Darren Rovell has asked the question “Is the First Pick a Money Maker?” In commenting on Rovell’s analysis at the Freakonomics blog, Stephen Dubner stated: “I don’t know what the Wages of Wins boys would make of Rovell’s analysis, but it’s well worth a look.”
So Dubner has given us (which I think will be me) an assignment. This assignment allows me to comment on Rovell’s insights, which the readers of The Wages of Wins would know are amazing (after all, on the cover of WoW are Rovell’s words: “Buy this book if you never want to lose an office water cooler debate again”). Also readers of WoW know how much we like Freakonomics. So clearly, this is a great assignment.
Unfortunately, this is going to take a bit of time. And by time I mean, I think I can have some kind of an answer by tomorrow.
In the meantime, take a look at the latest brilliant column from Stephen Walters: The Gluttons’ Pavilion at Dodger Stadium. Not sure what it is about the name Stephen, but our sample from Dubner and Walters suggests that this particular name seems to endow a person with unusually high levels of writing talent. Walters is clearly the best writing talent to grace this forum (and I am not saying that just because he works for free).
- DJ
4 responses so far ↓
Steve Walters // May 24, 2007 at 11:07 am
I like how Dave keeps using the word “brilliant” in the same sentence with my name. Never gets old. Clearly, then, I am not working for “free.”
This weekend the International Association of Sports Economists will be meeting in… Dayton, Ohio. There will be a lot of genuinely brilliant researchers in the room, and I’ll do my best to report in at some point with a summary of exactly where the frontiers of human knowledge are being pushed outward.
Natty K // May 24, 2007 at 2:23 pm
A couple years ago, ESPN published an academic study which claimed that (at least in the NFL), it was better to draft at the end of the first round. The argument went that the talent was more uniform than the pay differentials, and thus it was wasteful to spend money on a top pick. The general perception that it was more valuable only made matters worse, as teams with top picks who traded out did much better. In other words, making the pick was a double error. Paying too much for a talent and not getting multiple players of comparable talent later on.
Andres // May 24, 2007 at 3:07 pm
The question “is the first pick a win maker,” assuming wins eventually turn into money and championships, is central to the debate of tanking as a basketball strategy.
If I had paid millions of dollars for a franchise and I was paying more millions for someone to run my team, all while losing games, and all they could come up with to turn things around is let’s lose games so we can let a game of chance give us “the” winning piece, I’d fire them.
I’d love to break down each draft by player, get their wins produced, add their tenure in the league and see what kind of value was really had on the court. Maybe that would finally settle the doubt…
Ray // May 24, 2007 at 4:33 pm
The book is fake. You need to find better economist!