Thread: Recalled/Assigned: Matt Walker clears re-entry waivers
View Single Post
Old
12-02-2011, 06:47 PM
  #375
BernieParent
Registered User
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DUHockey9 View Post
I'm not sure I completely understand the bolded, but I think I sort of am saying that. I'm saying, we are fans. All we can do is formulate opinions on what we know, and ONLY what we know.

Fact: Homer placed Matt Walker on re-entry waivers.
Fact: Matt Walker has a cap hit of $1.7 million for this year and next.
Fact: Homer chose to risk $850k of cap space for both this year and next.

This in and of itself, has a certain level of risk to it, and I'm personally risk averse, and don't like it.

Fact: Matt Walker is not a very good player (admittedly, there is SOME degree of opinion in this, but most agree, he's a marginal NHLer at best)

Put it all together and I hate it. Without even thinking about what Homer might know, or what he doesn't know. What I DO know, is Homer is risking a sizable chunk of dead cap space, for 2 years, for Matt Walker (and he really isn't that good). This isn't like we're taking a calculated risk to add Sidney Crosby to the roster. It's Matt Walker; he's a body. Some may think he's a better body than others, but still.

To touch on your bolded point again, you appear to be making (correct me if I'm wrong), the classic theist counter-argument (coming from a theist, mind you). Atheists get all scientific and say there is no God, and having no other point to make, theists fall back on "Well you can't prove God doesn't exist!"

So if we directly, apply your bolded comment, to the God argument, I'm saying:

It's ok to not believe in God because there is no proof, but it's not ok to believe in God because there is no proof.

Simply put, one of those, holds more weight than the other.
To summarize: would C.S. Lewis have put Walker on recall waivers?

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote