing Coots, right?
- Dkos

He is ABSOLUTELY responsible. He is Bill, who persuaded Black Francis's dad, who persuaded Bobby Clarke who persuaded Cliff Fletcher who persuaded his son.

Y’all do realize he’s not responsible for the Flyers signing Coots, right?
- Dkos

Just another example of his failed player assessments

Kinda like when he said Frost DIDN’T blow his coverage in OT, he just skated toward the puck carrier, leaving the goal scorer wide open

Because those are different things apparently 😂

Funny thing is you trade Coots for assets if youre doing a full tear down, something that the Flyers were never going to do.

I would have been all for it, on the other hand, signing him to that contract in order to keep a bonifide #1 center was a no brainer, unfortunately, he incurred a serious back injury. I dont care how cynical you are, you cant predict something like that. BUt in pure Flyers fashion, they didnt take that as an opportunity to tear down instead, Fletcher still thought he could build a "playoff team" and DB/Jonesy/Torts are in a "rebuild"

I love the I gottcha withhunt on semantics that is you two dopes Crusade against MJL....its hilarious

Funny thing is you trade Coots for assets if youre doing a full tear down, something that the Flyers were never going to do.

I would have been all for it, on the other hand, signing him to that contract in order to keep a bonifide #1 center was a no brainer, unfortunately, he incurred a serious back injury. I dont care how cynical you are, you cant predict something like that. BUt in pure Flyers fashion, they didnt take that as an opportunity to tear down instead, Fletcher still thought he could build a "playoff team" and DB/Jonesy/Torts are in a "rebuild"

I love the I gottcha withhunt on semantics that is you two dopes Crusade against MJL....its hilarious
- THE BLACK HAND

It's hysterical that they have to twist the meaning of a simple phrase like "no brainer". Shows the weakness of their position and how desperate they are. It's astonishing that a self proclaimed superior intellect and scholar like PT21 can't understand a simple statement. Has to pretend he knows me and make comments about my age. Just sad individuals that have both been exposed as frauds.

Funny thing is you trade Coots for assets if youre doing a full tear down, something that the Flyers were never going to do.

I would have been all for it, on the other hand, signing him to that contract in order to keep a bonifide #1 center was a no brainer, unfortunately, he incurred a serious back injury. I dont care how cynical you are, you cant predict something like that. BUt in pure Flyers fashion, they didnt take that as an opportunity to tear down instead, Fletcher still thought he could build a "playoff team" and DB/Jonesy/Torts are in a "rebuild"

I love the I gottcha withhunt on semantics that is you two dopes Crusade against MJL....its hilarious
- THE BLACK HAND

No the funny thing is you don’t have to move an assert as some means or form of a total teardown rebuild. Or rebuild at all. You should be moving assets all the time to fit a timeline or strategy or plan to build or maintain or further roster.

Any person could have seen an 8 year deal to a playing turning 30 was NEVER gonna go well. At best you’re hoping for the first half to be great. That’s a lot of hope for 8 year deal.

The no brainer move then and now and in future is to move that asset.

See coots
See tk
See …..

It's hysterical that they have to twist the meaning of a simple phrase like "no brainer". Shows the weakness of their position and how desperate they are. It's astonishing that a self proclaimed superior intellect and scholar like PT21 can't understand a simple statement. Has to pretend he knows me and make comments about my age. Just sad individuals that have both been exposed as frauds.
- MJL

Because Jack fraud not only did you say “no brainer” you also said you ABSOLUTELY RESIGN HIM. HES ABSOLUTELY A 1c. You absolutely build around him.

No the funny thing is you don’t have to move an assert as some means or form of a total teardown rebuild. Or rebuild at all. You should be moving assets all the time to fit a timeline or strategy or plan to build or maintain or further roster.

Any person could have seen an 8 year deal to a playing turning 30 was NEVER gonna go well. At best you’re hoping for the first half to be great. That’s a lot of hope for 8 year deal.

The no brainer move then and now and in future is to move that asset.

See coots
See tk
See …..
- Stayin alive

B

What youve never accounted for is that, the end of these long deal for players approaching their 30s usually are never favorable production for compensation. The reason I dont get bent out of shape about it is beacuse, you have to pay someone, theres a salary floor. If the Flyers are managed properly, his cap hit shouldnt be a hinderence to signing younger talent. Coots has his worth even as he ages. The problem with the Flyers is that thye dont have enough talent that you have to worry about paying

Because Jack fraud not only did you say “no brainer” you also said you ABSOLUTELY RESIGN HIM. HES ABSOLUTELY A 1c. You absolutely build around him.
- Stayin alive

It is not necessary to say the bolded. It is implicit from the phrase no-brainer. If someone believes signing Couts is a no-brainer, then he must also "absolutely" believe that there is no other way. And that person cannot also 'see where others come from' if they differ.

I do not know which is worse. That the guy is so dense he cannot see this, or that he sees it and keeps on arguing. 🤷🏻‍♂️

B

What youve never accounted for is that, the end of these long deal for players approaching their 30s usually are never favorable production for compensation. The reason I dont get bent out of shape about it is beacuse, you have to pay someone, theres a salary floor. If the Flyers are managed properly, his cap hit shouldnt be a hinderence to signing younger talent. Coots has his worth even as he ages. The problem with the Flyers is that thye dont have enough talent that you have to worry about paying
- THE BLACK HAND

The way I saw this is (and said so then): if the guy produces, then because of the additive effect he has on his teammates, the entire team does reasonably well but not too well and so you end up picking in the middle of the draft and the needle never moves.

On the other hand if the guy drops off the deep end, then you're stuck with a long-term contract including during the years when you actually want to be making a play for signing good players and then you find yourself cash strapped and his contract is an anchor

There are other ways of getting to the cap floor such as for instance giving short-term contracts if necessary and not giving out NTCs.

So: lose, lose

It is not necessary to say the bolded. It is implicit from the phrase no-brainer. If someone believes signing Couts is a no-brainer, then he must also "absolutely" believe that there is no other way. And that person cannot also 'see where others come from' if they differ.

I do not know which is worse. That the guy is so dense he cannot see this, or that he sees it and keeps on arguing. 🤷🏻‍♂️
- PT21

How dense is it to invent your own meaning of a phrase?

Here it is, from the Britannica dictionary

No brainer


a decision or choice that is very easy to make and requires very little thought.

Your claim that there can "absolutely" be no other way does not exist in that definition. Nor does it prevent someone from seeing no other way or alternative point of view.

It simply applies to how easy a decision is made or how much thought needed to be put into it. It simply doesn't mean what you want it to mean. No matter how hard you try. You'll keep arguing though because you're pathetically desperate for revenge. You'll never get it.

The way I saw this is (and said so then): if the guy produces, then because of the additive effect he has on his teammates, the entire team does reasonably well but not too well and so you end up picking in the middle of the draft and the needle never moves.

On the other hand if the guy drops off the deep end, then you're stuck with a long-term contract including during the years when you actually want to be making a play for signing good players and then you find yourself cash strapped and his contract is an anchor

There are other ways of getting to the cap floor such as for instance giving short-term contracts if necessary and not giving out NTCs.

So: lose, lose
- PT21

That's because you have tunnel vision and believe the team should tank. They're not going to.

Just another example of his failed player assessments

Kinda like when he said Frost DIDN’T blow his coverage in OT, he just skated toward the puck carrier, leaving the goal scorer wide open

Because those are different things apparently 😂
- anti-lame

Yeah…I just can’t work up the energy to care that much about a comment a fan made on a hockey blog 3 years ago. I’m at the “shake my head” stage with Fletcher and he’s the actual guy who made the move.

How dense is it to invent your own meaning of a phrase?

Here it is, from the Britannica dictionary

No brainer


a decision or choice that is very easy to make and requires very little thought.

Your claim that there can "absolutely" be no other way does not exist in that definition. Nor does it prevent someone from seeing no other way or alternative point of view.

It simply applies to how easy a decision is made or how much thought needed to be put into it. It simply doesn't mean what you want it to mean. No matter how hard you try. You'll keep arguing though because you're pathetically desperate for revenge. You'll never get it.
- MJL

If you believe a pov contrary to yours is justifiable (not wrong), it means you believe there are certain circumstances in which you yourself could be wrong. In which case, your own pov cannot be "very easy"/ to arrive at.

I have now explained this exceedingly elementary reasoning 5 times now. I do know that

1. You will not see it or admit it.
2. You will not seek any competent external judgement to understand this simple contradiction if you can't yourself
3. Nor will you seek the psychiatric help warranted by 1 and 2.

I don't understand why I should want "revenge" on you. If I did so though, your life itself would be cruel and unusual punishment.

Now, if you don't mind, I talked with you for the first time in 6 odd months. Lets chat again in Oct or later. The ratio of stupidity to my tolerance for it is too high.

👋🏻

If you believe a pov contrary to yours is justifiable (not wrong), it means you believe there are certain circumstances in which you yourself could be wrong. In which case, your own pov cannot be "very easy"/ to arrive at.



- PT21

You're wrong. It without question can be an easy decision to arrive at without requiring a deep level of thinking. It's a simple case of easily and quickly weighing all the factors and coming to an easy decision based on my perspective. While also recognizing that there are alternate points of view that have merit. You fail to realize that both points of view can be correct and it could be advantageous to both keep and trade a player. You lack intelligence. The rest of your post is just drivel that doesn't need responding to. You're an indictment against the higher education system in that you don't have the logic or intelligence to understand a very simple concept. All in your desperation and pettiness and your ridiculously weak position that you have to focus on and debate "no brainer". I feel sorry for you. You failed again. Now go ahead and post about me personally with that other idiot to your heart's content.

If you believe a pov contrary to yours is justifiable (not wrong), it means you believe there are certain circumstances in which you yourself could be wrong. In which case, your own pov cannot be "very easy"/ to arrive at.

I have now explained this exceedingly elementary reasoning 5 times now. I do know that

1. You will not see it or admit it.
2. You will not seek any competent external judgement to understand this simple contradiction if you can't yourself
3. Nor will you seek the psychiatric help warranted by 1 and 2.

I don't understand why I should want "revenge" on you. If I did so though, your life itself would be cruel and unusual punishment.

Now, if you don't mind, I talked with you for the first time in 6 odd months. Lets chat again in Oct or later. The ratio of stupidity to my tolerance for it is too high.

👋🏻
- PT21

Do you still think people of color who have not been vaccinated should not be allowed to participate in society?