[Resolute 14]

It was a typical Mudcrutch blog post, actually. And I've read enough of his work back to his "the value of outscoring: a primer" days to know how the formula works. "I'm right and everyone else is wrong. Here's why: This hypothetical draft pick is worth this fraction of a point and this hypothetical is worth another fraction. But Hamonic is worth a full point! Also, here's a stat I invented but won't explain. I'm awesome! And now. lets look at Hamonic against another metric that I won't explain (or even link to an explanation)". Followed by 1500 more words I just couldn't get around to reading. Also, Corsi. Mutcrutch would probably literally die if he couldn't mention Corsi in a post.

He also likes to bring up phrases like "particularly cunning observers", "keen observers" and the like, which are really code words for "only people as smart as I am will agree..." and underscores the fact that he writes mostly to feed his own ego by mentioning work he's done and things he's invented wherever possible.

I mean, it's great and all that he thinks the Hamonic trade is good. But unless "likes a move by the Flames" is the only basis you are judging by, no, I wouldn't call that article excellent. I've no problem with his basing his posts on fancy stats. But his actual writing style remains poor and is certainly not the kind of quality that I expect from a publication that will eventually be asking me to pay $70 a year for.