"There’s so much to be gained from process," Irvin told me and two Miami radio hosts. "Professional athletics doesn’t have time for process. Athletes are given wealth instantly. We live in a society that used to prepare meals in a process and put them in the oven to bake and now we put things in a microwave and eat right away. We’re into instant gratification. We’ve lost the process. We’ve lost patience."
Michael lrvin, who apparently is moonlighting as Royals PR Flack/Mystery Sabermetrician, to Jason Whitlock
about 2 years ago
Matt Klaassen
14 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
On a serious note
I think this is one of Whitlock’s better pieces in a while.
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 6, 2010 11:29 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
insert joke about guy accused of sexual assault
lecturing about need for instant gratification
here
by Freneau on Feb 6, 2010 3:57 PM EST reply actions 1 recs
Irvin's a psychopath
Not that he’d kill you, since there’s nothing in it for him. But from everything I’ve ever read, including this column, he has no scruples. Not surprising that he was able to take in Whitlock. I’ve met a couple of people like this. Fortunately, there aren’t many.
It's pronounced Poo-ZHOLS in Catalan.
There Has Been
A huge transfer of wealth to the lower classes in the US via professional sports. I’ve often wondered if anyone has done a serious study of the effect this has had on everyone concerned.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
that's a very interesting thought
but i wonder if it’s negated by the fact that this wealth is transferred to a very concentrated group of people. i think this would only really have a noticable effect if the wealth was then in turn shared by the athlete with a very large number of people.
i doubt it, but that’s why you’d need the study
The Converse Phenomenon
Has been lower class athletes (and entertainers of all sorts) moving into the upper class. Think Mr. T in Beverly hills with a chain saw whacking down trees on his new spread.
I used to be an A's fan until they left town and got good.
by philofthenorth on Feb 8, 2010 8:41 PM EST up reply actions
That would be the interesting part...
I have heard that a very common course of action for recent lottery winners is to open a restaurant (which then fails because those folks have no experience running restaurants). It might actually be sort of interesting to compare the lives of millionaire athletes with millionaire lottery winners.
I would expect the athletes to do better as a group, since the lottery winners have achieved success by way of a decidedly poor investment strategy… would access to millions change that strategy much? I kind of doubt it, since, you know… it worked once.
Focusing your life almost exclusively on athletics
is also a decidedly poor investment strategy. The odds of having a huge payday are about the same.
It just comes down to the person’s innate judgment and the fact that big-time athletes have had agents, “advisors”, etc. that have been fawning over them and trying to take care of them for years. If the athlete hires the right agent/advisor (i.e. one who has decent character) and surrounds himself with the right people, then he’s probably financially stable for the rest of his life. Unless he runs around almost intentionally screwing things up, which it seems like Irvin, and many others, have done in the past.
"Now…put that in your [BLEEP]ing pipe and smoke it." -Hal McRae
"I was doing this when BJ was in his father's nutsack." -Renzo Gracie
by Sweep_the_Leg on Feb 9, 2010 11:53 AM EST up reply actions
The restaurant thing doesn't make sense
I thought these people played the lottery so they could quit working?
But neither does buying a lottery ticket until the jackpot reaches a point where your expected value turns positive. Regardless, just investing your money into dividend paying stocks, bonds, REITS, etc., can net you up to 10% per year. If they won $1M (after taxes) in the lottery, even at 5%, most people buying lottery tickets should be able to survive indefinitely on $50,000 a year, and at 10% that number doubles to $100,000.
what is the tipping point
never bought a lottery ticket in my life, but I’ve heard this before from mathematically-informed people, but I wasn’t sure what it was
I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.
Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Feb 10, 2010 10:02 AM EST up reply actions
It's simple expectation
E(value of bet) >= Cost of ticket
The probability of a win is always the same, but you’re taking a chance that there won’t be multiple winners. Ignoring all possibilities but the jackpot, the odds of winning are roughly 1 in 195,000,000. So if the ticket costs a $1 and the jackpot is $195M, that’s breakeven. It’s more complicated because of the tax bite, the lump sum payout option, other prizes, multiple winner possibilities, etc. It’s probably best to take a line from a cheesy 80s movie and conclude the best way to win is not to play.
Meet your new
Special Assistant to the GM!
That seems like a more appropriate name.
by CentralChamps20?? on Feb 8, 2010 4:24 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Royals Review
Related FanShots on Royals Review
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
