Saturday, October 30, 2004

Mike Wise gets it 

Writing on the Expos move to DC, The Washington Post columnist puts it this way:

The Squeeze Play Is On


Baseball's owners take everything and leave you with a promise. They tell you professional athletics will not only make your city whole again but it will surely serve as an engine of economic growth. Then, 20 years down the line, when they have siphoned your treasury, you are left praying that the promise is fulfilled. Or else.
The rest is good too - he's a journalist that "gets it." Bravo, Mike.

Friday, October 29, 2004

Job Opening 

The University of Georgia is searching for faculty in Sports Studies. Here is the position announcement. My understanding is that they are particularly interested in someone with expertise in sports economics.

Smokin' - Updates II & III 

Note: This is a reproduction of an update to the post on the Red Sox' streakiness this post-season, and is placed at the top of the blog temporarily so repeat visitors won't miss it.

Update II: David Pinto writes in the comments section: "Hold it. Any 11 game sequence of 3 losses and 8 wins would have the same probability. So if the sequence was WLWLWWWWLWW, the probability would still be 2047 to 1, and no one would have thought it was very miraculous."

I anticipated this comment when I cut a line mentioning "1 of 2048 sequences, all equally likely" from the version I posted, since I didn't want to get into the following digression. Now is the right time I suppose. Thanks for prompting it.

The short answer is that David's sequence is much less streaky than the Sox's sequence. Of the 2048 combinations of an 11 game sequence, some are streakier than LLL-WWWW-WWWW, but not many. And fewer still would have resulted in a Red Sox victory in the World Series.

There is a statistical test for whether a sequence is streaky - a "runs test." If I get a chance I'll execute it and post it in Update III. If someone has it handy it the result may make it here before the weekend. I believe that the Sox' streak is highly unlikely under a coin flip scenario, and is thus evidence against the random walk model.

Update III: I've had a chance to check my trusty stats book from days of yore (Walpole and Myers, 1985). The probability of having only 2 runs in a sequence of eleven trials, i.e. one run of Ls and one run of Ws, where either outcome is equally likely, is .012. That "p-value" is sufficiently low to reject the null hypothesis at the 95% confidence level, the standard used by David in his critique of my original post. Skeptics may wish to employ a higher standard of proof, but it's good enough for me. Indeed, Walpole and Myers employ a similar example from a twelve trial sequence, and state that "a sample containing only two runs is most unlikely to occur from a random selection process."

I continue to believe the Red Sox' post-season performance was streaky.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Why I believe in the hot hand 

The post below discusses the hot hand, in reference to the amazing LCS and World Series performance by the World Champion(!) Boston Red Sox. I take the point that the general public, and television commentators in particular, often refer to "hot" or "cold" streaks in the midst of purely random sequences of events. And detecting systematic departures from a random walk model of basketball shooting or baseball hitting is notoriously difficult.

But these facts do not disprove the existence of streaky performance. Many factors - some physical, some psychological - affect an athlete's ability to perform. Take a golfer with a bad back. When it hurts, he's toast. When it's fine, he's as smooth as silk. Think Freddie Couples. Better yet, on the psychological side, read Malcolm Gladwell:
There was a moment, in the third and deciding set of the 1993 Wimbledon final, when Jana Novotna seemed invincible. She was leading 4-1 and serving at 40-30, meaning that she was one point from winning the game, and just five points from the most coveted championship in tennis. She had just hit a backhand to her opponent, Steffi Graf, that skimmed the net and landed so abruptly on the far side of the court that Graf could only watch, in flat- footed frustration. The stands at Center Court were packed. The Duke and Duchess of Kent were in their customary place in the royal box. Novotna was in white, poised and confident, her blond hair held back with a headband--and then something happened. She served the ball straight into the net. She stopped and steadied herself for the second serve--the toss, the arch of the back--but this time it was worse. Her swing seemed halfhearted, all arm and no legs and torso. Double fault. On the next point, she was slow to react to a high shot by Graf, and badly missed on a forehand volley. At game point, she hit an overhead straight into the net. Instead of 5-1, it was now 4-2. Graf to serve: an easy victory, 4-3. Novotna to serve. She wasn't tossing the ball high enough. Her head was down. Her movements had slowed markedly. She double-faulted once, twice, three times. Pulled wide by a Graf forehand, Novotna inexplicably hit a low, flat shot directly at Graf, instead of a high crosscourt forehand that would have given her time to get back into position: 4-4. Did she suddenly realize how terrifyingly close she was to victory? Did she remember that she had never won a major tournament before? Did she look across the net and see Steffi Graf--Steffi Graf!--the greatest player of her generation?
I remember that match. If you don't believe in the hot hand, you'd believe that Novotna had a decent chance of winning it at that point. It didn't turn out that way.

Being a cynic, I used to scoff when announcers would talk about shifting "momentum" in a football game. Not any more. Sure, they overuse the term, but don't they do that with everything they chatter about?

And by the way, the Astros got "hot" this season too, and I'm mighty grateful for it.

Smokin' 

Snippets of a conversation among two economists this morning:
A: Is a sequence of eight heads conditioned on three tails a random walk?

B: Almost certainly not. Why?

A: The Red Sox.

B: Yeah, wow. That was some performance.

A: Did they have a hot hand?

B: I think so. And apparently the Cardinals did too. They hardly showed up last night.
The conventional wisdom in the academic literature is that psychologists and behavioral economists have debunked the "myth of the hot hand," i.e. that players or teams are subject to streaky performance. Performance is just a random walk, they say. I don't buy it. The Red Sox were on a roll.

Note: The odds against LLL-WWWW-WWWW in a sequence of coin flips are 2047 to 1. Yes, Sox fans, deliverance from the curse of 1918 was a near miraculous event.

Update: Eric McErlain points out that the Red Sox' post-season was even streakier than the sequence listed above.

Update II: David Pinto writes in the comments section: "Hold it. Any 11 game sequence of 3 losses and 8 wins would have the same probability. So if the sequence was WLWLWWWWLWW, the probability would still be 2047 to 1, and no one would have thought it was very miraculous."

I anticipated this comment when I cut a line mentioning "1 of 2048 sequences, all equally likely" from the version I posted, since I didn't want to get into the following digression. Now is the right time I suppose. Thanks for prompting it.

The short answer is that David's sequence is much less streaky than the Sox's sequence. Of the 2048 combinations of an 11 game sequence, some are streakier than LLL-WWWW-WWWW, but not many. And fewer still would have resulted in a Red Sox victory in the World Series.

There is a statistical test for whether a sequence is streaky - a "runs test." If I get a chance I'll execute it and post it in Update III. If someone has it handy it the result may make it here before the weekend. I believe that the Sox' streak is highly unlikely under a coin flip scenario, and is thus evidence against the random walk model.

Update III: I've had a chance to check my trusty stats book from days of yore (Walpole and Myers, 1985). The probability of having only 2 runs in a sequence of eleven trials, i.e. one run of Ls and one run of Ws, where either outcome is equally likely, is .012. That "p-value" is sufficiently low to reject the null hypothesis at the 95% confidence level, the standard used by David in his critique of my original post. Skeptics may wish to employ a higher standard of proof, but it's good enough for me. Indeed, Walpole and Myers employ a similar example from a twelve trial sequence, and state that "a sample containing only two runs is most unlikely to occur from a random selection process."

I continue to believe the Red Sox post-season performance was streaky.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

"Caught Stealing" 

That's the title of a briefing paper by Dennis Coates and Brad R. Humphreys, just published by the Cato Institute. The paper focuses on the public subsidy for the new baseball stadium in DC. Money quote: "Baseball's protracted decision-making process as it mulled over the relative merits of various locations ... was a classic exercise in concession extraction by a monopoly sports league."

Perhaps the best part of the paper is its critique of the political rhetoric which politicians use to promote the subsidy. Consider this claim by Mayor Williams:
"the ballpark will be 100% financed by the team owners, those who use the ballpark, and by DC's largest businesses ... our residents will not be asked to pay one dime of tax dollars toward this ballpark."
Coates and Humphreys brilliantly expose the fallacy, indeed the lie in that statement. They also discuss their research, which documents that bringing a sports club to town is not the economic bonanza it is purported to be.

Given the timeliness of the topic and the quality of the presentation, this report goes directly on the reading list for my students. If you are interested in this issue, it belongs on your list too.

Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Welcome to Market Power 

Market Power is a new, cleverly named economics blog from Phil Miller in North Mankato, Minnesota. Phil is off to a good start. Indeed, this post on revenue sharing in sports parallels a lecture I gave to my students last week, so he must be right!
With this type of revenue sharing, the value of talent at the margin decreases for every team by the same proportion. It is argued that profit maximizing teams will not alter the amount of talent that they will try to acquire - but that talent will bring less in pay for the players. In other words, relative talent is unchanged leaving no change in competitive balance.
That's the theory alright: revenue sharing has no impact in a league composed of profit-maximizing owners. (Note: a luxury tax, however, by affecting the margin only for high spending teams, can affect competitive balance.)

Phil continues with an empirical observation:
MLB has recognized that there may be a need for an incentive to entice receiving teams to spend some of their shared revenues. The most recent collective bargaining agreement signed by baseball players and owners states that "each club shall use its revenue-sharing receipts... in an effort to improve its performance on the field." "... the Commissioner", Bud Selig, " may impose penalties on any club that violates this obligation."
In most CBAs these days, the player have been able to offset some of the consequences of salary caps and revenue sharing by negotiating a floor for payrolls, or some requirement that owners don't simply pocket the transferred cash. The trouble with the MLB agreement is that the enforcer of the spending floor happens to be Bud Selig. And Bud knows which side his bread is buttered on.

Beer-free sports TV 

Get ready for the "Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV." Coming soon to a campus near you, the campaign has been "endorsed by more than 150 organizations."

I think the initiative has a fighting chance. If it comes to pass, I'll miss the Bud Light ads, even though I can't stand the stuff. As for the Coors twins and their lot, good riddance.

Monday, October 25, 2004

Eliminate the stoplight 

From a fascinating article on Traffic Control by Kenneth Todd in the current issue of Regulation:
Official reports have attributed 40 percent of the vehicle delays in urban areas to traffic signal inefficiencies. If that figure is correct, the annual nationwide loss comes to 5.7 billion vehicle-hours, or $95 billion, plus $28 billion for wasted fuel and other vehicle operating costs.
Some places in the US are making greater use of roundabouts and all way stops, which Todd argues are more efficient in many applications where stoplights are currently installed. I'll buy that. In Clemson we have a perfect candidate for elimination: the stoplight at College Avenue and campus. This light perfectly fits the cartoon of signs accompanying Todd's piece, with a seemingly infinite array of periods, each granting one entity or another the exclusive right to travel through the intersection. The result: waiting, and lots of it.

Consider this however:
Experiments in the Netherlands have shown that running traffic in urban areas at 30 kilometres per hour, encouraging eye contact, eliminating traffic rules, signals, and other controls all together - and leaving road users to their own devices, their own judgment, and their common law duty of reasonable care - has cut accidents, delay, and congestion, and saved public funds. ... So successful were those trials that other European towns are copying them.
I'm certain the campus planner and city engineer will scoff at this, but they'll both be getting a copy of Todd's article. You should too.

Winning by the numbers 

Hal Bodley on the Red Sox' Theo Epstein:
Exorcising the Curse of the Bambino is the Red Sox mission, but a subplot is the performance of Epstein, whose innovative approach to baseball will be on display as this Series evolves.

Oakland's Billy Beane is the high priest of this approach. In addition to Epstein, disciples include Toronto's J.P. Ricciardi and Paul DePodesta of the Los Angeles Dodgers.

What Epstein has done should certainly silence critics. Especially after the Red Sox took a two games to none lead in the Series on Sunday, thrashing St. Louis 6-2 for their sixth consecutive postseason victory.

Epstein, at 30 the youngest GM ever in the bigs, is a Yale grad. He and DePodesta, 31, from Harvard, have brought an Ivy League presence to a fraternity of grass-roots baseball lifers who didn't know a spreadsheet from a bedsheet.
The Sox have been trading at 80 cents today on Tradesports, so the Curse is pretty well done and dusted, but there's still plenty of ball to be played.

Can a rap concert save a football program? 

Middle Tennessee State is in jeopardy of losing its Division I status due to lack of interest in its football team, as attendance has fallen below the NCAA's minimum requirement. Like many things NCAA, the attendance minimum is a bizarre rule, unless viewed as a petty means of cartelization. Which keeps it in the land of the bizarre.

MTSU's solution falls into the bizarro category as well: a post-game concert with 1/2 of a rap duo performing. The armchairgm has a reasonable take on this madness.

Update: In the comments section, John Topoleski points out the following piece of chicanery:
Louisiana-Monroe (another Sun Belt conference team) this season played at home game in Little Rock vs. Arkansas. This was a favor to ULM in order to meet the attendence requirement.
The attendance requirement is one heck of a rule, ain't it?

Why Lone Star Park? 

The Breeders Cup will take place this weekend at Lone Star Park in Grand Prairie, Texas. This is not exactly one of your historic, tradition-laden racetracks. Why have the event there? Several reasons are discussed in this story, the most important of them being Lone Star president Cory Johnson. He's been a man on a mission for the past decade. With any luck, come Saturday it will be "mission accomplished."

Dueling studies on Arlington stadium 

This Dallas Business Journal story focuses on economist Mark Rosentraub's critique of the pro-stadium propaganda purchased by the City of Arlington. Arlington's mayor defends the propaganda against all logic. He does the job of a masterful politician, deflecting the criticism and obfuscating the issue:
Arlington Mayor Robert Cluck, who said he's familiar with Rosentraub's work, said he remains comfortable with the ERA study.

"I certainly hope that Mark is right and that money that is currently spent on the Cowboys in Irving is redistributed right here in Arlington," he said. "Arlington is not getting anything from the Cowboys right now, and that's basically what we're doing -- redistributing wealth to Arlington."
Clever - even taking account of whatever locational redistribution takes place, Rosentraub's calculations show that the stadium deal is a loser for Arlington.
Cluck also noted that Rosentraub has consistently argued against building stadiums in lightly populated suburbs, without masterplans for ancillary development.

"We're proposing to put this stadium in the middle of our entertainment corridor, which includes Six Flags, Hurricane Harbor and AmeriQuest Field," Cluck said. "He said you have to have a master development plan, and we signed an agreement a few weeks ago to hire a masterplanner.
I find it hard to believe that putting the Cowboys alongside the Texas Rangers will provide the perfect catalyst for growth and development in Arlington, and I'm certain that after-the-fact "master planning" is nothing more than window dressing.

The Dallas Cowboys have followed the stadium subsidy script perfectly, playing off one political jurisdiction against another, landing a few hundred million dollars in the process. Rewind the tape a month or so, and you will find MLB doing the same in landing a sum of similar magnitude from Washington DC.

There is no question that the revenue stream enjoyed by the Cowboys is more than sufficient to finance construction of a stadium. But given the locational mobility of our franchises, we can expect the stadium subsidy game to be played out each time a stadium lease agreement expires. This is why I'm a card-carrying supporter of Keith Olbermann's Constitutional Amendment Prohibiting Corporate Welfare:
any official of any government "who pays, suggests his government should pay, or promises a sports franchise, or ... money towards building a stadium or refurbishing an existing one, that official will be sentenced to a life of hard labor in a federal penitentiary."
That's what it would take to put a stop to this.

Note: Anyone interested in the Cowboys' stadium controversy should visit Craig Depken's blog, which is the mother lode of links on this issue.

Friday, October 22, 2004

Boswell on the Bosox 

Thomas Boswell adds to the hype of a hyped up series, doubtless sowing the seeds of future mythological literature. But with his conclusion, and indeed much that preceeds it, I concur:
[T]he Red Sox stealing the pennant from the Yankees not once but four times within 72 heart-stopping hours was something more than just the greatest last-gasp comeback in history.

More than that, it was a partial squaring of accounts, a down payment on simple fairness. With due respect to Brian Cashman, Torre and their classy players, the Yankees cannot escape the fact that their franchise has used its wealth to tilt the supposedly level playing field of sport by a larger margin and over a far longer period of time than any other team in our national history. If somebody should have the biggest flop on record in our national pastime, it should be the Yankees; and it should be while George Steinbrenner III owns them at a moment when he has, yet again, broken his own gluttonous payroll record with a $182 million team.

If any club deserved the right to administer these dishonors to the Yankees, it was the Red Sox, crownless for 86 years. The true distinction of this fabulous week was that this ALCS was the most fun -- the most unadulterated, disbelieving, decades-overdue fun -- that baseball has experienced in our time. And maybe, if you like a pinch of malice with your meat, ever.
Well, I'm not sure unremitting tension is fun, but the result of it all surely was.

Any publicity is good publicity 

Some school leaders buy that theory, and some of their faculty differ. Here's University of Nebraska Chancellor Harvey Perlman: "They offered us Tommy Lee, they didn't offer us Snow White."

The Motley Crue drummer has enrolled in classes at Nebraska in order to film a reality TV show. Lee's likely grades aside, Snow White would have certainly failed to get Perlman's institution in the news. So by his operative theory's standard, the move has already been a success.

No hate, no hype... 

just baseball, at its best. Congratulations to the Cardinals. Getting through that lineup is a nightmare, and even Roger Clemens, on a night where he threw five really good innings, couldn't do it for a sixth.

Well, it was a great ride for Astros fans - unbelieveable really - and someday the boys will get there. Give 'em a chance Drayton: Sign Carlos Beltran!

Economic impact of the Super Bowl 

From an article in the Greensboro News-Record, some stats for the Panthers, on the heels of their improbable run last season:
Between the NFC championship and the Super Bowl, the team saw a 3,448 percent increase in merchandise sales over the same two-week period in 2003.

...The spillover into the 2004 season hasn’t been nearly as dramatic, of course, but business has been good. Game-day merchandise sales at the stadium are up 47 percent.


...An 18 percent increase in ticket prices, bringing the average Panthers ticket to $50.23. [Note: Virtually all Panther games are sellouts].

...The annual sale of personal seat licenses, which require a one-time payment for lifetime season-ticket rights and essentially paid for the construction of the Panthers’ privately financed stadium, have more than doubled to 1,400 in 2004.

...Sponsorship sales ... are up 20 percent from last year.
These appear to be facts that should be taken at face value. The article errs, however, in the following assertion:
The Panthers’ success likely won’t have any impact on the city’s economy, though, largely because the team owns the stadium, radio broadcast rights, Internet site, you name it.
Who owns what has little to do with the breadth of the economic impact. The Richardsons are local people, so the windfall is not flowing out to New York City, per se. The real issue is that the money collected by the Richardsons' comes out of the pockets of local citizens, who are spending money on the football team, and not somewhere else. That the Richardsons have put a more competitive product in the marketplace does not boost the cash flow of the Charlotte Motor Speedway, it reduces it.

Thursday, October 21, 2004

Want to get inside Steinbrenner's head? 

Go here. Poor George.....

Cover shots 

The WSJ online has a collection of front page photos from Boston and NY papers on the Red Sox' famous victory over the Yankees last night. Prominent are boyish celebrations among the Sox, and anguished portraits of beaten Yanks. The pick of the litter goes to The Boston Herald. The Herald's is the only cover with an action photo: a sweet shot of the ball jumping off the bat of Johnny Damon.

I respect the Yankee players, but not their fans' lording over the Red Sox these past few years, nor the organist prompting the crowd into the "Who's Your Daddy" chant. If the chant is home grown, that's one thing (as in English football). But that was a low blow from what should be a classy organization.

Wednesday, October 20, 2004

The Golden Age League 

Wealth has its advantages. The European soccer leagues are loaded with the best young talent from South America. But what about the older players, those who came through the ranks before big money hit the game?

The demand for "golden age" players brings some Latinos to the states, where an airplane ticket and an offer of a day job allows them to play in leagues for old-timers. From The New York Times:
They call this over-40 soccer league of Central and South American players the Golden Age League. It has several teams made up of players who mostly live in New York City. Now that the league is in its playoffs, many former soccer stars who are legends in their countries and among soccer fans come out of the woodwork to play. Romerito, who lives mostly in Paraguay, spends October here, staying with friends in Astoria, Queens. Mr. Cabañas, who lives in White Plains and is busy raising a family and running a soccer school, takes more evenings off than he can really afford, for Sol de América.

Both Mr. Cabañas and Romerito are retired and have lost a step or two in the open field, but their legs are still taut and their skills remain sharp. Though slightly past their prime, the men are hardly weekend warriors. The play is rugged. There are daring diving headers and savage sliding tackles. Passes are crisp, and the men execute plays with the strategic cunning of a chess grandmaster.

...Miguel González, a Paraguayan immigrant who plays for Sol de América, stood watching in street clothes and shook his head in disbelief.

"I grew up like everyone in my country, watching these guys playing on television as national heroes," he said. "It's exciting but it's strange. You have some of the best soccer players in history playing in this park, and no one knows it."

...Mr. Cabañas said that even after his distinguished 21-year professional playing career, he is not set for life.

"I can't retire," he said. "American athletes make a lot of money, but soccer players have to keep working."

"I have played with Pelé and Maradona," Mr. Cabañas said. "I scored 380 goals in my career, but when someone recognizes me playing in the park and thanks me for what I've done for soccer, it's as thrilling as playing in Giants Stadium in front of 75,000 fans."
Thanks to Nick Ebinger for the link.

Reaching out 

The Vatican now pontificates on soccer, in a weekly radio program. Why not? The culture of sport could benefit from high-minded commentary.

And it might benefit the church too. I'd wager that the purpose is to advertise the cardinals' love of the game, and to expand their presence in the sports community. While it may prove a successful venture on those terms, drawing sports commentary from such a narrow pool seems unlikely to pass the market test.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Cathedral Costs 

Declarations of the "economic impact" of sports stadiums never touch on the fundamental question of resource allocation that should be at the heart of the debate over stadium finance. One virtue of leaving the financing of such projects to the teams themselves is that, should customers be willing to pay sufficiently through ticket prices and the like, we can be confident that the resources used to build stadiums are flowing to their highest-valued use. Once the state gets involved, all bets are off.

An example of the opportunity costs of diverting resources to state-supported projects comes from a new manuscript written by Ekelund, Hebert, and Tollison. In Economics and Christianity, they offer a supply-side analysis of the link between the Protestant Reformation and the subsequent development of capitalism in Europe. This addresses the famous thesis of Max Weber, whose explanation for the link is preference-based (crudely put, Calvin promoted thrift, and so on, which made savings available for capital investment). In contrast, the essence of Ekelund, Hebert, and Tollison's theory is that the Reformation reduced the cost of religious services in Europe below that offered under the Catholic monopoly. Reduced spending on cathedrals and bishops allowed more resources to be directed towards transport, education, and technology. You need not read very far to find the analogy to sports stadiums:
Competition, in medieval times and our own, almost always has a locational component. Urban centers with cathedrals vied fiercely for relics and works of art to adorn their churches. Somewhat in the manner of modern sports stadiums, medieval cities engaged in a kind of spatial competition for ever grander cathedrals that inflated the costs of providing religious services of all kinds...

In this as in all matters economic, the true cost of the cathedral was the opportunity cost of resources used in its construction and maintenance: the opportunity cost of stone masons, artists and saver-investors whose human and physical capital resources were directed to the provision of religious services.

...The precise amount of resource use generated by cathedral building cannot be directly calculated, but a good deal of anecdotal evidence suggests that the opportunity costs were massive. According to Scott, more stone was cut between 1050 and 1350 in France than in the entire history of Egypt. Scott and Morris also note that almost 9,500 ecclesiastical buildings, such as abbeys, cathedrals, parish churches, were constructed in England and Wales over the medieval period. While capital markets were rudimentary, the actual building of cathedrals on these scales meant that resources were in fact responsive to a kind of "spiritual" investment demand and therefore allocated away from additional infrastructure, such as roads and bridges, or from greater investments in education and technology.

...Scott estimates that each Gothic cathedral or other type of great church would cost hundreds of millions of pounds in contemporary currency. Such estimates, while anecdotal, provide indirect evidence of an enormous opportunity cost of building cathedrals and other church structures. Indeed, if Weber is correct, economic growth set in after the spate of cathedral building stopped, which is a corollary of our argument.

...It is clear that medieval Catholicism emphasized large-scale, extravagant structures over small-scale, simple ones. Economic resources have alternative uses. Therefore, by rejecting the extravagance of church buildings - however they were financed - Protestantism made it possible for such resources to be directed toward more secular, market-oriented activities.
We are wealthier these days, and can afford some degree of state-sponsored extravagance when it comes to building stadiums. But I find the cathedral cost story compelling. And the principle remains the same centuries down the road -- the opportunity costs to resource mis-allocation are real, and potentially quite large.

Sign Carlos Beltran! 

Astros fan Ray Kirby's Sign Carlos Beltran Petition now has over 9000 signatures. Petitions can be fun. But what will make the difference once the season ends is cold hard cash, and George Steinbrenner (curse his dark soul) will come calling with a mountain of it. But those thoughts don't quell the joy of being one game from the World Series.

For those of you stuck with Fox and the Yankees-Red Sox last night, my condolences. As good as that game was (I kept tabs between innings), the battle between the Cards and 'Stros was one for the ages. Jayson Stark agrees.

There's nothing like a tight post-season baseball game to raise and maintain the tension in a sports fan. Every pitch or fielding play matters enormously when hits are as scarce as last night (one a piece through eight innings).

The eduring image from the game may be Beltran streaking like a gazelle from right-center to left-center, diving in full stride and just snaring Renteria's line drive before it hit the grass. Or perhaps it will be Beltran gracefully backing up Tal's Hill to snag a fly ball at the 425-foot mark, where everyone else seems to rumble, stumble, and bumble as if auditioning for a Chris Berman video. Said Bagwell, tonque-in-cheek: "He didn't just make it look easy. He went up the hill backward. In case you hadn't noticed, he's a decent player."

He's decent, sure enough. Then there was Lidge - lights out! Then Kent, then delirium. What a night for Astros fans.

Saturday, October 16, 2004

Economics students on a roll 

This is the heyday of the analytical manager. The longest unbeaten run in English history now stands at 49 games, and belongs to Arsene Wenger's Arsenal. The Gunners dispatched Aston Villa by a 3-1 score today, despite falling behind to a goal in the opening moments of the match. Tomorrow, Bill Belichick's Patriots attempt to extend the NFL's record winning streak to 20 against the Seahawks.

As regular readers of this blog well know, both managers graduated from University with degrees in economics, and are known for their innovative thinking and use of analytical tools. The point? Economics teaches a method of analysis, one that is quite useful. Its application in sport helps break through conventional wisdom and uncovers more productive approaches to both player management, and the strategic approach to the game itself.

We may be at the high water mark for these streaks, as all good things come to an end, and athletic competition is keen and subject to randomness. The 3-1 Seahawks will be a tough test for the unbeaten Pats tomorrow, while next Sunday the Gunners will face Manchester United at Old Trafford. Both will be challenging games. But these challenges are what makes sport interesting. Bring it on!

Is the Fox Soccer Channel in our future? 

Via Soccertv.com:
Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation has filed trademark applications 78444142 and 78485747 with the United States Patent and Trademark Office to register the names "FOX Soccer Channel" and "The Soccer Channel".

Multiple sources indicate that FOX is planning to convert FOX Sports World (US) into an all-soccer channel sometime in the first quarter of 2005.
That's all I ever watch on Fox Sports World, so that's good news for me and Stateside soccerheads. Significant media exposure will help develop the game in the US, and could provide a boost for the MLS. Let's hope it motivates the league to increase its investment in world class talent.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

"Rushing the passer" 

From the Fort Worth Weekly, a nice article by Dan McGraw on the rush to put the Cowboys' stadium "proposal" on the ballot in Arlington.
Despite all these no-hurry factors, Jones insisted that this issue be put on the Nov. 2 ballot. There are many issues at play: polling numbers that favor a general election with high turnout, national trends that show local governments aren’t as enthusiastic about stadiums as they once were, and some important court cases on the docket that may affect future stadium developments.

According to several sources involved in the negotiations between the Cowboys and several local governments about potential locations for a new stadium, Jones has made a fall election a non-negotiable demand.

....Those who study voter turnouts know that national elections draw many more of these less-savvy voters than local elections. Polls paid for by the Cowboys, sources said, made it clear that if a stadium issue went before voters in a special election — where turnout is low and anti-tax older people still get out and vote — the issue could lose big time. In short, Jones’ advisors have told him that if the issue doesn’t get on some ballot during this presidential election, it might be years before it could pass.
Let me restate that slightly: the less informed the voting pool, the better, for the likes of Jerry Jones.

Wednesday, October 13, 2004

An interesting approach to investing 

Bill Brown sent me the following quote from The Sequoia Fund's annual report:
There is nothing wrong with good luck, particularly when it's yours. But we approach the market not as if it were Churchill Downs, where the outcome of the wager is clear in a couple of minutes, but as if it were the auction block at Keeneland, where you expect the purchase of a horse to prove itself out over years. Because this is for the long run, we don't want Old Paint. We want a great horse at a great price. And because, unlike at Keeneland, an investment comes with a rider who will be in the saddle for many years, we put as much emphasis on the jockey as we do the horse.
The report goes on to compare some of their winning equity bets to "terrific thoroughbreds." I don't own the shares (the fund is closed to new investors) but I like their style!

Larry Summers on the Nobel Prize 

From yesterday's WSJ on the Nobel award to Kydland and Prescott:
Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard and the former U.S. Treasury secretary, once wrote that the work of Messrs. Prescott and Kydland on business cycles had "nothing to do with the business-cycle phenomena observed in the United States or other capitalist economies." In an e-mail yesterday, Mr. Summers said the two professors "richly deserve" the prize because of the economic methods they introduced, even though "I like many others find their particular theories [about business cycles] implausible."
Summers is a distinguished economist. When he wrote this attack on real business cycle theory I took it seriously, and assigned the paper to my students. But we've just gone through a period which, in my view, provides an ideal example of real business cycle theory in action. Few would dispute that we've experienced a decade-long cycle driven by technical change in information technology. The 90's boom was fueled by investment in this sector, a process which had a huge impact on labor productivity. The recent recession was clearly associated with a collapse in hi-tech investment. This long cycle of boom and bust is exactly what Kydland and Prescott's "Time to Build" paper was about. After living through this for the past fifteen years or so, how can a mind as sharp as Larry Summers' still find the theory "implausible." I'm completely baffled by that comment.

Sunday, October 10, 2004

Pitching on 3 days rest 

ESPN's Jayson Stark :
Clemens will start Sunday on three days' rest, for the first time in 2 1/2 years. He has won just once on short rest in the last 14 years. And his record in the six starts he has made in that span (regular season and postseason) is only 1-4, with a 7.55 ERA. He hasn't won a postseason start on three days' rest since Game 7 of the 1986 ALCS.

If he doesn't win, the Astros will then bring Oswalt back on three days' rest Monday. They won't want to know that, counting Johan Santana's no-decision Saturday in the Twins-Yankees series, 39 pitchers since 1999 have started a postseason game on short rest. They've gone a combined 7-20. And their teams are 11-28.
Ouch. Those aren't very good odds. But then again, when the choice is between Pete Munro or Clemens on three days rest, you give the ball to Roger.

Cowboys v. Redskins 

Jeff Mosier of the Dallas Morning News digs up a barrel full of facts on comparative stadium finance. He contrasts the modest public investment and unknown economic impact of the Redskins' FedEx Field, with the Cowboys' plans for a stadium in Arlington.

Mosier doesn't take a stand, but read between the lines and the following picture will emerge. City officials on FedEx Field: "huuuge economic impact!!!" Local businesses and residents: "where - at the tailgate parties in the parking lot ten times a year?"

Monday, October 04, 2004

Blinkers on 

I'm in the stretch drive, trying to finish a paper by midweek, so blogging will cease until then. In the meantime, allow me to mention two events from last weekend which warmed the heart of this cynic. First, 2003 Derby winner Funny Cide turned in his best performance since last year's Preakness. He won the Jockey Club Gold Cup at Belmont with a determined stretch drive. It's good to see the gelding capture a big race.

And how about those Astros? They literally came back from the dead. They are everything that the vanquished Cubs are not, namely, a team. And as a Chicago reporter wrote last month, a team with class. As a life-long fan, its great to see them come through like this. Seven straight wins to make the playoffs, every one of them absolutely necessary, and eighteen in a row at home! Look out Atlanta!

Thanks for reading, and see you later in the week.

Friday, October 01, 2004

A modest pitch on behalf of trial lawyers 

Merck has moved rather swiftly and decisively in its withdrawal of Vioxx from the marketplace. The stock took a big hit yesterday, but experts are praising the company's response, according to this article in today's WSJ:
The pharmaceuticals giant responded 'almost in a paragon way,' said Gerald C. Meyers, a University of Michigan business professor of organization and management. 'They're being very open about what they know. They're bringing in top people to lend veracity,' he said. Faced with a major crisis, 'most companies fail because they're not prepared.'

But the Merck crisis could linger for a long time, as its management struggles to quell anxiety among patients, employees and investors. The manufacturer withdrew its popular painkiller after a trial showed increased risk for heart attacks or strokes. The move sent its stock falling nearly 27%.

Merck also may face more criticism for having strenuously denied for several years suggestions by outside researchers that use of Vioxx led to heart problems. The company even published its own studies suggesting the drug wasn't causing harm.

To maintain faith in its crisis management, specialists say, Merck will need to make prompt disclosures of any additional information about Vioxx, good or bad, through national advertising campaigns, direct patient contact and meetings with their physicians. Merck officials should assure the public that 'we will make sure you know day by day what we know' about the drug's problems, said Harry M. Jansen Kraemer Jr., former chairman and CEO of Baxter International Inc. 'This is a matter of life and death.'
My take: Merck's response is due to a real threat from trial lawyers. If they dragged their feet while more and more evidence accumulated, the company would face a barrage of suits from families of heart attack victims. Now, it is possible that the added risk of heart attack from taking Vioxx is not fully established. I'm certainly no expert on that. But assuming the link is real, the threat from trial lawyers motivates appropriate behavior from Merck, and is thus saving people's lives.

Musical teams 

The Jets & Nets are looking to move across the river. The next move in the saga may involve the Mets reversing the flow, and moving to New Jersey.

Remember folks, bilateral monopoly has no stable equilibrium. That's what our sports barons and politicians have given us. It's not a pretty spectacle, and not what sports are supposed to be about. Thanks to John Jasina for the link.