Have to say, he's been pretty good since his "adjustment" period after the trade. I don't think Gorges is much better than him. Really.
Please tell me your kidding about Gorges not being better than him...Gorges is a lot more mobile and better defensively
Have to say, he's been pretty good since his "adjustment" period after the trade. I don't think Gorges is much better than him. Really.
But Weaver's not starting tonight? That wouldn't happen with Gorges.
and he gets almost triple of Weaver salary ,he better to be betterIt is playing Weaver that has made me appreciate what Gorges brings.
Gorges is much better.
I didn't say that Gorges isn't better than him. 55 is the Black Hole on D, not 43 or 6.
Actually you did write that Gorges isn't better than him. Read your initial post.
Please, we know what you were doing.
I guess lawyers in BC are not required to read properly.
Making a ridiculous take but trying to couch it in a way that gives him wiggle room when called on it.
or we read correctly and know exactly what another lawyer is trying to say while not technically saying it
case dismissed counsellor
Weaver was brought in to fill the gap that was created by Gorges injury. He's not here to light to up or lay crushing hits. He's been fine.
OBJECTION, your honour.
Not so fast, Count. Now admittedly I never went to law school but I have seen every episode of "Law & Order" as well as "A Few Good Men", "And Justice For All", "Inherit The Wind" and "The Paper Chase" several times each so I think I know what I'm talking about when I say that what you THINK Krusty is trying to say isn't relevant. It only matters what you can PROVE he said or didn't say. And going by his original post, what he said was that he didn't think that Gorges was "much better" than Weaver. That doesn't mean the same thing as saying Gorges "is not better" than Weaver or that Weaver "IS better" than Gorges.
Just sayin, your honour.