Blog Post - Luggyball (part 1)

[Pubey]

http://www.shrimperzone.com/vb/entry.php?46-Luggyball-part-1

Please read, comment, tear to pieces!

Thanks

j

 

[Ricky Otto]

This really interests me, I actually created a thread on this subject some time ago. Good blog.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Good stuff, looking forward to the follow-up and am very interested with where you take this.

BTW Beane and De Podesta didn't invent new statistics, they utilised advanced statistical analysis that had been developed by amateur baseball enthusiasts looking to better understand the game such as the legendary Bill James. Beane's contribution was to bring these amateur metrics and way of analysing into the professional game as these models were actually better than the traditional measures that had been widely used.

 

[Blue_Wes]

http://www.shrimperzone.com/vb/entry.php?46-Luggyball-part-1

Please read, comment, tear to pieces!

Thanks

j

Good read. I enjoyed the film, and have wondered myself if/how the same is/can be applied to football. Like YB, be interested in how you tie this into Luggy.

PS. Looking at that picture, anyone else think Luggy and David Dickinson share the same sunbed?

 

[Napster]

Economics is not about money or big business per se, but about making the best of limited resources. Economics was traditionally founded on concept that people made rational decisions – that with their salary they spent it wisely, and looked to maximise their wellbeing. Economists look to apply this to decision-making for firms and business – getting the best out of limited resources, or maximising efficiency and profit. The problem is that many people, decision-makers, and economists get it wrong. They are stupid with their money, they manage their businesses inefficiently, and this allows other people to take advantage.


Interesting. But I disagree. It depends on who's making the decision and why. Rationalism is a logical place to start, but it is always pragmatism that wins out, however on a macro-scale this is not efficient.

I also think it is because resources are scarce because people are more competitive and in a capitalist economy, with the aim being to maximise dividends to shareholders, it's dog-eat-dog. It's not because people are stupid or wasteful necessarily.

 

[Pubey]

Economics is not about money or big business per se, but about making the best of limited resources. Economics was traditionally founded on concept that people made rational decisions – that with their salary they spent it wisely, and looked to maximise their wellbeing. Economists look to apply this to decision-making for firms and business – getting the best out of limited resources, or maximising efficiency and profit. The problem is that many people, decision-makers, and economists get it wrong. They are stupid with their money, they manage their businesses inefficiently, and this allows other people to take advantage.


Interesting. But I disagree. It depends on who's making the decision and why. Rationalism is a logical place to start, but it is always pragmatism that wins out, however on a macro-scale this is not efficient.

I also think it is because resources are scarce because people are more competitive and in a capitalist economy, with the aim being to maximise dividends to shareholders, it's dog-eat-dog. It's not because people are stupid or wasteful necessarily.

Yeah I agree with all that, I was just focussing on a specific aspect to bring the Moneyball idea through.

 

[Jedi Shrimper]

A good start Pubey, looking forward to reading more :thumbsup:

 

[Napster]

Yeah I agree with all that, I was just focussing on a specific aspect to bring the Moneyball idea through.

Oh OK, as you were then.