SA's shared items
|
Unintentionally hilarious!
Check out this LOLtastic video of fans that showed up to a Sexy Sarah book signing (above).
A few more thoughts on quarterbacks:
There are two separate issues with respect to quarterbacks. The first is whether, historically, NFL teams have done a good job of predicting which college quarterbacks will succeed in the pros. Dave Berri and Rob Simmons’ paper in the Journal of Productivity Analysis (that I relied on in the essay “Most Likely to Succeed” in my new book “What The Dog Saw”) proves pretty convincingly, I think, that the answer is no. One of the best parts of that paper is how Berri and Simmons demonstrate how much NFL teams tend to irrationally over-weight “combine” variables like speed, height and Wonderlic score.
There’s a second wonderful paper on this general subject by Cade Massey and Richard Thaler—Thaler being, of course, one of the leading lights in behavioral economics—called “The Loser’s Curse.” The argument of the Thaler-Massey paper goes something like this (and I encourage anyone who is interested in sports to read the whole thing, because I can’t do it justice here). By looking at the trades that NFL teams make, we can estimate the “market value” of a draft pick. And what we find is that teams place a very high value on high first round picks. The first pick in the draft, they write, has historically been valued as much as “the 10th and 11th picks combined, and as much as the sum of the last four picks in the first round.” Then Thaler and Massey calculate the true value of draft picks, using what they call “surplus value.” The key here is that all NFL teams operate under a strict salary cap. So a player’s real worth to a team is the extent to which his performance exceeds the average performance of someone making his salary. And what do they find? That market value and surplus value are radically out of sync: that teams irrationally over-weight the importance of high first round picks. In fact, according to their analysis, the most useful draft picks are in the second round, not the first: that’s where surplus values tend to be highest. Hence the title of the paper: “The Loser’s Curse.” The NFL rewards its weakest teams by giving them the highest draft picks—but those picks are actually not the most valuable picks in the draft.
It is important to note here that we are talking about relative value. Personnel decisions in the NFL have clear opportunity costs: if you pay $15 million for a quarterback who only gives you $10 million of value, then you hve $5 million less to pay for a good linebacker. As they write: “To be clear, the player taken with the first pick does have the highest expected performance . . . but he also has the highest salary, and in terms of performance per dollar, is less valuable than players taken in the second round.”
What Massey and Thaler are saying, in essence, is that NFL general managers are not rational decision-makers. That’s why I think its so useful in this particular discussion. Those who believe that draft position is a good predictor of quarterback performance are essentially voting for the good judgment of the people who make draft decisions. And what Berri and Simmons in particular—and Massey and Thaler in general—remind us is that that kind of blind faith in the likes of Matt Millen and Al Davis simply isn’t justified. And, by the way, why should that fallibility come as a surprise? We’ve known for a long time that it is not easy to making decisions under conditions of extreme uncertainty. Here is Massey and Thaler from their conclusion:
Numerous studies find, for example, that physicians, among the most educated professionals in our society, make diagnoses that display overconfidence and violate Bayes’ rule. The point, of course, is that physicians are experts at medicine, not necessarily probabilistic reasoning. And it should not be surprising that when faced with difficult problems, such as inferring the probability that a patient has cancer from a given test, physicians will be prone to the same types of errors that subjects display in the laboratory. Such findings reveal only that physicians are human.
Our modest claim in this paper is that the owners and managers of National Football League teams are also human, and that market forces have not been strong enough to overcome these human failings. The task of picking players, as we have described here, is an extremely difficult one . . . Teams must first make predictions about the future performance of (frequently) immature young men. Then they must make judgments about their own abilities: how much confidence should the team have in its forecasting skills? As we detailed in section 2, human nature conspires to make it extremely difficult to avoid overconfidence in this task.
This brings up the second question. Is it possible to ever accurately predict which college quarterbacks will succeed in the pros? Both the Thaler analysis and the Berri analysis hold out the real possibility that teams can be a lot smarter than they currently are. The New England Patriots clearly have taken some of Thaler’s lessons to heart, for example. There has also been a real effort by the folks over at Pro Football Outsiders to come up with a more useful algorithm for making quarterback selections. David Lewin’s “career forecast” zeroes in on career college starts and career college completion percentage as the best predictors of professional performance. I took the position in my essay “Most Likely to Succeed” that I didn’t think that quarterbacking (as opposed to other positions on the field) was predictable in this sense—that there is so much noise in the data, and so much variability between the college and professional games—that attempts at rationalizing draft day decisions have real limits. I’m still of that inclination. I’m willing to be convinced, though. I’d love to see more statistically-minded people weigh in on the Lewin analysis, and I’d also like to have a better handle over how the recent innovations in college offenses—particularly the use of ever more aggressive spread formations—affects the accuracy of that algorithm.
Steve Jobs was treated two months ago in a Tennessee hospital for a liver transplant, the WSJ reports, citing an unidentified source, who added that the Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) CEO will work only part time for the next month or two. So, though Jobs is on schedule to return to work this month as promised, his shortened work days will mean COO Tim Cook, who has served as the company head for the past six months, will continue to have a wider role. Cook is also expected to be named to Apple’s board shortly as well.
Just before Jobs’ medical leave was announced in January, Apple explained his rail thin appearance as the result of a mere hormone imbalance. But at the time, many speculated that the pancreatic cancer that had been in remission for four years had returned. No matter the mystery of Jobs’ ailment, it’s not too cynical to question the timing of this leak, coming on the same day that the latest iPhone hits store shelves.
To read a long rambling theory about how Steve Jobs may or may not live in Memphis, check out peHUB’s unsubstantiated, but tabloid-like story here.
Will online video kill the TV star? That's the question panelists tried to answer during the Video Advertising panel at Digital Hollywood. "The TV and movie industries have a value chain—grips, actors, screenwriters, etc. What do we do in our industry so it doesn't get decimated like it has with newspapers or music?" asked Steve Robinson, president of video ad firm Panache.
Responses varied, of course, but the consensus was that there was no way the TV industry would survive in its current form:
The least optimistic was Kevin Yen, YouTube's director of strategic partnerships: "Industries evolve, there's consolidation and things change. We need to develop the economics that support this current model. We can't take the perspective that there's a big pot of gold at the end of the rainbow that rewards this [legacy] structure."
"We're still applying TV metrics on the cost side to the Web, and that's never going to work," said Nada Stirratt, MTV's EVP of digital advertising. "We need to actually look at the investments we're making in web originals, look at the level of engagement they get, and value them accurately."
"It's taken a long time, but we're shifting at NBC so that the TV content we produce can automatically get repurposed for the web," said Mark Marvel, senior director of video monetization for msnbc.com. "We're trying to get more out of our existing talent and burn through less resources, I think you'll see more of that happening across the board—with smaller Upfronts, more pilots being sent right to the web, etc."
"We're spending too much time trying to figure out what model is going to work, when it's clear that we just need to be better at following consumers." said Jason Forbes, group SVP of strategy, new products & marketing at Time Warner (NYSE: TWX) Cable Media Sales. "If we don't, we're just going to lose the revenue—like the music industry and Napster (NSDQ: NAPS), or like newspapers in their attempts to catch up online."
Photo Credit: Flickr
Stephen Curry will forgo his senior season at Davidson and enter the NBA Draft, raining tears all over the Southern Conference—and also breaking a special promise he made to one little blogger.
Silicon Alley Insider editor (and former Denton-ophile) Nicholas Carlson is a graduate of Davidson, as is his younger brother, and during a campus visit two years ago he scooped the world with inside knowledge of Curry's professional basketball plans. Curry personally told him "we have two more years of this" implying, no ... vowing that he would finish his time and graduate as a Wildcat. Then he and Nick hugged and that is a bond that cannot be broken, man. Yet today, Curry went back on this sacred oath and announced he will drop out of school.
Reached for IM comment Carlson said this:
A real dson doesn't quit school
I guess money and fame mean more than hugs.
Curry to go pro [Davidson News]
Exclusive: Stephen Curry Tells Lunchfood He's Staying In School [Nicholas Carlson]
Mississippi lineman Jerrell Powe raised some hackles this weekend when he was cited by police for a noise violation—then told the officer that he couldn't sign the citation because he doesn't know how to read.
I'm sure that Powe thought he was just being clever and he wouldn't be the first person to think he could outfox a police officer by "playing" dumb. (Once the cop informed him he was getting the citation whether he signed it or not, Powe complied with the order.) But this incident becomes a little more suspect when you consider that it took Powe two years to even be admitted to Ole Miss because of academic problems.
Powe signed with Ole Miss in February of 2005, but had to spend a year at Hargrave Military Academy in Virginia when the school denied him admission. Then after working to get his grades and test scores up, the NCAA still denied him eligibility twice and he filed a lawsuit. (That was later dropped and he enrolled in 2007.)
Oh, and there was this too: His mother was quoted in legal papers as saying, "Jerrell really is a good child, but he just can't read." That might have been what raised some concerns.
Anyway, Powe finally got join the Rebel football team last fall, but was briefly a poster child for everything that's wrong (or right) with college sports and the awesome "diploma mills" that seemingly only serve to make athletes eligible for games. Powe has been described in the media as "learning disabled" and he probably can write his own name, but the fact that a college football player being unable to read is not an implausible story probably tells us something. As does coach Houston Nutt's blustering denial:
Of course he can read, how do you think he's getting through college?" Nutt said. "Now he just needs to learn to keep his mouth shut."
Yeah, dude. Ixnay on the illiteracyay! (Do you think he reads Pig Latin?)
UM's Powe jokes; Nutt's not laughing [The Clarion-Ledger]
Ole Miss DT Tells Arresting Officer He Can't Read [Brooks]
Related: Powe cleared to play for Ole Miss [Daily Mississippian]
While athletes smoking weed still seems to make front page news, regardless of context, the story here is not, “Percy Harvin and former UNC wideout Brandon Tate tested positive for marijuana at the NFL combine.” Rather, it’s more along the lines of “Harvin and Tate were stupid enough to get caught.” From FOX Sports:
Harvin and Tate were the only high-profile players to flunk their combine drug tests, the sources said. Fewer than a dozen players tested positive for recreational drugs, one source said.
NFL teams received the drug-test results earlier this week. Players who failed are subject to entry into the NFL’s substance-abuse program.
Sports Illustrated’s Web site reported that Boston College defensive tackle B.J. Raji had flunked a combine drug test. Raji was not on the list of failed players, one source said, and SI.com has since retracted its story.
I don’t get it. If the guys running the combine had that news in February, why not release it to the teams then? Why wait until the week of the draft? And why not tell everyone publicly? And what’s up with airline food? And is Dana Jacobson seeing anyone? You know, besides the Papa John’s guy every night?
Blogging: “There are almost as many people making their living as bloggers as there are lawyers. Already more Americans are making their primary income from posting their opinions than Americans working as computer programmers, firefighters or even bartenders.” Mildly interesting. “It is hard to think of another job category that has grown so quickly and become such a force in society without having any tests, degrees, or regulation of virtually any kind. Courses on blogging are now cropping up, and we can’t be far away from the Columbia School of Bloggerism. There is a lot of interest now in Twittering and Facebooking — but those venues don’t offer the career opportunities of blogging. Not since eBay opened its doors have so many been able to sit at their computer screens and make some money, or even make a whole living.” The piece is being heavily criticized here, here and here. (WSJ)
So I successfully got my drink on, both before and after tonight’s game, which made the last dry Jays game of the season bearable, both during and after the slight clusterfuck.
That’s right, I said slight.
Sure, I saw Doc’s giant “god damn it!” as he came off the mound after the top of the seventh, where he gave up a dinger to Ian Kinsler that had me planning out how I was going to slit my wrists later on. But… you know… I know it’s the lamest fucking excuse for a team that came up short at the plate—believe me, after last year, I know— but the Jays seriously did make some hard outs tonight.
That’s right, I’m playing the hard out card. Especially Barajas in the eighth. Fuck, and Hill ripped at least one, too. Like I say, I know it’s bullshit, but what am I going to do, blame Doc? I kind of really do think this just maybe was one of those games. Then again, I’m drunk.
Hey, Speaking of the Eighth
That was awesome. Holy fucking crowd, what the hell? People were sober enough to actually be into the fucking ballgame during important at-bats in the eighth inning—and it was fucking nails, apart from a handful of fucking morons who decided that, rather than watch the game, it was more important to turn their back to the play, stand up and block the view of the people behind them, then try to get the rest of the crowd to stop paying attention to the awesome baseball game they paid to see and to start following the pointless fucking wave, so that they could tell the precise moment, when it came around to their section, that they would need to stand up, to ensure they kept an eye on the action instead of some fat back covered in plastic chair sweat. Assholes.
But, then… um… the ninth? You people all know that the bottom of the ninth inning is the Jays’ last chance to do something to win the game, right? Fuck, as quickly as I started to think that I might have actually been in a decent baseball crowd—save for a few wave-starting peckers—it was gone. Poof.
Should I Have Mentioned This First?
Scary moment tonight when home plate umpire Kerwin Danley had to be removed from the field on a stretcher after getting clocked with a broken bat. Thankfully, the word is that he never lost consciousness, and may have a concussion, but hopefully nothing more serious than that. Of course, I have no idea, because they told us absolutely nothing at the stadium.
This is hardly the first time Rogers has left fans completely in the dark when something outside of the script has happened. The other two times I immediately recall were during this year’s home opener, when many of us sat wondering what the fuck was going on as the Tigers were pulled off the field, and the infamous lineup card incident, when Lyle Overbay and Aaron Hill had their places on the card mixed up, and the umpires took their sweet time to confer, call them out, and then try to decide whether or not Ernie Whitt could really possibly be that dumb.
Obviously tonight’s situation was different, because we knew what was happening as Danley was being attended to, but after he was taken off, we heard nothing. I mean, holy fuck, we’re human—not just pairs of eyes to watch your bloody advertising—we get concerned when we see something like that. Letting us know that he was OK would have been nice.
(Of course, maybe that information wasn’t available by the time the game ended, but a) I doubt it, and b) given the shitty response to previous things you’d goddamn well think they’d take a second to inform the fans about, I’m just going to bitch about it anyway, and let the shits fall where they may.)
Tonight’s Beverage of Choice
Don’t ask…
