EclectEcon

Curling -- I'm going to try it again

Nearly sixteen years ago, my late friend Alan Adamson and I started a blog together about curling. We both liked the game because it is such an interesting combination of skill, strategy, and physical fitness. But neither one of us had ever set foot on a sheet of ice for curling.

After a few years of writing quite regularly on the blog, we convinced a local radio station that we should cover some major tournaments for them as journalist, including The Scott Tournament of Hearts (Canadian Women's Curling Championship), The Brier (Canadian Men's Curling Championship), and The Men's World Curling Championship when it was held in Regina. We even did radio play-by-play of a morning game during the Scott Tournament of Hearts because it wasn't being televised for some reason. We had a blast!

About then, Ms. Eclectic and I decided maybe we should actually try to play the game, and so we joined the local curling club, and I curled there once or twice a week for about three years before we moved back to London, Ontario. I wasn't good, but I enjoyed the game and I enjoyed trying to learn more about the game; I also enjoyed the friendship and camaraderie among the curlers. We never "got down in the hack" to slide the rocks down the ice; instead we used push sticks to propel them.

Here are some photos from those days. I knew I wasn't a good curler, so I went for "best-dressed curler" at some of the bon spiels.

Also about then, the Canadian Mint put out some quarters honoring curlers at the 2010 Olympics:

And I couldn't resist these curling cufflinks:

Here I am with a curling scarf that some generous and kind fans in Regina gave me while we were covering and reporting from the Men's World Curling championship:

Well....I've missed it. So on Monday I'm going to try it again. My friends from the Vanastra Curling Club send their sympathies to the folks at the London Curling Club.

Amazon Prime Video Bleg

Please read the post before making recommendations!

We've had Amazon Prime for years but we never bothered trying to look for Amazon Prime videos on our Smart TV. Several years ago, we tried Netflix for two months and didn't watch anything on it because we never came across anything that looked as if it might appeal to us, so we never bothered with Amazon Prime videos.

But a couple of weeks ago, Amazon was the exclusive broadcaster of an NFL game, and so we had to figure out how to view Amazon Prime videos. And we did.

So here's a request. What do you think we might like to watch on Amazon Prime?

Before you start typing recommendations, here are our tastes, roughly:

• We like convoluted spy stories that we can watch over and over again, e.g. Three Days of the Condor, Tinker Tailor and Smiley's People (the Alec Guiness versions), and the Page Eight trilogy, including Page Eight, Turks and Caicos, and Salting the Battlefield. We highly recommend all of these and we watch them frequently. We have them on Blu-ray and don't need Amazon Prime for these.
• We like British classic mysteries, with little gore, little suspense, and lots of puzzles: Agatha Christie (we have tonnes of Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot on Blu-ray), Sherlock Holmes (we have everything ever put out on DVD or blu-ray).
• We never cared much for Morse, but love the Lewis series (again, we have them), and we like most of the Endeavour series (though some are dodgier and/or weaker than we like)
• The Bletchley Circle series was good at the beginning.. but weakened as it went on.
• Vera is okay, but isn't the sort of thing we like to watch over and over again.
• The two different series of Peter Wimsey are both fabulous.

Others:

• We watch tonnes of baseball, some football, lots of curling, no basketball, and very little hockey.
• We watch tonnes of science/space on BBC Earth, NASA Smithsonian, and the Nature Channel (also some on TVO and other channels that sometimes have shows like these).

It looks as if we can get all these things on Amazon Prime. But are there other things like these that we're missing or might enjoy?

Our first attempt was Alex Rider, a teen-spy series. It had potential, but had way too much filler and too much gag-me/meh stuff in the first four episodes. We may watch the last one or two episodes to see what happened but it was exactly the type of thing we don't want to spend much time on.

Io Triumphe!

Recent correspondence with my sister reminded me of a special cheer my dad and the students from Albion College used to chant, (and still do!) "Io Triumphe!"*

After essentially being kicked out of Hannibal Junior College and then being told by a chemistry prof after two years at Drury College (Springfield, MO) that he would never get his degree there, somehow my father managed to get into Albion College in Albion, Michigan. He had very little money but with the help of an aunt was able to finish his Bachelors' degree in chemistry there.

During his first year at Albion (1938-39), he lived in a boarding house called "The Goodrich Club". Our mother and he were married after that first year, and my sister was born during his second and final year at Albion.

I think he was always grateful to Albion College for the confidence they (or someone there) showed by admitting him into their chemistry program. My dad was smart but probably not very serious as an undergrad in his early years (I had/have similar lack-of-seriousness problems).

In the early 1950s, our family made three or four trips to Albion for the fall homecoming parades and football games. I fondly remember those trips.

The homecoming parade took a U-shaped route. We'd all watch the parade go from west to east and then hurry north a few blocks to watch it come back. The only candy passed out was a bit thrown from the float with the Homecoming Queen. It all seemed so special.

One time, probably in the very early 1950s or so, we actually had a boarding house dinner at The Goodrich Club after the football game.

At the football games, Dad and a few alumni always wowed the crowd and the cheerleaders by shouting the following cheer rapidly at the tops of their lungs:

Io Triumphe! Io Triumphe!
Haben Swaben Rebecca le animor
Whoop te whoop te sheller de-vere-de
Boom de ral de-i de-pa-
Hooneka Henaka whack a whack a
Hob dob balde bora bolde bara
Con slomade hob dob Rah!
Al-bi-on Rah!

I never completely learned the cheer, nor did my sister (Update: she says she could say the whole cheer nearly as fast as Dad could!), but I do remember that we learned the last three lines and joined in, much to the delight of Dad and his friends.

On the trip home one year, my sister and I were squabbling in the back seat of the car, and my Dad angrily announced, "If you kids don't stop that, I'm going to blow my top!"

My sister and I promptly began cheering,

Blow that top!

Blow that top!

Much to the amusement and delight of our parents.

And then my sister added, noting his partial baldness, "You don't have any top to blow, Daddy."

Very fond memories.

--

*From the Albion College site,

"Io Triumphe," a yell written by the Class of 1900. Some of its phrases were taken from other college yells, some from a Greek play that had been presented on campus during that period, and others were borrowed from the poems of the Roman writer Horace.

Also, apparently the "Io Triumphe!" cheer was adopted by an Occidental College, crediting Albion College with its origination.

Photos from June 8th -- Throwing the Ceremonial First Pitch

On June 8th, the London Majors, in recognition of my baseball sportscasting for nearly thirty years, had me throw out the ceremonial first pitch. Here are two photos their team photographer, Matt Hiscox, took of the event.

 

Starlin Peralta, the starting pitcher for that game, had coached me a bit. You can see from the hand position that I was throwing a soft slider or curveball.

The pitch broke down and away from a right-handed batter, knee-high and about 3 inches off the plate.

 

Paul Costa of the Majors set it up. Here he is with Starlin Peralta and Mike Ambrose, who caught the pitch.

Others who helped coach me along the way were Cleveland Brownlee, Carlos Arteaga, and my broadcast partner John Harrelson.

 

 

Throwing out the First Pitch

On Friday, June 8th, Doc Palmer will be throwing out the ceremonial first pitch at the London Majors game vs. the Toronto Maple Leafs.

The Majors are recognizing both the length of time I've been doing sportscasting and the innovation and energy I've shown along the way.

• In the late 1980s, no one was carrying the AA London Tigers games on radio until I convinced CHRW to carry some of the games. During that time I was also a member of SABR (Society for American Baseball Research) and made constant efforts to introduce more useful measures of performance (e.g. On Base Percentage [OBP] and Slugging Average [SLG]) to the broadcasts.
• A few years after the London Tigers left town, the London Werewolves of the independent Frontier League came to Labatt Park to play ball. Again, no one else was carrying the games on radio and again I convinced CHRW to carry some of the games. The next year I did the play-by-play for Rogers Television as well. During that stint, I had it specified in my agreement with Rogers that they would not show RBIs on screen and that they would show OBP on screen.
• Several years ago I began working with Rogers Television to cover the London Majors games in the Intercounty Baseball League [IBL]. Last year, Rogers stopped covering IBL games, and I suggested that the games could be live-streamed to Facebook, which is happening now on a fairly regular basis. Live-streaming on Facebook at this level is a blend of radio and television: we call it "radio with a webcam".

Here are some photos taken by London Majors photographer, Matt Hiscox, as I practiced a bit, preparing to throw out the first pitch.

Apparently the betting in the pressbox and dugout is that I will bounce the pitch on or in front of home plate.

 

Getting the Sign

 

Suggesting a Practice Curve Ball

 

Preparing to Throw an Overhand Curveball

 

 

Into the Stretch...

  

The pitch!

Live-Streaming Baseball on Facebook: Doc Palmer Back at the Microphone

I've done baseball (and other) sportscasting at various times for over thirty years, covering the AA London Tigers, the London Werewolves, and the London Majors. Last year, when it became apparent that no local media were going to cover the London Majors, I suggested lives-streaming their games on Facebook.

It has taken off, as our "telecasts" [which are really just radio with a webcam] reach thousands of people all over the world.

Here is an article about our work: http://lfpress.com/sports/local-sports/london-majors-live-stream-on-facebook-proves-popular

And here is the (revised) schedule of our upcoming broadcasts (see notes below):

Saturday June 2 London at Burlington 1:05 pm 
Wednesday June 6 Hamilton at London 7:35pm
Friday June 8 Toronto at London 7:35 pm 
Sunday June 10 London at Brantford 2:00 pm 
Friday June 15 Burlington at London 7:35 pm 
Saturday June 16 London at Guelph 7:30 pm 
Sunday June 17 Brantford at London 1:05 pm 
Friday June 22 Guelph at London 7:35 pm Sunday 
Sunday June 24 Brantford at London 1:05 pm 
Wednesday June 27 London at Brantford 8:00 pm 
Friday June 29 Burlington at London 7:35 pm 
Tuesday July 3 London at Hamilton 7:35 pm 
Thursday July 5 London at Burlington 7:15 pm 
Friday July 6 Toronto at London 7:35 pm 
Sunday July 8 London at Hamilton 2:00 pm 
Thursday July 12 London at Kitchener 7:30 pm 
Friday July 13 Hamilton at London 7:35 pm 
Friday July 20 Kitchener at London 7:35 pm 
Sunday July 22 Barrie at London 1:05 pm 
Friday July 27 Guelph at London 7:35 pm 
Friday August 3 London at Brantford 8:00 pm

Notes:

1. We will try to cover as many of the playoff games as we can.
2. The London Majors pick up all the extra data charges when we have to use our cellular plans to transmit a road game.
3. Some of the games will not be covered because we have other commitments, especially in late July when I'll be at the Hamilton Fringe.
4. Other sports I've covered? Curling.

Guest Lecture for Sports & Entertainment Analytics Course

Professor Kyle MacLean invited me to present a guest lecture to his bizskool class on Sports and Entertainment Analytics at UWO's Ivey Bizskool today. The talk involved lots of war stories, but some things, too. What a great time!!!

Here are the notes for that presentation:

Notes for February 26, 2018:

Baseball, background

Bill James Historical Abstract and intuitive stat techniques

1. Ability to win close games? Or is it luck…

James argued that it is luck and that if a team’s win% in close games is greater than its overall win%, that’s a sign the team was just lucky and will likely have a lower win% in the next season.

If W%_c1 > W%_t1, then we should expect W%_t2 < W%_t1, and

If W%_c1 < W%_t1, then the team was unluckly in t=1 and we should expect W%_t2 > W%_t1.

Not for all teams, and generally, roughly speaking, on average.

To test, must have a good defn of close games. One-run? Extra innings? Overtime games in hockey? 3pts in basketball or football?

Of course it doesn’t always work:

• Teams change from year to year
• Some teams have more depth for later in games.
• Test for significance? Normal approx. to binomial?
• Confirmed by James and numerous students.

2. Coin toss. Need honesty. Find out who the champion coin-tosser is.

That person has a true ability to predict coin tosses. Ha ha. Relate to Finance.

What about players who come through in the clutch or those who choke? Are there players who demonstrate clutch ability?

Well, they may have a string of clutch performances:

• Tom Brady
• Joe Montana
• Pat Tabler’s batting average with the bases loaded.
• Dan Gladden
• [choke?] Scott Norwood’s missed field goal in last 9 sec of Superbowl.

Did these players have clutch ability? Choke ability? How do we know they weren’t just lucky or unlucky.

[rispl = runners in scoring position, late innings]

Studies showing if BA(rispl)1 > BA1, then the distribution of BA(rispl)2 – BA2 is normally distributed the next season. More generally the distribution of BA(rispl) – BA is not consistent year-to-year.

The point: don’t confuse luck and ability

- - - - - -

Why do all these tests? To measure ability and to test assertions about player and team ability. GMs want to know who to sign and how much to offer, and that requires measurements and forecasts.

What are the goals of professional sports franchise?

                           Profits and narcissism (aka utility?)

To max profits, produce that rate of output for which MR = MC.

What is the output of a sports franchise? What do they produce?

                  Wins. So want MR(W) = MC(W)

But a team generally makes most decisions ex ante, before the season, and so it tries to use inputs to produce expected wins up to the point at which the eMR(eW) = eMC(eW) [Here, “e” means “expected”; also, in reality should discount for present value]

What does eMR(eW) look like? Humped because extra wins as a team begins to contend for the playoffs, each additional win is worth quite a bit.

What does eMC(W) look like? Upward sloping.

Put the two together to show eW*. Note that if a team has tonnes of die-hard fans (Cubs, Leafs) then eMR(eW) is pretty low and it pays to not to have such a good team.

Cubs in 1965-6 had very low attendance. Averaged <8K/game.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/CHC/attend.shtml

Back to graphs.

How to produce eW? By hiring playing ability (PA)

Hire ePA up to the point at which eMR(ePA) = eMC(ePA)

Problems:

• can’t always get smooth increments
• complementarities (less of a problem in baseball but still there)
• how to measure PA or predict ePA?

Too many measures are team and/or teammate dependent

e.g. Wins [often used for goalies or pitchers. Ugh. Teammate dependent and somewhat arbitrary]

hockey: +/- ? save%

Baseball: Triple crown – BA, HR, RBIs

Better baseball: OBP and SLG

         Rogers contract [when I did play-by-play of the London Werewolves games, I insisted that the contract specify they would NOT show RBIs on screen but WOULD show OBP]

         OPS = OBP+SLG

Pitchers? Not wins. ERA? WHIP? Why not OOPS?

What does WAR imply re: the supply curve of playing ability?

Economic Impact on a city from sports and arts.

From this source.

1. Multiplier [not 7, as some sports owners argue].

              Eastbourne story for World Cup

• much spending leaves the community
• negative impact
• diversion from other community spending
• likely somewhere between +0.5 and -0.5

2. but it puts the city on the map as big league.

If that’s valuable does it show up in real estate values?

Green Bay vs Oshkosh and Appleton? Nope. Explain.

Stratford and Niagara-on-the Lake? Yes. Explain.

3. Olympics? [didn’t get to this]

I Am Gradually Losing Interest in the NFL

I am gradually losing interest in the NFL, and from what I recall having read, I might not be alone. TV ratings for the National Football League (NFL) are down. I still watch the NFL some, but I don't watch it nearly so much as I did twenty or thirty years ago. My watching of NFL games has slowly, gradually dwindled since then to the point that I probably watch the NFL only about a quarter as much as I used to.

I expect there are many reasons I watch less. Here are a few:

• I'm old. I no longer suffer from (as much) testosterone poisoning, and so I don't get so excited by blood sports.

If so, and if others are like me, then NFL viewership will almost surely trend downward as the North American population continues to age. All of us older men will have less interest in the violent blood sports we were glued to in our youth.

However, I'm not sure how strong this effect might be. I stopped watching the NHL (hockey, for the non-sports-enthusiasts) when I was about thirty years old. I had loved watching the hits and the fights when I was 18, but I grew to dislike that aspect of the game, and I still do. Maybe my testosterone levels began to dwindle way back then, but the point I'm hoping to make here is that while I suspect we older males are less enthused about the NFL for this reason, the loss of testosterone probably doesn't explain everything.

• The pre-game and post-game shows. I used to be glued to the pre-game shows. I loved the assessments of the players and teams, the analysis of plays, and the predictions about outcomes. Nowadays the pre-game shows have too many talking heads, too much yelling, too many pointless interviews, too much loud music, too many in-jokes, and too many people interrupting each other. I don't know who likes that nonsense. The only show I like is the Sunday evening show, which is calm and analytical.
• The violence. I really don't think the game or the players are any more violent than they were 50-60-70 years ago. Further, I realize there are some rule changes that were designed to ameliorate the effects of the violence. At the same time, the use of helmets and pads as offensive weapons, not defensive tools, seems to have become increasingly prevalent. And the recent evidence about the preponderance of concussions and head injuries among NFL players really bothers me. I used to love the hard-hitting nature of football but now it concerns me. ... not so much that I don't watch, but some.
• The announcers. There are some who are great. They focus on the game and the plays and the players and the coaches. Others (e.g. John Gruden [sp?]) seem much more bully-ish (a la Don Cherry?) and full of themselves. They turn me off, and I switch away from games they are involved with. My Facebook friend Otis adds, " ... just too much hype and political commentary about things off the field and/or not germane to the game at hand."
• Other options. We had fewer television viewing options 20-30 years ago. Nowadays many people (not me) reserve Sundays to binge-watch something on Netflix. But even without Netflix, we have hundreds of channels to choose from. Where I might have stuck with an NFL game in the past, now I might channel-surf and end up watching a movie, a science show, or some other sporting event.
• Over-saturation? Is it possible there are too many NFL games on television too many different nights? When there were at most two games on Sunday, the advent of Monday Night Football seemed really special. But now there are often two games on Monday, games on Thursday, and games on Sunday night. I lose track of who is playing whom when, and as a result I lose interest.
• Lack of a home-town team? Many of us grew up cheering for a local or nearby team. That was the team we saw on television, and we knew it's players well. Now, however, I can watch nearly any game that is being televised. I don't have the forced loyalty from local television that I used to have. As a result I seem to care less about any particular team.
• Despite my intense interest 20-30 years ago, I wasn't very good at predicting winners. Maybe I lost interest in the games as a result?

The Blue Jays vs. The Indians in the 2016 AL Championship Series

The upcoming series between Trono and Cleveland should be tight, close, and exciting. Cleveland had a better record during the regular season (94-67 for Cleveland vs 89-73 for Toronto). But the overall performance stats look very close.

Using the two statistics I like to rely on for quick summaries, OPS [team on-base average plus slugging pecentage] and pitchers' OOPS [Opponents' OPS given up by the team's pitchers]:

Team        Batting OPS        Pitchers's OOPS

Cleveland     .759                    .711

Trono            .755                    .703

Cleveland appears to have a slight edge in hitting, while Trono appears to have a slight edge in pitching.

I expect these numbers are somewhat misleading, though, in that the teams have had some very impressive streaks. Also, it is unlikely the teams will use more than four starting pitchers for the series, and they both have four good starters (especially the Blue Jays do). And who know what hitters will do?

As I said it should be tight, close, and exciting. We're looking forward to it. First game is tonight at 8pm EDT.

Would Someone Please Teach MLB What Alphabetical Order Means?

I went to a website to vote for players for the July Major League Baseball  All-Star Game today.

At the end, a voter must select a favourite team. I had trouble finding the Toronto Blue Jays on the list Here is a screen capture of the drop-down menu they made available when I voted:

My Pick for SuperBowl 50

First, let me say, I can't believe there have been 50 Superbowls, following the merger of the AFL and NFL.

Second, let me say that the spread sure has changed a lot over the past two weeks. Right after the conference championship games, the spread shown on Yahoo Sports opened at Carolina by 4. If I had made my pick then, I would have taken Carolina -4 for sure. [Other initials spreads were as low as -3.5; see below].

Apparently many people agreed with me.

The Super Bowl 50 line is on the move and it's moving. After opening up as 4.5-point favorites, the Carolina Panthers are now [EE: as of Feb 4th, the date of this article] 5.5-point favorites to beat the Denver Broncos. ...

It shouldn't be a tremendous surprise: nearly 80 percent of the public money is currently on the Panthers when it comes to against-the-spread bets.

Most sportsbooks detailed a huge initial rush of money on the Broncos when the line opened with the Panthers as 5.5-point favorites, causing the number to head back down, as low as 4 points.

What followed was significant money on Carolina, with very little action on the Broncos.

"I can't remember a more one-sided betting Super Bowl," William Hill US's director of trading Nick Bogdanovich told ESPN.

As a result, books are moving the line higher and higher, although it stands to reason the Panthers might max out giving 6 points.

According to some earlier articles, the spread from some books went as high as Carolina by 6.5 points. But it looks as if the betting is settling down at Carolina by 5.5 points. From SB*Nation,

The line opened with the Carolina Panthers as 3.5-point favorites. Money quickly poured in on the Panthers following their thorough beating of the Arizona Cardinals, and the line climbed as high as six points. Some sportsbooks have seen some money on the Denver Broncos and brought it back down to 5.5 points, but it is holding steady otherwise.

The Denver defense is amazingly good. Well, so is the Carolina defense (though mistakes by Arizona made them look even better in the conference championship game.

At the same time, Newton and Manning are both superb quarterbacks, albeit with quite different qualities and abilities. I've noticed that some pretty knowledgeable people are picking Denver plus the points (see this).

But I'm picking Carolina minus 5.5

That and steak and a veggie tray and some cider.

Related articles

Regina SK is like Lincoln NB

The Easiest Ways to Stream the Super Bowl Without Cable

Super Bowl 50 Nail Art Guide

My NFL Picks for Tomorrow 16/01/24

I went 2 - 2 last weekend, which is a whole lot better than 0 - 4 the previous weekend.

The spread on Sunday's games hasn't budged all week (not yet, anyway) according to Yahoo Sports.

1. New England at Denver [3pm EST]. The spread says New England by 3. This despite their earlier loss in overtime in Denver. New England looked weak in their last few games of the season, but last week with some of their wounded warriors back at near-full-strength, they looked very good against Kansas City. At the same time, Peyton Manning and the Broncos looked pretty pathetic in their win over Pittsburgh. These things probably are what have driven bettors to keep the spread at NE -3. And I expect the New England Economists to cover the spread. Take NE minus the points.
2. Arizona at Carolina [6:40 EST]. The spread is Carolina by 3. Carolina nearly blew a 31-point lead over Seattle last week but still looked good in that game. Arizona looked lucky to win their game against Green Bay in overtime. Carolina is dynamite good. I cannot fathom why this spread is so low. Take Carolina minus the points.

For what it's worth, my granddaughter's partner agrees with these picks.

[Note: this post was written Friday afternoon. I may update it if there are any substantive changes that I hear about before game times]

Related articles

Superbowl Pick

NFL Picks for Today

My NFL Picks for This Weekend 16/01/16

After having gone 0-4 with my NFL picks last weekend, I thought I'd take another shot this weekend. The spreads I'm using are from the Yahoo Sports application on my iPhone.

• Kansas City at New England. The odds makers have set New England by 5. Regular readers of EclectEcon, as well as my Facebook friends, know that I am a huge fan of New England, often referring to them as "The New England Economists" because Coach Belichick majored in economics and at one time asserted that his economics training helped him with his decision-making. Also, I have a New England hoodie (bunny-hug for my Saskatchewan friends) that I often wear on game days.
  
  All that aside, New England has not looked good lately, and Kansas City has looked very  good lately. I'll take Kansas City plus the points. I'll be cheering for the New England Economists, and hoping they win by less then 5.
  
  
• Green Bay at Arizona. The spread is now Arizona by 7.5. Really?? I may be out to lunch on this, but Seattle, who didn't look all that good last week against Minnesota, blew away the Cardinals (in Arizona!) the previous week; and Green Bay looked mighty good last week (albeit against a not-so-good Redskin team) after their hohum loss to Minnesota the previous week. I know Arizona has been good all season, but I don't see them winning at all, much less by 7.5.  I'll take Green Bay plus the 7.5.
  
  
• Seattle at Carolina. Carolina has an excellent record with an excellent team and a star quarterback, and has home field advantage. At the same time, Seattle has looked very good in the last two-thirds of the season, aside from their narrow very lucky victory last week. The spread says Carolina by 2 points. I'll take Carolina minus the points.
  
  
• Pittsburgh at Denver. This is a tough game to call for me. I don't really expect either of these teams to be in the superbowl. I have always really liked the play of Peyton Manning and of the Broncos when he is playing, and I expect they will win. But the spread is Denver by 7.5! (That's an exclamation point, not a factorial sign - actually I have no idea how to take a factorial of a decimal, so that and this are needless nerd-digressions). Back to the game. I can see this one going in any direction. I have extremely weak priors about this, weaker than my other picks. Coin toss: Denver minus the points.

As my friends have learned, if you want to make money gambling on sports, the best strategy is to bet against my picks.

My NFL Picks for This Weekend

Here are my picks for the NFL playoff games today and tomorrow [the spreads shown on Yahoo Sports are in brackets]:

• Kansas City at Houston [KC by 3].  Houston is pretty good and they have an all-star defensive player. Also Houston has home field, which is generally worth 5-7 points. I'll take Houston plus the points.
• Pittsburgh at Cincinnati [Pittsburgh by 1.5]. Dalton (QB for Cincinnati) was too important for that team and is injured, so I can understand the oddsmakers' spread here. But I'll still take Cincinnati plus the points.
• Seattle at Minnesota [Seattle by 4]. Seattle is scary good, and while Minnesota looked good (but not great) beating Green Bay, they just aren't as good as Seattle. I'll take Seattle minus the points.
• Green Bay at Washington [Washington by 1]. Green Bay hasn't looked all that good in their last few games, and Washington has. I'll take Washington minus the point.

On the Radio This Morning

King Banaian (aka Sparky) and I have known each other for about 25 years, ever since the early days of rec.sport.baseball. We finally met up at an economics convention a few years after meeting online, and then we had a chance to meet face-to-face again several years ago as I was driving through St. Cloud Minnesota.

King is a very bright guy with an amazing, quick mind. I've appeared in numerous podcasts with him in the past as well as exchanged blog posts and citations with him over the past decade.

He has asked me to appear on his radio programme this morning. He says he wants to talk about curling because I used to write a blog (with the late Alan Adamson) about curling. But he also says the half-hour conversation could go anywhere. I'm fine with that. I trust him.

You can listen anywhere via the internet:

Go to the homepage of the station http://www.twincitiesbusinessradio.com/ and you will see a Listen Live button near the top-center third of the page.  Opens a new window with a player, runs a 15-second ad first.

He says the programmes are also available as podcasts, and so I'll post the link as soon as I get the precise link.

That's less than two hours from now! OMG!!!!

Are Canadians the Rodney Dangerfield of Sports?

We don't get no respect.

I noticed this morning that in the sports section of the NYTimes, the three items did not include a story about the Trono Blue Jays staving off elimination in baseball's American League Division Championship. There was nothing about Estrada and the bullpen pitching a gem, nor about the otherwise-slumping Tulo hitting a three-run homerun.

Nothing in that email digest.

Maybe it's because the NYTimes, like Harold Reynolds, thinks Canadians don't play a lot of baseball and hence can't catch. No foolin. From CBC:

Harold Reynolds Says @HReynoldsQuotes

"We talked about foul balls into the stands... they don't play a lot of baseball in Canada, a lot of people aren't used to catching them"

The comments are fun. I especially like the one allegedly from Larry Walker:

Larry Walker ✔@Cdnmooselips33

I won 7 gold gloves. I think part of winning them was cause I could catch.

Maybe Harold Reynolds had this Instagram video in mind?

 

Harold was right. @jayonrait

A video posted by Dan O'Toole (@fs1otoole) on Oct 11, 2015 at 7:20pm PDT

Two Grand Slams in One Baseball Game. July 26, 1952.

The first and only major league baseball game that my dad ever took me to was in the summer of 1952, the New York Yankers visiting the Detroit Tigers. It was a Saturday afternoon game, July 26th.

Mickey Mantle hit a grand slam home run in the first inning. I'd swear it went way back and up in straight-away centre field, but the information from Baseball Reference says it went to left field. If so, it must have been to the upper deck. I remember people around us groaning and oohing and ahhhing all at the same time. And I seem to recall a sort of resigned look on my dad's face.

After that, Detroit pitcher Ted Gray settled down and allowed only two more Yanker runs the rest of the game. Meanwhile the Tigers hit pretty well and managed to tie up the game by the bottom of the 8th inning.

Neither team scored in the 9th or 10th innings. Detroit had a chance to win it in the bottom of the 10th. The bases were loaded with 2 out and slugger Walt Dropo at the plate, but to the dismay of everyone around us, he fouled out to the shortstop to end the inning.

Ted Gray continued pitching for the Tigers and put the Yankers down 1-2-3 in the top of the 11th. I guess pitchers did things like that back then.

In the bottom of the 11th after Groth grounded out, Mapes walked and then Ginsberg doubled, but Mapes couldn't score to end the game. With runners at 2nd and 3rd, the Yanks issued an intentional pass to Kolloway, presumably to set up a force out at home or maybe a double play. I remember my dad (who must not have had a lot of baseball knowledge, which now surprises me) saying, "Why are they walking him? He's not very good."

Ted Gray was due up next, but the Tigers decided he'd had enough and sent Steve (Bud) Souchock to the plate. He hit a long fly ball that barely cleared the LF fence. Grand Slam!

Even if it hadn't been a home run, the Tigers would have scored, but it was SO exciting to be there, to see the home team (sort of -- I grew up in Michigan and was an early Tiger fan) win. I know my dad was really excited, too.

What a great memory, all spurred by some discussions on FB of Virgil Trucks' pitching two no-hitters for Detroit that season.

Digression: Detroit was horrible that season, winning only 50 and losing over 100 games. Aside from winning the two no-hitters he pitched, Trucks went 3-17 in his remaining decisions.

I Am an Unabashed Fair-Weather Fan

I refuse to support mediocrity and failure in professional sports. I sneer that some people actually think it is somehow desirable to be a "die-hard fan" and spend good money supporting teams that don't win.*

But now that the Trono Blue Jays have started winning so much, I've jumped on the bandwagon. Sure, we watch games (and even visit Rogers Centre Hotel) even when the Jays aren't doing so well, but we watch more games now, and we watch them longer. Also we have bought more stuff with the BJ logo, including shirts for several granddaughters and now this:

We had gone out to try to find an inexpensive folding balcony chair, but then we saw this. It has an insulated pocket on the left arm and drink holder on the right. And the Trono BJ logo! We were hooked.

* From the perspective of stockholders, I see little reason for the Trono Maple Laughs to try to win if they can spend less money on talent and still have so many die-hard fans.

Superman = Blue Jays?

In early August, when Ms Eclectic and I visited the Rogers Centre and watched the Trono Blue Jays defeat the Minnesota Twins, we were delighted that the Blue Jays were finally vying for a play-off spot, albeit the last of two wildcard positions.

Now look where they are: Leading the AL East Division and likely to clinch that spot today. And they are leading the entire American League with a game and a half lead over the Kansas City Royals, which (if they remain #1) will give them home field advantage throughout the playoffs.

Wow. What a change from a mediocre .500 record. The new additions to the team plus the remarkable improvements of some already on the team really seem to have made a difference.

The Toronto Star thinks so. Here's today's editorial cartoon:

Who Should Be the American League Most Valuable Player: Mike Trout or Josh Donaldson?

Everyone in SW Ontario (and maybe Canada) is touting Josh Donaldson, 3B for the Trono BJs, for AL MVP. I love watching him play, and he is clearly a very strong contender.

But Mike Trout, CF for the California Angels, has been very good, too. Here is a comparison of the stats (as of Monday evening) that might be relevant:

OPS (on base percentage plus slugging average), all positions:

Trout is first in the AL at .983

Donaldson is third at .951

Both OPSs are excellent, but a 32-point differential is fairly substantial.

Defence: 

There aren't any good readily available stats on defence at the MLB site. Here are two that are available, but since they play different positions, the comparison is with others at the same position: Fielding percentage and Range Factor.

Trout is tied for 1st in fielding percentage among AL centre-fielders. He has made noerrors. However, he is only 4th of 11 in Range Factor. 

Donaldson is only 8th of 12 in fielding percentage for third basemen in the AL. However, he is 2nd in Range Factor.

These stats are consistent with what I have seen: Donaldson makes a lot of plays, many of them electrifying. He gets to more balls and makes more plays than most 3B. 

Trout is no slouch in the field, though (I'm thinking, for instance, of the HR he stole last night, going high over the CF wall). He likely isn't quite as good defensively, but it's close.

As an unabashed BJ fan, I'd love to see Donaldson win the MVP. But unless things change substantially over the last 7 games of the season, I think BJ fans had better be prepared for some disappointment here. Trout will likely win the award.

In Praise of Bandwagon-Jumpers

About 25 years ago, I wrote a column "In Praise of Fairweather Fans". Unfortunately, I can no longer find it; otherwise I would just link to it.

With the way the Trono Blue Jays are playing these days, Blue Jay fans are coming out of the woodwork. Like many fans, I love watching their games when they win. And when they are losing, I start checking to see what else is on tv or start spending more time on the internet or (gasp!) reading a book.

We are Jays fans, but we are certainly anything but die-hard fans. We watch more, and we buy more memorabilia for our children, grandchildren, and great grandchild when the Jays are winning.

Actually, I don't have all that much respect for die-hard fans. I see no reason to support mediocrity or worse. I think all fans should be fairweather fans. [Dare I say, unlike Trono Maple Laugh Leaf fans who seem to keep going to Leaf games no matter what!].

Furthermore, die-hard fans owe a huge vote of thanks to the bandwagon jumpers. We are the ones who provide the big incentive for teams to get better; we are the ones who provide the big incentive for teams to win. Without us, the teams would have markedly diminished incentive to improve, to win.

I see very little value in being loyal to a team. If they don't produce, there is no good reason to support them. I feel the same way about nearly all producers of goods and services: if they don't produce high quality goods and services at reasonable prices, I'm less interested in patronizing them. If I were a loyal fan or loyal customer, they don't have to pay attention to me.

With these thoughts in mind, I was thrilled to see this sign outside one of our favourite restaurants, The Blu Duby, yesterday:

I love their honesty and I love their implied understanding of the basic economics tenet, "People respond to incentives."

Overnight Conversion

Last week, Ms Eclectic and I were at the SkyDome Rogers Centre Marriott Renaissance Hotel to watch a couple of Trono Blue Jays baseball games. Less than an hour after the final game of the homestand, hundreds of employees began the all-night-and-longer process of transforming the field from a baseball stadium into a football stadium for the Sunday evening CFL game between the Trono Argonauts and the Saskatchewan Roughriders.

One crew started separating all the seams in the artificial turf so it could be removed.

I had no idea that was what they were doing since I didn't realize they use different turf for football vs baseball at Rogers Centre.

Another crew began using bucket loaders to remove the dirt from the base cutouts.

They had some pretty nifty machinery for rolling up sections of the turf.

All the black lines you can see are the black stuff that sprays up when a ball hits the turf during a baseball game, and it is all swept/vacuumed up. We noticed none of it sprays up during a football game.

In these photos, you can see the empty metal spools onto which the turf is rolled. You can also see the rolls of turf, which were moved individually to some area under the left-centrefield seats.

In the photo below we now see some groups of seats. These later became field/ground-level seating for the football configuration.

The green paint on the concrete shows where the movable permanent stadium seats will be aligned, and you can even see the tracks the seating sections are moved along.

I had trouble sleeping all night because I found watching the conversion so fascinating.

I'm not sure how well these photos show the stairway directly behind homeplate. The stadium seating splits right in the middle of that stairway and is swung around to the sides to form better sightlines with football seating.

If you look carefully at the pitching mound in the photo below, you can see it is about 5 feet or so below the surface of the turf. There is a hydraulic mechanism that raises and lowers the mound.

As the sun was rising, the dugouts and pitching mound had been removed and filled in,  and most of the outside turf had been removed. The dugouts are just sitting at the bottom of the photo. This photo (below) shows the seam in the stairway where the field-level seats divide.

In this next photo, seats down the first-base line (left side of the photo) have been slid over toward the football configuration. It is almost in position; the final position is shown by the green paint on the concrete.

Right near where the visitors' dugout had moved, there's a small(ish) white vehicle. It's the sweeper/vacuum that sweeps up all the black particles and other debris left on the concrete.

This next photo shows the dugouts waiting to be moved, the turf rollers working on the centre square of turf, and the seats along the 3rd base line rotated to the football configuration.

The yellow vehicle at the bottom of the photo has a long projection at the front, making it look xiphias-like. The folks driving those units (there were some orange ones, too) have good aim and insert the pole into the spools of turf to move the turf.

Here is another view, below, showing both sections of the seating moved to the sides, making way for the endzone seating.

Also, the roof is partially closed, and all the base cutouts have been filled in and covered.

And they are starting to move the football turf into location. It took them forever to get it located properly which, when you think about it, makes sense --- that first piece must be put down in exactly the right place so that all the others line up properly, too.

Finally, they began to unroll the first roll of football turf. But unfortunately then we had to check out to catch our train back to London.

Overall, what a neat thing to watch.

And then, after the football game, they had to do it all over again in reverse to get the field ready for the next Blue Jays home game on Tuesday evening. What a lot of work! What a costly setup. But it was oh, so intriguing.

Note: I was tempted to title this post "Overnight Sensation".

Computers Calling Balls and Strikes -- about time!

Back in the days of rec.sport.baseball, Gary Huckabay advocated the use of cameras and computers to call balls and strikes for baseball games. He knew the technology could do it, but also knew it would take some time to be accepted.

Now it will be tried in an independent baseball league for a couple of games on an experimental basis. Yea!

According to John Shea of the San Francisco Chronicle, the Pacifics will use an automated computer system to call balls and strikes later this month in the first human umpire-less games in professional baseball history. The team plans to use the technology on July 28 and 29 against the Vallejo Admirals.

The system is called PitchFX, and utilizes a multitude of camera angles to calculate pitch speed and trajectory. All 30 MLB stadiums are already equipped with PitchFX, and it is used to evaluate umpires as well as for analytics purposes.

I must say that after watching the pitch tracker for the past several years and seeing how many incorrect calls are made, I welcome this development. May it please happen in my lifetime!

Eventually, I expect the sport will use computerized voices to call balls and strikes and not rely on someone to relay the computer results. I can also imagine that a similar scheme can be put in place to assess whether a batter holds up on checked swings. However,

As my umpire friend Jim Cressman says, though, who will sweep off home plate?

What Do Joe Maddon and EclectEcon Have in Common?

Joe Maddon is currently the manager of the Chicago Cubs. Previously, he managed the Tampa Bay Rays. Besides enjoying baseball, he and I have something else in common.

From an interview with Baseball Prospectus,

DL: You majored in economics in college. What role do economics play in the baseball world of Joe Maddon?

JM: Honestly, I was not a very good student. With economics, "ubiquitous" was probably my favorite term. I guess that the number-crunching is something I liked. I've always been into that. I've always like analyzing statistical information, even before it was fashionable. When I was back in the minor leagues, as a roving hitting instructor back in the mid- to late '80s, I probably had a more simplistic perspective, but nevertheless I saw the value in it. But my economics days at Lafayette College were probably a case of having to declare a major more than anything.

Like Joe Maddon, I was an economics major and I was not a very good student (as an undergrad). I liked number-crunching at an intuitive level then, too. But I did fail a math course and get Ds in two different economics courses. I don't know about him, but I was lucky I didn't fail out.

Related articles

The Tale of Two Tutees

Josh Donaldson Certainly Should Be an AL Starter at the All-Star Game

He just made an amazing catch in today's game, diving into about the 3rd row of the crowd to catch a pop foul. Check out these images from this site:

 

 

 

 

 

Furthermore, his OPS is more than 50 points higher than that of Moustakas, and his Range Factor on defense is nearly 50 points higher than that of Moustakas.

 

 

Related articles

Josh Donaldson Certainly Should Be an AL Starter at the All-Star Game

Take THAT Kansas City!

Two weeks ago, the baseball world was outraged that so many players from the Kansas City Royals were millions of votes ahead in the voting for the All-Star game.

Well, I just voted 105 times (35 times from each of my 3 email addresses). And there wasn't a single player from Kansas City on my ballots.

And it turns out that Trono 3B Josh Donaldson is now within only 33K votes of being the #1 3B player on the ballot. He has a good chance of being voted in. The other BJ who should be voted onto the team is Russell Martin at Catcher.

I Figure the Odds are Good that I Would Like One of Theseself-balancing unicycle with a seat and hand grip

Available from Amazon.com.

Game Theory in Economics and Sports a survey of economists

Via Gabriel:

"Behavior in many complex and seemingly intractable strategic settings can be understood more clearly by working out what each party in the game will choose to do if they realize that the other parties will be solving the same problem. This insight has helped us understand behavior as diverse as military conflicts, price setting by competing firms and penalty kicking in soccer."

It isn't new. This approach underlay the Cournot equilibrium nearly two centuries ago and the Edgeworth disequilibria long before the extensions that developed with John Nash et al.

The important thing in applying the technique to penalty kicks in soccer is the collection of lots of data and analyzing the snot out of it. A refined analysis generally leads to the use of optimally proportioned mixed strategies. Some of the research in these areas is intriguing, even fun.

I find it amusing and amazing that I, a non-mathematical, intuitive game-theorist economist, strongly and confidently agree with this quotation but there are some in this survey who don't.

Deflatinator: What's the Appropriate Standard of Proof?

I think there's a good chance someone or several someones from the Patriots, possibly including Tom Brady, knew and/or had something to do with the low pressure in some of the footballs used by the Patriots during the 2014-15 NFL season and playoffs.

But a good chance is not a very high standard.

Given the Patriots' response, I am quite certain (with some probability, of course) that nobody could be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (the standard of proof required for criminal cases).

Further, I'm not sure that the standard of proof for civil litigation (preponderance of the evidence? balancing of the probabilities? it depends on who you talk to) would find against the Patriots. It might, though.

That doesn't mean that by some standard, such as "more likely than not" the NFL erred in their finding. It's just a question of what standard should be used.

As I wrote over a decade ago, the appropriate standard of proof for different institutions and different legal environments requires an understanding of confidence intervals, Type I errors, and Type II errors.

With the weakest standard of proof, call it the "more likely than not" standard, we are willing to tolerate a higher probability of "convictions" (that's not really what they always are) of innocent people in order to make sure that there is a higher probability of punishing those who actually do commit an offense. We don't tolerate such a low standard of proof in criminal cases, not wanting to punish someone who is probably innocent. (see my piece on cruel and unusual punishment)

But in internal disputes (like the NFL and the Patriots) presumably the standard of proof for offenses and punishments is set out in franchise agreements and player contracts. Given the Patriots' response, and given the analysis by Russ Roberts, I really doubt if anyone involved with the Patriots is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. At the same time, I think there's a chance someone involved with the Patriots did something.

And if all it takes for the NFL to levy fines and punishments is a low standard of proof to the tune of "Palmer thinks there's a good chance someone did something wrong," then while the fines and punishments may be reduced, they will not necessarily be rescinded completely.

Note: I have only a two-week law degree and so I'm quite open to refinements to the above from my lawyer friends.

Related articles

NFL Changed "More Probable Than Not" Requirement Because of the Patriots

The only thing worse than our system of public justice is ...

Maybe the Patriots Didn't Cheat...

Before you comment, please read the entire article. It's long, it's detailed, and it raises some serious doubts about the NFL's position. From the conclusion,

Because the NFL had little or no experience with measuring psi in the heat (or cold) of a championship game, it is not surprising that the initial readings, from either gauge brought by Walt Anderson, suggested that the Patriots had been cheating. But a careful review of the measurements should have led them to conclude that the entire process of measuring and complying with the psi regulation was much more complicated than had been previously understood. ...

Instead, the NFL decided to tarnish the reputation of a future Hall-of-Famer who some would argue is the greatest player in the history of the NFL. That player is known to even the casual fan as a very intense competitor. I would not be surprised if under the pressure of an impending championship game, he encouraged or allowed staffers to break a rule. It’s a shame that the hard evidence that would make that conclusion definitive is not provided by the Wells Report.