February 18, 2008

Fantasy Baseball

It's that time of the year. Fantasy baseball drafts are starting up, and I need to get my draft board in order. Yup, I put a draft board together for my fantasy baseball drafts (yes, I do more than one league) every year. For the last 5 years, I've won at least one league I've been in, and think that putting a board together gives me an advantage. Does it really? Who knows, but I'm certainly not changing my system now.

Let me backtrack for a second. I started playing fantasy baseball in the 5th grade. I remember it being the 5th grade because my best friend's dad was in a league and a group (6) of us decided we wanted to be cool like his dad and put a league together. This was before the advent of all the fantasy sports websites on the internet, so we had to do stats once a week from Baseball Weekly on a spreadsheet in the computer lab. Our math teacher thought this was a great way to learn about math, so he would let us out of class to work on it. Ever since then, I've been hooked.

There have been reports that fantasy football costs workplaces nearly $200 million in productivity (as of 2005). Fantasy baseball is far more time consuming. You need to update your roster every day in the leagues I'm in (though some make you set a line-up once a week and roll with it) as opposed to only once a week for football. You also have more players on your roster (typically 23 as compared to 12-15 for football), and have to keep a track on guys being called up to jump on them (thanks Ryan Braun). In fantasy football you can usually ride one or two good players every week to a win (I.e. Tom Brady last year or LdT the year before), but fantasy baseball requires you to put together a much more well rounded team.

So why do I spend so much time on fantasy baseball? I find it challenging and fun. It satisfies the urge to gamble, and its a fun way to interact with my friends all over the country. The draft is a prime example of game theory. You have to look at the rosters of your opponents and figure out if you can let a guy slide to the next round or two to take him instead of using the current pick.

So the 15 (or 50) or so hours that it will take me to read (I've already ordered the Baseball Prospectus 2008 from Amazon) everything I need to know about different rotations and rosters to put the  board together is fun for me. Hopefully I'll be able to continue my streak one more year and win enough to pay for another vacation with the fiance. While the "League of Dorks" (as my fiance says, courtesy of the Sports Gal) may be time consuming, I enjoy getting to be GM for a season.

(Any sleepers, websites to read, or other suggestions will be greatly appreciated.)

February 15, 2008

Transcript of Clemens Congressional Testimony

I watched 3 hours of Clemens Congressional Testimony, and I have to say, I wonder why Washington is so bored. I think the hearing was an absolute waste of time and money, and that going into the situation, everyone had to know that nothing was going to get resolved. I think Bill Simmons summed up best what I feel about the hearing:

Given that we're dealing with Iraq, global warming, the subprime shakeout, the decline of the American dollar, the decline of the public-school system and every other troublesome reality in this country right now, it's hard to believe some of our most notable Congressmen didn't have a better way to spend this week than interrogating a disgraced Hall of Fame pitcher and the sad-sack Andy Dick lookalike who once trained him. I do not approve this usage of my tax dollars.

I received an email from a friend this morning that made me laugh. I wonder if Chairman Waxman thought this was what was going to come from the meeting:

Clemens: You want answers?

Congressman: I think I'm entitled to them.

Clemens: You want answers?

Congressman: I want the truth!

Clemens: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has baseballs. And those balls have to be hit by men with bats. Who's gonna do it? You? You,Congressman? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for steroids and you curse HGH. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that HGH, while illegal, probably sells tickets. And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, sells tickets...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that mound. You need me on that mound. We use words like fastball, slider, splitfinger...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent playing a sport. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and falls asleep to the Sportscenter clips I provide,! then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a bat and dig in. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

Congressman: Did you order the HGH?

Clemens: (quietly) I did the job you sent me to do.

Congressman: Did you order the HGH?

Clemens: You're gddamn right I did!!

I understand that baseball has an anti-trust exemption (just like football) and that Congress has the rights to hold these hearings, but just because you have the right to do something, does that mean you need to exercise that right? Shouldn't the player's association be held accountable for bargaining against drug testing? 

While this performance enhancing drug situation is a disgrace to the game, it came come back from this. If it turned out the games were fixed (like the WWE), I don't think we'd see the league last much longer.

February 10, 2008

Class at 8:45 in the morning on a Sunday?

Yes. I was in class at 8:45 this morning. Yes, it was voluntary. No, I was not getting any credit. Yes, I was questioning my own sanity.

By my count there were 6 other Owen students and 8 law school students, 13 large Starbucks coffees, 2 dozen Krispy Kreme donuts, and three Adjunct Professors who had forgotten more about the M&A process than most of us will ever know. Compared to last weekend when I had my Eli Manning jersey on at 9 am and was pacing around my house because I was so nervous about the Super Bowl, discussing the nuances of a material adverse change clause was quite a change.

The course, Mergers and Acquisitions Deal Dynamics, is a 4 day short course taught by David Katz, a partner with Wachtell Lipton, Rosen & Katz in NYC, Leo E. Strine, Jr., the Vice Chancellor, Court of Chancery, Delaware (and a fellow University of Delaware alum), and Jim Cheek, a partner with Bass Berry & Sims in Nashville who was involved in the HCA and Genesco deals. These three professors created an assignment that tracks an imaginary case of a proposed MBO that leads to an auction of the company. We started from the very beginning of the process, and were challenged at every step of the process to critically think about what each actor would/could/should do at each step of the process and why. Nothing is assumed and everything is questioned.

The course is not easy. The course started Thursday night and went for 3 to 4 and a half hours a day for 4 straight days (it concluded this morning). The amount of reading was a little overwhelming (~500 pages) and some of the conversations went right over my head. However, this course coupled with the Law and Finance of Mergers and Acquisitions has given me a whole new prospective at how to look at business situations that I read in the WSJ. Even though I won't be going to work for an IB or a related industry that has M&A activity, this class was definitely a worthwhile endeavor.

February 01, 2008

Can we quantify anything?

I've always been fascinated by the business side to sports. While some of my classmates would love to become CEO's of Fortune 500 companies or MDs at an IB or a consulting firm, I wish I was Jerry Reese or Brian Cashman. Unfortunately for me (and probably fortunately for the Giants and Yankees) I highly doubt I'll ever be running either organization. I was never a star athlete, and have no experience in the industry. However, that doesn't mean that I don't read as much as I can on how teams run the personnel side of their organizations. Though this, I recently came across a couple of articles about the Houston Rockets.

The first, Houston’s G.M. Is a Revolutionary Spirit in a Risk-Averse Mind, is an article that appeared in the NY Times this week about the Houston Rocket's GM and the new metrics he's using to track players. The simplest way to describe it is Moneyball meets basketball. Daryl Morey, the Houston GM, has a bachelor’s degree in computer science and an M.B.A. from M.I.T. He was never an athlete, but is trying to quantify basketball players and their actions into a formula that will create the best team. As Chris Wallace, the GM of the Memphis Grizzlies says, “The difficult thing to factor in is basketball is more of a collaborative, chemistry sport than baseball. Obviously, you need star power and great players. But a tremendous amount of your success is dictated by your interplay and synergy with the team — continuity, chemistry, feel for each other, those type of intangibles, which are very difficult to quantify.” Because of this, I find it hard to believe that you can only hold the rights to 15 players and make this work. There's no real minor leagues to allow players time to develop, and much less of a margin of error. Wikinomics has a take on the situation which I think makes a lot of sense.

So back the question. Can we quantify anything? I don't think so, but that doesn't mean people are going to stop trying.

January 23, 2008

More Academics and Sports

Economists are now trying to use models to predict where high school players will attend college:

CNNSI Article

Also, there is a study from Univeristy of Colorado - Denver about whether college football games cause an increase in crime. Freakomonics has a blog article about it:

Freakonomics Blog

And here's a link to the paper:

College Football Games and Crime by Rees and Schnepel

January 19, 2008

Someone is in trouble...

I'm taking a seminar in monetary policy this mod, so I found this kind of funny.

As one of my classmates pointed out, this is on her website:

“Dedicated to the principle that fiscal responsibility begins in "one's own backyard," Congresswoman Kaptur has consistently returned money to the federal Treasury.”

The first two speakers of the class have been the Vice Chairman of the Fed and an economist with a PhD from Harvard. Both think we're going to avoid a recession, but for different reasons. I can't say I understand everything they say, but they have both done a great job of making the material relatable to our class.

January 15, 2008

Why haven't I been posting?

I don't have a good excuse. I really don't. And I apologize for that.

It's strange posting things about who you are and what you do. Things that seem boring and mundane to me, may seem interesting and exciting to others (doubtful, but still possible). So, I'm going to do my best to be more active in posting things that I find interesting. It may not interest everyone, and for that I apologize.

So a quick update. Last semester was interesting. There were some classes that I really enjoyed, and some classes that I wish I had avoided. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but not every professor at Owen is going to fit your learning style well. Just like the location of where you are is important (both for school and work), the people you report to are vital to your experience. If I could go back, I'd probably take a couple of different classes, but experiences, both positive and negative, have helped me mature (at least that's how I rationalize it).

I've actually tried to travel a little more the past couple of months. I went to Atlanta for a concert, Tampa for the Giants/Tampa bay game, NJ for the Giants/Pats game, Chattanooga for the 1-AA (I'll call it what the NCAA does eventually), and am trying to make it to Green Bay for the NFC Championship game this weekend (anyone have two extra tickets I can buy?). Last year I felt trapped at school. Between class, studying for banking interviews, trying to find an internship, and never seeing my fiance, I was getting run down. I needed to get away and do things that I enjoyed. Obtaining a full-time job has certainly made me have more time to do this, but my perspective on Nashville (and most things in general) is much better.

How does this mod look? Not too bad so far. I'm taking a seminar class in Accounting and another in Monetary Policy, and a third class that is structured as a debate class. There's also going to be three short courses (one weekend each), covering two topics in real estate and a deal dynamics class in the law school that is bringing in Jim Cheek and the Chancellor of the Delaware Courts. Instead of taking classes because I have to, I'm now taking classes that I find interesting.

Most of what I post about isn't going to be focus on classes. I think most of the people on here do a pretty good job painting that picture for you. If there's specific questions about the finance realm, please shoot me an email or post a comment.

GO BIG BLUE!

October 08, 2007

Not that article again!

There are good things about the Internet, and there are bad things about the Internet.

Real-time information; good.

Getting the same article sent to you by 10 different people; annoying.

People talking about things they don't know about and acting like its straight out of the Bible; bad.

I've seen the same article written by Penelope Trunk entitled B-school Confidential: MBAs May Be Obsolete at least 10 times. I honestly never want to see this article again. I don't know Ms. Trunk, I don't want to know Ms. Trunk, and I wonder how people like Ms. Trunk are allowed to post the things they do. Let's break down her "article":

1. Only the top business schools have high value.

The difference between the value of a top-tier MBA and all the others is very big. In fact, if you don't get into a top-tier program, the value of your MBA is so compromised that it's not worth it to stop working in order to get the degree. Go to night school instead.

A lot of people already know this, which has made the competition to get into a top-tier b-school fierce. So much so that you probably need a consultant to help you get in. Wondering how effective those consultants are at gaming the system? So effective that schools are publicly saying they're trying to change the application process in order to undermine the effectiveness of application coaches.

Ok Ms. Trunk. What's top-tier? Top 3, Top 5, Top 10, Top 20, Top 50? According to the link, that would be the top 50 as determined by US News. What about the WSJ rankings, Business Week rankings, or Financial Times rankings, do they not matter?

It's also nice that you link to your own article about who should attend. The funny thing is you say if you can only get into a third tier business school you shouldn't go. I wonder what the third tier is.

As for the consultant thing, I have classmates that were accepted at top 5 programs and didn't use one. I didn't use one. In fact, I don't know that many people who have used one. The people who started these "consulting" firms realized there was a void in the marketplace and that some people were so desperate that they would pay the insane fees that they charge. I'm glad they can game the system to get the people in, but how exactly does that devalue the degree that will be obtained from the schools? If you're saying that people who shouldn't have gotten in do get in, I can see that. But I know that when I'm competing for a job with them, and they lack the written and oral skills I'm going to get the job. All this tells me is that schools outside the top 5 are getting some great talent that is only going to make that school better.

2. Business schools are compromised by a lack of female applicants.

Harvard Business School is so concerned that it's not receiving enough female applicants that it's changed the admission process to accommodate the biological clock. This means that students will have less work experience coming into the program.

In the past, business schools have said that prior work experience is important to the MBA education. But apparently, the lack of women is so detrimental to the education that Harvard is willing to take less work experience.

While the changes are beneficial for women in some respects, one has to wonder if this doesn't compromise the value of an MBA for everyone.

Say what? That link takes me to another article written by you that cites some "hush hush" thing about women starting school earlier for biological clock reasons and not personality reasons. Then there's a link to another article written by you, which takes me to yet another article written by you that has this in it:

There is a response from a woman, who, big surprise, has a big career. But to me, she just sounds like she’s whining. And she’s definitely missing the point.

So your opinions are valid, but her opinion isn't. Got it. Let's see some more things you wrote there:

The conclusion, that marriages and families work better with a full-time housewife, is hard to swallow but hard to deny.

Please, do not send me emails about your perfect marriage because I don’t believe it. In my marriage we have tried everything, and everything is hard in its own way.

Meanwhile, it’s good advice to men to pick a woman who will be a full-time housewife, but I have some advice for women who are shopping for husbands: To find a partner who will support your choices both financially and emotionally and who will be around enough to participate as an equal parent, marry someone with a very large trust fund

Ummmm.... ok. Since it hasn't worked for you, it can't work for anyone. Understood. So the sample size is one here. Something tells me that Batman Bruce would say that the sample size is a little too small to be statistically significant.

3. Business school is like buying a high-priced recruiter.

The best thing you get out of business school is a good job afterward. But how do you know you wouldn't be able to get that job without business school?

In an article in The Atlantic, management consultant Matthew Stewert says you probably could. He also says you should consider paying a recruiter to get you a good job, and spend your time taking philosophy classes instead. That's because philosophers, as Stewert writes, "are much better at knowing what they don't know. ... In a sense, management theory is what happens to philosophers when you pay them too much."

And if you are thinking of becoming a CEO, Sallie Krawcheck, herself the CEO of Citigroup's Global Wealth Management, says you should be an investment banking analyst first. That's because being a CEO is really about making decisions with limited information, and that's what analysts do best.

Another wonderful point. We're going to ignore the fact that Mr. Stewert has a doctoral degree, and seems to be only slightly jaded. We're also going to ignore the fact that he's trying to sell books on why management education stinks. There's no conflict there, right?

As for the IB analyst thing, how many IB analysts do you think there are coming out of school every year? Is that the only role in all of America that has to deal with incomplete information? For someone who wrote about work-life balance, I doubt IB analysts have that. Are you also trying to imply that if you have graduated college and worked in a different field, that you should go back to an entry level IB analyst position because that's the only way to make CEO someday?

4. Hotshots don't go to business school anymore.

For a while now, it's been clear that the true entrepreneurial geniuses don't need degrees. The most effective way to learn about entrepreneurship is to practice in real life. You don't need an MBA for that.

Now that trend is filtering into the finance industry. Pausing one's career to get an MBA used to be non-negotiable for investment bankers. But today, the top candidates in finance are choosing to forgo business school. They're already making tons of money, and they're well-positioned to keep making tons of money, so the MBA seems unnecessary.

The upshot of this is that business school might start looking like something for people who are feeling a little bit stuck in their careers and need a jumpstart, rather than just a starting gate for superstars.

Oh, so no successful entrepreneur needs to learn about how to manage human capital, or how to read financial statements, or how to market their product. They are either born with it, or they're never going to learn it. That makes a lot of sense.

I also didn't realize that EVERYONE who goes to business school wants to be a trader or open their own asset management shop. I thought there were lots of different things people go to business school for, not just to be a trader. It's amazing the things I'm learning from this article. I also didn't realize that business school was only for "Hotshots". I'm sure no future CEO will have come out of business school in the next five years. They're all going to be skipping it because they're former IB analysts who are already "Hot Shots" and don't need it. How will most of the Fortune 500 companies survive and prosper if every talented person is either in banking or running a hedge fund?

5. People go to business school for the wrong reasons.

An MBA is very expensive in terms of time and money, and it solves few problems. If you're not a star performer before b-school, you probably won't be one after you graduate And if you just want to make a lot of money, the odds of you of doing that are only as good as the odds of you getting into a top school -- currently about 1 in 10.

If you're still wondering if an MBA is necessary for you, here are five more situations that might put the nail in the coffin of the MBA.

The bottom line is that very few careers today really require an MBA. If you're getting one for a career that doesn't require it, you might look more like a procrastinator than a go-getter.

It solves few problems? Really? You mean that if I wasn't already a superstar there's no point in furthering my education, meeting some bright minds that I'll network with for the rest of my life, and getting a job that I otherwise would not have been able to? Darn. But let's go through your links again, since you took us to one article and then another one written by you:

5. Use LinkedIn instead of an MBA.
Okay. I’m sort of exaggerating here, but so many people say they are going to business school for the networking opportunity. Instead, these people should consider spending all that time on networking instead of going to class. Business school makes connections for you, but they might not be for the best; I once read an essay that suggested that
business schools are merely headhunters who charge a fee to the employee.

Ah yes, a headhunter will help me make the interpersonal relationships that I have over the past year. Nevermind that I'm still going to have the same skill set, but I should just pay a headhunter. I'm starting to wonder if you're married or related to one. But that link takes us to your five cautionary ideas about going to business school, that low and behold quotes Mr. Stewart again (ahem Mr. Bookseller), something about McKinsey not using MBAs (at least that's what I got out of her disjointed paragraph), business schools are both headhunters and places where you learn too much academic things (eh?), and something from a guy who gets paid to help people network saying that you need to be able to network outside of school (so how do you start again?)

If you can't tell, I'm not a fan of her article whatsoever. I think she's out of touch, and that everyone needs to investigate things for themselves. Her blanket statements are elementary and misleading at best, and her style is to create controversy, not educate anyone. I wouldn't follow her advice, but that's my opinion, not the facts that she's trying to present. In my opinion, if you think she's right, then business school isn't for you and I highly doubt we'd work well together.

 

SIDE NOTE: Home Dogs are now 14-6 the last three weeks with Buffalo going tonight.

September 30, 2007

Marketing

I will freely admit that I know very very little about consumer marketing. However, at Sportsman's last night there were two girls wearing tank-tops and shorts that advertised Jack Daniels. After seeing them walk around the bar, I started wondering. How effective is it to have those girls walk around and give the trinkets out compared to subsidizing the cost of a Jack Daniels drink at the bar? I didn't see anyone order a Jack Daniels drink while the girls were there, so I wonder why they were there. Who was the person who decided at first to send young ladies around a bar wearing the logo of the company in an attempt to get them to drink such a well known liquor. Wouldn't this method be more effective for an unknown alcohol?

Levitt Theory for today: (If you are in Vegas and able to legally gamble, use the Mirage lines, they are much more favorable to underdogs as compared to Caesars)

Atlanta +3 (Second)

Cleveland +4.5

Detroit +3

Minnesota +1.5 (Second)

Buffalo +3

San Fran +2

Arizona +6

Giants +2.5

Cincy +8 (Biggest anti-public play of week)

That's 9 games that have home dogs. There have only been 8 in the last 2 weeks. It will be interesting to see how well this theory works today.

September 25, 2007

You found my resume where?

I've been very fortunate the last couple of weeks. I've had people from many different companies in many different industries email or call me about possible job opportunities. Judging by my resume and my concentrations (finance and accounting), you would think that most jobs would be in that category. However, the jobs have been in every category except marketing (I guess they saw the grade The Heff laid on me last year). At the start of last week, I thought I had everything lined up as to where I was going to go and what I was going to do, but the last week has made me reconsider everything. On one hand I'd really like the process to be over, but after hearing the Dean speak I wonder if maybe one of these jobs that I wouldn't have even considered last year is a position that I would thrive in. I think the week of finals is going to be difficult, but I'm going to have to sit down and decide what's most important to me, and go from there.

Nandetta - I will write-up more about the M&A class next month. I want to be able to really contrast the business school style of teaching (which is what the first mod predominately is) compared to the second mod which will be taught by Professor Thompson in the law school.

Dan - The Levitt method is now 6-2. This week he'd be on Atl. +3, Lions +2.5, Vikings +1, Bills +3.5, San Fran +1, NYG +2.5, and the Bengals +7. Literally half the card are home dogs. Those are some ugly teams to be backing, and half the favorites are on the road. Wow.

OwenBloggers and all content & imagery © 2008 unless otherwise noted.
Design & layout may not be reused without permission.