<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for thepuck</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/thepuck/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/thepuck/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:10:56 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: 2025 NHL Mock Draft: Post-Combine First Round Projections (with Trades!)</title><link>https://www.bleachernation.com/blackhawks/2025/06/09/2025-nhl-mock-draft-post-combine-first-round-projections-with-trades/#comment-6719920635</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I doubt Utah does that trade considering that they already have a ton of draft picks over the next three drafts (2025-2027) and a loaded farm system already. But these things are always written from big market point of view so it's easy to understand you dont really know Utah's situation...nor worried about even trying to find out.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:10:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Could the Utah Mammoth sign a big UFA this summer?</title><link>https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/utah-mammoth-sign-big-ufa-free-agent-marner#comment-6715366064</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice article, but in the context of what was being said, I think you meant Bill Armstrong is playing chess and not checkers...not the other way around.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 01 Jun 2025 21:21:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Norris Trophy race looks to be down to Cale Makar and Zach Werenski</title><link>https://www.dailyfaceoff.com/the-norris-trophy-race-looks-to-be-down-to-cale-makar-and-zach-werenski#comment-6670631641</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Seems every year, people look to find any reason to not give Makar the Norris. The mental gymnastics it takes to do so can get quiet hilarious to see. Makar is the obvious best choice, but I'm sure they'll figure out a way to once again tell the slam dunk best defensive player in the game that he isn't.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 2025 10:26:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Who Is the NHL’s Best All-Around Defenseman: Cale Makar or Quinn Hughes?</title><link>https://thehockeywriters.com/quinn-hughes-makar-nhl-best-all-around-defenseman/#comment-6657230692</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Makar for sure&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 22 Feb 2025 17:39:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: US espn-plus</title><link>https://downdetector.com/status/espn-plus#comment-6002059829</link><description>&lt;p&gt;In the last three days, I have had real problems watching any games set up as on demand.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:26:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Twins cut ties with Trevor Plouffe</title><link>http://www.twincities.com/2016/11/18/minnesota-twins-place-trevor-plouffe-on-outright-waivers/#comment-3010404975</link><description>&lt;p&gt;exactly&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2016 16:07:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The Blacklist Continues to Mistake Ambiguity for Complexity</title><link>http://www.popmatters.com/review/the-blacklist-s4ep8/#comment-3007750326</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Pretty ridiculous critique.  Red is easily a more compelling character than Urguhart&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2016 20:44:11 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 3 Good Reasons Every Christian Should Close Their Wells Fargo Account Right Now</title><link>http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/50085-3-good-reasons-every-christian-should-close-their-wells-fargo-account-right-now#comment-2082718274</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The three reasons: hate, discrimination and bigotry&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2015 17:04:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 3 Good Reasons Every Christian Should Close Their Wells Fargo Account Right Now</title><link>http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/50085-3-good-reasons-every-christian-should-close-their-wells-fargo-account-right-now#comment-2082694982</link><description>&lt;p&gt;give all your money to the poor.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:51:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 3 Good Reasons Every Christian Should Close Their Wells Fargo Account Right Now</title><link>http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/50085-3-good-reasons-every-christian-should-close-their-wells-fargo-account-right-now#comment-2082694185</link><description>&lt;p&gt;1: Hate.&lt;br&gt;2: Discrimination.&lt;br&gt;3: Bigotry.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:51:11 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: 3 Good Reasons Every Christian Should Close Their Wells Fargo Account Right Now</title><link>http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/50085-3-good-reasons-every-christian-should-close-their-wells-fargo-account-right-now#comment-2082688758</link><description>&lt;p&gt;well said!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2015 16:48:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Most Beautiful Small Towns to Visit in the U.S.</title><link>http://www.tripstodiscover.com/most-beautiful-small-towns-to-visit-in-the-u-s/#comment-1824156693</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Carmel, California. Less than 4,000 people and the area is about 1 square mile.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:02:24 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Washington Nationals Will Regret Money Spent On Max Scherzer</title><link>http://www.rantsports.com/mlb/2015/01/19/washington-nationals-will-regret-money-spent-on-max-scherzer/#comment-1804468350</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I suggest reading articles with a bit more info, a better breakdown, to form an educated opinion.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2015 11:56:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re:  
                        Explaining my 2015 Hall of Fame ballot                         </title><link>http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/2015/01/05/explaining-2015-hall-fame-ballot-2/#comment-1775191043</link><description>&lt;p&gt;good thing too, Morris didn't deserve to be in&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:55:37 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re:  
                        Explaining my 2015 Hall of Fame ballot                         </title><link>http://blogs.twincities.com/twins/2015/01/05/explaining-2015-hall-fame-ballot-2/#comment-1775186845</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This illustrates the ridiculousness of putting a limit on the amount of players a voter can vote for.  You put a limit on the amount of players a voter can vote for AND you go from 15 years of eligibility to 10 years.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We know Mike believes Randy and Pedro deserve to be in it.  He didn't use the ridiculous excuse many do, which is something like, 'Well, if The Babe, or Mays or (name a guy) didn't get 100% of the vote, no one else should either.'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;When there are so many deserving guys on the ballot, it's not necessarily a bad thing to use a strategic approach.  If they got rid of the limit, this wouldn't happen.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:53:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1769326956</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The goal of almost every team is to make as much money as possible. To get as much value from their players as possible. If they win 'a championship' that's icing on the cake.  They won't SAY that because no one wants to hear that, but that's the truth with most teams nowadays.&lt;br&gt;Back in the day, when there was just an AL winner and an NL winner, the W Series actually crowned the best team almost all the time, but with 1/3 of team making the playoffs now, that just isn't the reality...and they extended the playoffs because more games equals more money, not because it made it possible for the best team to win.  Sabermetrics works, has worked, will continue to work, regardless of whether or not one of the posterboy teams for sabermetrics actually wins the post season tournament.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2015 19:50:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767950612</link><description>&lt;p&gt;no he wasn't&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 21:34:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767946553</link><description>&lt;p&gt;' A little legwork would show that many such projections have proven to be wildly inaccurate.'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not really. First, the projections being made aren't actually predictions. It tells us what players should be expected to do and then say what a team should perform if everyone performs as their talent suggests...but that doesn't actually make it their predictions.   For example as of right now, one very well thought of projection model says no team in the AL will win more than 88 games.  The people projecting this don't actually believe that no AL team will win more than 88 games.  The people know that players will over-perform and under-perform their projections.  They know they can't account for sequencing of performance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In any event, there are much more accurate than you say. Here's some leg work. Go to The Hardball Time and read the story called 'Evaluating the 2014 projection systems.'&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 21:28:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767943107</link><description>&lt;p&gt;' A little legwork would show that many such projections have proven to be wildly inaccurate.'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not really. First, the projections being made aren't actually predictions. It tells us what players should be expected to do and then say what a team should perform if everyone performs as their talent suggests...but that doesn't actually make it their predictions.   For example as of right now, one very well thought of projection model says no team in the AL will win more than 88 games.  The people projecting this don't actually believe that no AL team will win more than 88 games.  The people know that players will over-perform and under-perform their projections.  They know they can't account for sequencing of performance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In any event, there are much more accurate than you say. Here's some leg work. Go to The Hardball Time and read the story called 'Evaluating the 2014 projection systems.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 21:24:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767932469</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Brian Kenny is making fun of the arbitrary counting stats when he says stuff like that.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 21:09:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767887824</link><description>&lt;p&gt;it's a good thing the stats actually agree with you as well.  at least any stat that really tells you how the pitcher did.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 20:12:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767886871</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yeah, but then you realize Glavine also had 246 more starts than Schilling and that his winning % is only .003 better.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I mean, this should only be important to those who care about the win loss stat for pitchers.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Schilling had the better ERA, the better ERA+, the better ERA minus, the much better WHIP, A WAAAAAAY better FIP.  Schilling also averaged 8.6Ks per 9 IP while only averaging 2.0 BB per 9 IP.  Glavine averaged 5.3Ks and 3.1 BB per 9IP. Schilling had more than 500 more strikeouts too.  There's really no way Glavine was better.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 20:10:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767875521</link><description>&lt;p&gt;' A little legwork would show that many such projections have proven to be wildly inaccurate.'&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Not really.  First, the projections being made aren't actually predictions. It tells us what players should be expected to do and then say what a team should perform if everyone performs as their talent suggests...but that doesn't actually make it their predictions, because they know players outperform and underperform their projections and they know they can't account for sequencing.  For example as of right now, one very well thought of projection model says no team in the AL will win more than 88 games.  The people projecting this don't actually believe that no AL team will win more than 88 games.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In any event, there are much more accurate than you say. Here's some leg work. This tells us how the projections for 2014 ended up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt; &lt;a href="http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.hardballtimes.com/evaluating-the-2014-projection-systems/"&gt;http://www.hardballtimes.co...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 19:56:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767866638</link><description>&lt;p&gt;yeah, I don't understand how you think Beane has failed in his sabermetric building of his team.  Most years he gets more wins per dollar that anyone else.  TB has been successful using it.  Red Sox have won three W Series using it.  The idea it's a failure because a team didn't win a post season tournament, a tournament that proves nothing, is funny.  Playoffs are the definition of small sample size. I get that the playoffs and W Series have the mystique and all, but what happens in them really doesn't prove anything. Very rarely doesn't the best team in baseball win the W Series.  The postseason is a reward to the teams that did best over the course of 162 games season...but the randomness of such a small amount of games...it doesn't prove anything.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 19:45:11 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why isn't Curt Schilling getting Hall of Fame votes?</title><link>http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/105158850/#comment-1767857208</link><description>&lt;p&gt;ERA+ is still better than ERA....especially when comparing players from different eras. Tells us how the guy did in relation to other in his league.  But, really, I'd rather look at FIP and if we have to look at an ERA stat, I'd rather look at ERA-&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ThePuck</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2015 19:33:38 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>