Rick Perry vs World

08 April 2010

Interview with David Berri, author of _Stumbling on Wins_

Today features something a little different. Sports economist David Berri has a new book out, Stumbling on Wins. I was a big fan of Berri's first book, Wages of Wins, and regularly read his blog. I sent him a few short questions.

PVW: Whenever I read you write about your work, you seem to put it in terms of behavioral economics, but I've never actually heard you use the term. Do you identify yourself within that camp as an economist?

To answer your questions I am going to refer to the summary of behavioral economics offered by Alan Krueger at Princeton.

Krueger offers the following description of behavioral economics:

Fastest growing field in economics
Behavioral economics is concerned with the ways in which the actual decision-making process influences the decisions that are made in practice; combines psychology and economicsAssumes bounded rationality – meaning that people have limited time and capacity to weigh all the relevant benefits and costs of a decision.
Decision making is less than fully rational. People are prone to make predictable and avoidable mistakes.
At the same time, decision making is systematic and amenable to scientific study.

As Krueger notes, this is one of the fastest growing fields in economics. Stumbling on Wins is but one book drawing upon research from this field. For example, in Predictably Irrational, Dan Ariely presents evidence – drawn from laboratory experiments -- that human beings frequently fall short of the rational ideal. Nudge – by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein -- show how once we understand that people are not perfectly rational better policies can be designed. And How Markets Fail (by John Cassidy), The Myth of the Rational Market (by Justin Fox), and Animal Spirits (by George Akerlof and Robert Shiller), all demonstrate how behavioral economics can explain the causes of our recent economic downturn. So this is not just a field that is growing, it's also an important area of research.

PVW: It's been a few years since I read your excellent first book, Wages of Wins. As I remember it, the book was disproportionately weighted towards basketball, though it certainly had some chapters in other sports as well that would have been worth the price on their own. Does this book contain a similar percentage about basketball?

Stumbling on Wins covers research from baseball, hockey, basketball, and American football. The NBA is the primary focus of Chapter Two (Defending Isiah), Chapter Six (The Pareto Principle and Drafting Mistakes) and Chapter Eight (Is it the Teacher or the Students?). Hockey is the primary focus of Chapter Three (The Search for Useful Stats). American Football is the focus of Chapter Four (Football in Black and White), Chapter Five (Finding the Face of the Franchise), and parts of Chapter Seven (Inefficient on the Field). And baseball comes up in Chapter One (Maybe the Fans are Right) and parts of Chapter Six and Seven.

Essentially the book is trying to show that the Moneyball phenomenon (decision-makers in baseball were not valuing players correctly for much of baseball history) is something we see in all the major North American sports.

PVW: Did any parts of your new book surprise you when you first did the research?

Let me refer to what has become a classic cliché in answering your question. Specifically, it was Albert Einstein who said, "If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?"

I think that quote captures the unpredictability of research. For each study we are asking some basic questions: What determines draft position of an NFL quarterback? What factors determine the pay of an NBA free agent? What factors determine wins in the NBA? How consistent are NHL goalies across time?

The answer to each question isn't known before we start investigating the issue. And the answers – given what we understand of the conventional wisdom – are all somewhat surprising.

PVW: What parts of the new book do you think will cause the most controversy?

This is hard to answer. The story that was picked up on first was the story on the impact a Final Four appearance has on an NBA's players draft position. I would not have guessed that story was going to be noted first and that demonstrates how hard it is to predict how people react to the stories you tell.

PVW: In 5 years, what overvaluations and undervaluations in the NBA do you think will persist?
This is one of the key questions addressed in behavioral economics. How quickly does new information get adopted by decision-makers? In traditional economics it is imagined that information is adopted instantaneously. In reality, though, the process seems much slower. We note in the book, baseball had the data to calculate on-base percentage since the 1860s. But it doesn't appear that it was correctly incorporated in the valuation of players until the 21st century. That record suggests that the overvaluation of scoring in the NBA might persist for some time to come.

PVW: If charges drawn was kept as an NBA stat, do you think it would improve the explanatory power of Wins Produced?

No, the explanatory power is based on the connection offensive and defensive efficiency has to wins. But it would allow us to connect part of what is currently counted for the team to the individual players. So our evaluation of players would be improved (although I doubt it would be much of an improvement).

Let me offer a few more details on Wins Produced:

The model used to measure player performance begins with the simple notion that wins in the NBA are determined by a team's offensive and defensive efficiency. From this statistical model we can derive the value – in terms of wins – of much that is in the NBA box score. These values tell us that wins in the NBA are primarily determined by shooting efficiency and the ability of a team to capture and maintain possession of the ball. This means that an NBA player helps his team win when he is an efficient scorer, grabs rebounds, captures steals, and avoids turnovers (i.e. the possession factors). Blocked shots, assists, personal fouls do matter. But shooting efficiency and the possession factors matter more.

The model explains 95% of team wins and is much more consistent across time than the plus-minus models. But it does tell us that players who score inefficiently, and/or who are below average with respect to the possession factors, do not help a team win very much. And this can be true even if the player scores more than 20 points per game. As a consequence, Wins Produced can produce results that contradict what people generally believe about NBA players. Again, popular perception is driven by scoring. So as we argue in the Stumbling on Wins, perhaps what we see from Wins Produced shouldn’t be that surprising.

PVW: Now, for a change of pace: which do you think will be easier to model: american football or football (soccer)?

I am currently doing more work on both sports. My sense is that soccer will be easier. But then again, research is often surprising. So I am not sure that will be my answer when my co-authors and I finish our research.

---------------------------
Thank you, Professor Berri.

Note: for the sports fan clicking through, this is a blog about Texas politics, so you'll probably be disappointed. The only post even remotely related is Rick Perry sponsoring Bobby Labonte. Although I'm not sure that the sabermetric statheads are NASCAR fans, perhaps they are.

Posted by Evan @ 04/08/10 12:09 AM | Comments (0)

07 April 2010

David Jennings on LinkLetter's payola

Props to David Jennings for publicizing the LinkLetter's pay-for-play. That has always been one of my least favorite parts of Harris County Republican politics. Every campaign I've ever been part of in Harris County has internally called it pay-for-play, whether they played ball or didn't.

Posted by Evan @ 04/07/10 10:48 PM | Comments (0)

People care about Rick Perry sponsoring Bobby Labonte

My post isn't even terribly high up in the rankings for Rick Perry sponsors Bobby Labonte, but there are a fair amount of people coming to vist anyway.

Given that Perry has trended towards a different model of voter turnout, this spending looks better every time I think about it.

Posted by Evan @ 04/07/10 10:11 PM | Comments (0)

I'd rather be a Republican in Texas in 2010 than in 2006

Karl-Thomas Musselman at BOR kindly links to me in his Texas blog roundup (which is usually a good finger on the pulse):

A debate over the median Texas voter as it relates to Bill White's campaign strategy. It's right and wrong. Wrong in that Bill White doesn't have to worry much at all about his left flank in going after middle of the road voters- the left flank needs a win more than it needs a champion. Rick Perry vs the World is right in the sense that White may have not strayed much from Barack Obama- but he's wrong in saying that makes him a liberal. I mean, come one, Barack Obama is not a liberal champion so White's pretty in line with the middle of the road.

Karl-T and I agree that Bill White has not strayed much (if at all?) from Obama. So substantively, liberals should be quite happy with him. I'm not sure why Karl-T says I was wrong when I agree with him on that 100%.

As I read it, Karl-T is suggesting that Obama is middle of the road, so thus White should feel comfortable running with Obama as he has been doing? I don't think Texas voters would agree in any way that Barack Obama is middle of the road.

Perhaps that is why Bill White is running the campaign he is. As I said, the only time I've found him differing from Obama was to criticize Obama for not being liberal enough. I don't think that's a winning strategy in Texas in any year, but especially not in 2010.

Posted by Evan @ 04/07/10 10:07 PM | Comments (0)

06 April 2010

I don't think William McKenzie understands the median Texas voter very well

William McKenzie analyzes Rick Perry vs Bill White:

Will White be able to get enough of its more liberal members to give him cover so he can go out and try to win more moderate-to-right-leaning independents? If the independents were hard right, they would be in Perry's camp. But they aren't hard right, so they are up for grabs.

White can't win them, though, if he runs a campaign that appeals mostly to Democrats, especially the party's base. He needs freedom to wander off the reservation, if you will.

The only way he can do that is if the Garnet Colemans, Jim Dunmams and Leticia Van De Puttes give him room. As the party's more established liberals, those state legislators can deliver the message to fellow Democrats that White needs room to win over independents, especially those influential suburbanites who turn out at the polls in droves.

I thought about one-lining this with a snarky: so that is why Bill White is going around talking to reporters about how liberal he was growing up?

But in truth, I don't agree with McKenzie on this at all. He presents a false dichotomy that smart campaigns reject.

Apart from that, to this point in the race, where has Bill White substantively strayed from his party or from Barack Obama? Perhaps I've missed it, but the only time I remember him disagreeing publically with Barack Obama it was to criticize his cap and trade legislation for not being liberal enough. Does that sound like a winning formula for getting to 50%+1 in Texas? Is the Median Texas Voter going to vote for Barack Obama in 2010?

Finally, Mr. McKenzie, your rhetoric suggests that Republicans are "hard right." That's a loaded phrase, essentially used only to criticize Republicans. I did a quick search for any instances where you use the phrase "hard left." I couldn't find any. It's probably not a good idea to use language more often used by liberal bloggers than by thoughtful journalists, especially when Republicans and Republican-leaners are a majority of your potential customers.

Posted by Evan @ 04/06/10 06:15 PM | Comments (2)

Rick Perry to sponsor Bobby Labonte's 71

Rick Perry has sponsored Nascar driver (and Texan) Bobby Labonte's number 71 for the April 18th Sprint Cup Samsung Mobile 500 race at the Texas Motor Speedway. The ad on the front bumper asks folks to text 71 to 95613 which goes toward Perry's strategy of being able to contact folks for free electronically. They paid $225,000 for the privilege, and apparently think it's the first time a candidate has bought ads on a driver's car.

April 10th is the last day for the Perry's tour with Labonte's race car.

Here's the Rick Perry video talking about the activities they've got planned:

History of politicians with NASCAR:
It's not the first time a political logo has been appeared in Nascar. Kirk Shelmerdine put the BushCheney '04 logo on his race car because he didn't find an advertiser for the space. His exercise of free speech earned him an FEC investigation for a few years, an admonishment, and assuredly lots of legal fees.

Also, Democrat Kendrick Meek, a Florida Congressman running for Senate sponsored Mike Wallace at Daytona in the second-tier Nationwide series, as did former Florida Senator Bob Graham's presidential campaign.
---------------------

Update for the folks searching here: Bobby Labonte's 71 car is taking a trip around Texas for the next few days. That schedule is at the end of the post. They're also auctioning off two race day VIP passes.

This post has also been edited so that people coming in on search engines can hopefully find some of the stuff they are searching for. Below is the full press release:

[Read More]

Posted by Evan @ 04/06/10 05:50 PM | Comments (0)

05 April 2010

Week 4 of Bill White not releasing his tax returns

Peggy Fikac notes:

It's week four of waiting for White to release his income tax returns for the time he served as Houston mayor. He has said he won't release any except for the time he's been running for statewide office (that's 2009 so far). Perry has released returns since 1996

I am fascinated by the fact that Bill White thinks he can get away with not releasing his tax returns. He's running for governor of an economy that is one of the top 10 in the world. Not only is it customary for any major candidate, but White has been talking about his success as a businessman (ignoring the fact that he had more success as a trial lawyer than as a businessman). It's pretty reasonable for voters to want to know about potential conflicts of interest. As a heuristic, it's probably also reasonable that voters assume that if a candidate doesn't release his tax returns, he probably has something to hide.

It's not an issue that will go away. The press will keep talking about it. Even if the press were to neglect to mention this fact again, the fact that Perry's campaign can put it in ads means that it's a losing issue for White.

I assume White will release his tax returns soon. In the meantime, he is looking silly refusing to release them and losing media cycles. And, he is defusing any potential ethics charges he might try to throw at Perry later.

Posted by Evan @ 04/05/10 07:14 AM | Comments (0)

Peggy Fikac does the state of KBH - Perry relations, one month after the primary.

Her office isn't making any promises: "I don't think we're even thinking about fall campaigning right now. Politics doesn't come into focus at this point at all. She's focused right now on doing her job in the Senate, because it is intense up there," said Hutchison spokeswoman Lisette Mondello.

Political scientist Jerry Polinard of the University of Texas-Pan American noted it would be the political norm for Hutchison to campaign for Perry:
"During the primary campaign, your opponent has three sixes behind their ear," he said. "But after it's over, it's time for a group hug." Polinard said Hutchison could help Perry appeal to her primary backers who'd be more inclined to sit out the general election than vote for Perry or White.

This is the standard line, and it is certainly not wrong. But it is more right in some contexts than in others. All things considered, I think KBH's 2010 primary campaign showed that she 1) did not inspire a significant core of ardent supporters, and 2) did not attract new voters to the process. Even so, Perry is clearly hoping for an event or two, and he should, because Hutchison brings a warm, fuzzy "Good Housekeeping" moderate seal of approval. Plus it keeps newspapers from writing constantly about the state of the relationship.

It would be great for the GOP if Hutchison campaigned for Perry, said political consultant Mark Sanders, but he added, "It's hard in this business to run against someone and then go stand with that person at a political rally or campaign fundraiser. Sometimes we forget it, but these people are human."

As I read this line, I remembered that a reporter at one of the big dailies had recently labelled Mark Sanders a GOP consultant, which is clearly non-factual. I checked, and it was in fact Peggy Fikac. So kudos to Fikac for changing her label.

With that said, quoting Sanders when talking about Perry is a perilous endeavour. Sanders once mostly did GOP campaigns, until he switched to the Democrats to run against Rick Perry. Then in 2006, he switched to independent Carole Strayhorn to run against...Rick Perry. He also did some unusual (to say the least) candidate recruitment once upon a time. Given all that, there are probably better sources for unbiased Rick Perry analysis than Mark Sanders. This is a pretty innocuous quote, however; not exactly a situation that called for insightful analysis.

Posted by Evan @ 04/05/10 12:14 AM | Comments (1)

03 April 2010

I didn't mention this when it came out a few weeks ago, but...what?

Former Houston Mayor Bill White's service on the board of an oil field services company now facing a congressional inquiry is not illegal, but it is unusual.

Only White and Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert showed up as serving as directors of major corporations.

White, the Democratic nominee for governor, made $2.6 million during his tenure as Houston's mayor by also serving on the board of BJ Services Co. The firm now is part of a congressional investigation into hydraulic fracturing techniques in gas drilling and whether it leads to groundwater pollution.

That is very rare to be a director of a corporation while mayor of the 4th largest city in America. How did that never get published until now?

Folks like Richard Murray like to talk about how brilliant Bill White is, but his duration at mayor was pretty clearly focused on higher office. Why wouldn't he be perspicacious enough to avoid this? I guess he figured $2.6 million bucks was worth the negative hit when the news came out in a campaign.

Posted by Evan @ 04/03/10 11:31 PM | Comments (1)

02 April 2010

Perry vs KBH, after

AP:

Perry said he "would suspect you've heard the last of that" when asked Thursday about [the moniker Kay Bailout Hutchison].

He applauds Hutchison for staying in the Senate, noting she's on some "very important committees" that can help Texas. Perry, who faces Democrat Bill White in November, also says he anticipates Hutchison's help with his re-election.

In his words, "We're on the team. We just had an intramural scrimmage, and we got that over with."

I always love the post-primary quotes.

Posted by Evan @ 04/02/10 09:26 AM | Comments (0)

[Previous 10 Entries] [Next 10 Entries]

SITE MENU

+ Rick Perry vs World
+ About Me

+ Archives

+ Email:
perryvsworld* at *gmail dot com

ADVERTISING

SYNDICATION

DISCLAIMER

Rick Perry vs. World is powered by Nucleus.

Site design and Nucleus customization by Kevin Whited.