|
get that OUT of my face posted:Here's a real doozy. I don't even care about baseball but recognize Moneyball as the kind of trash that it is. Like The Big Short but sportsball
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
The Big Short was so patronizing, and I don't know what the hell they were doing with Bale's character. He just came across as a magical retard who liked annoying music. And the stupid celebrity explanations of the finance aspects of it was just cringe-worthy. Margin Call was a much better (aside from having kevin spacey in it), much more subtle way of portraying the 2008 crisis without the audience being treated like a moron.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:I don't even care about baseball but recognize Moneyball as the kind of trash that it is. He's talking about the concept of moneyball, not the movie based on the book about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
I liked Steve Carrell in The Big Short.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:The Big Short was so patronizing, and I don't know what the hell they were doing with Bale's character. He just came across as a magical retard who liked annoying music. And the stupid celebrity explanations of the finance aspects of it was just cringe-worthy. The best part of The Big Short was all of my friends coming to me and asking what kind of brokerage accounts would let them short stock because they thought so and so was gonna drop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:51
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:The best part of The Big Short was all of my friends coming to me and asking what kind of brokerage accounts would let them short stock because they thought so and so was gonna drop. I don't know much about stocks but isn't shorting things very risky? To me it always seemed like an idiotic thing to do unless you had plenty of room in your budget in case you fail or you had insider information. But yeah, after seeing that movie to the naive eye the impression I would get is that it is just the quick/smart way to make money.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 00:56
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I don't know much about stocks but isn't shorting things very risky? To me it always seemed like an idiotic thing to do unless you had plenty of room in your budget in case you fail or you had insider information. Nah, it's like taking candy from a baby! By subscribing to my weekly newsletter, for a mere $19.99 an issue, I can help you (yes you!) go from Rags to RicherTM!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I hate baseball because it's boring as poo poo, but didn't the moneyball thing actually produce results? If it actually works, I see no problem in using data to win sports. As for the second point about how a player's prime is younger than ever: the current CBA restricts young players' freedom of movement for several years. Once you make the major leagues and play the proper amount of games to count towards burning off your first year of entry level, you get a few more years (I'm not sure how much, exactly) until you get your first pay raise. But that player doesn't get to hit free agency just yet: the team still controls him and the amount of money that they make is decided in arbitration. They're going to get more money, but because they don't have the team still controls what they get, it's drastically less than they would if they were able to hit free agency. Finally, after that arbitration deal runs out, they get to get that big-money free agent contract. Here's the problem: that hasn't been the case over the last two seasons. Last season's free agent class was rather weak, but there were still a lot of good players who had to wait longer than expected to be signed by a team, and at less money than they would have if it were five years earlier. A lot of those contracts were definitely an overpay because a lot of the players that signed them didn't play anywhere near the level that "deserved" that contract. This year, two of the best players in the game, Bryce Harper and Manny Machado, hit the free agent market and were expected to be taken near the beginning of free agency. A couple of months have passed and only four teams are interested in one or both of those players. This is where another unintended consequence of analytics comes in. Harper and Machado are both 26. In an earlier era, they would be considered young, in their prime, and signed within a week at the very latest. But today, the analytics show that they won't have that many years left of that level of play, so they're still unsigned. It makes business sense, too. Why would teams like the Yankees, Phillies, Dodgers, and Braves take a "risk" on somebody at that ripe old age when they've got their own players in the minor leagues that project to be better for longer- and, even better, to be cheaper for longer? Unfortunately, the only way I can see that getting fixed is if the players go on strike and make earlier freedom of movement one of their core demands. The labor situation in baseball is hosed and the MLBPA has been on the losing end of the last couple of CBAs, so the time to make a point is the next negotiation in two years. That was a lot of words and I may not have been accurate in some of the details, but essentially: yes, I agree that using data to win games is a good idea. But it's led to some side effects that make me wonder if the whole movement was worth it. Honestly, I don't think it was.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:16
|
|
|
no offense but that post almost bored me as much as watching an actual baseball game
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:20
|
|
|
Nobody in baseball even dunks
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:22
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:Nobody in baseball even dunks Michael Jordan??
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:28
|
|
|
According to Star Trek, baseball will be dead eventually anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:28
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:According to Star Trek, baseball will be dead eventually anyway. but there will stil lbe baseball nerds. I'm looking at you, the sisko.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Henchman of Santa posted:He's talking about the concept of moneyball, not the movie based on the book about it. Yeah, and I didn't watch moneyball I just got the ugly gist of it
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:It's worked too well, IMO. A big reason why games last so long these days is because managers will pull relief pitchers at a drop of a hat if the matchup is slightly unfavorable, and sometimes that occurs after a reliever has faced one or two batters. It takes a few minutes for the next pitcher to warm up, so that eats up a lot of time. You're lucky if a game goes slightly over 3 hours these days, and anything well below that amount of time is a minor miracle. The commissioner of MLB has made it a point that he wants games to go quicker, but he hasn't made much of a dent. Partially that's because a lot of the rules he's passed are either not related to that goal at all or do very little to speed up games (although limiting mound visits is a welcome development), but there's only so much he can do that doesn't involve radical changes. Reducing the amount of relievers a team can use per game would help, but it'll go over like a lead balloon for both the players and managers. Analytics have made that an important part of the game, and it helps a team win, but it also makes games slower than ever. And that contributes to people like you thinking that it's boring. The quickest way to speed up games is to cut down on commercial breaks and just charge more for the time allotted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:The quickest way to speed up games is to cut down on commercial breaks and just charge more for the time allotted. Trick is that those 15 seconds still reach the same number of people if it’s one commercial out of 10 or out of 100. Unless you think it would proportionately increase viewership, revenue goes down quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 04:35
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:White Bear Tubgoat posted:Black Mirror doesn't NEED to spoonfeed its audience the conclusions that this poo poo is horrific Solice Kirsk posted:The quickest way to speed up games is to cut down on commercial breaks and just charge more for the time allotted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 05:11
|
|
|
Just watch "San Junipero" and "USS Callister" because those are the feel-good Black Mirror episodes that are also entertaining with good performances. As a bonus the gamergate people hate USS Callister so you know it's good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 05:32
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:I don't know much about stocks but isn't shorting things very risky? To me it always seemed like an idiotic thing to do unless you had plenty of room in your budget in case you fail or you had insider information. It is in fact very risky. If you short something and it goes up you end up losing money. You can also be caught in a short squeeze in various circumstances where you absolutely must buy stocks even if it would ruin you financially. I think it can also look really, really suspicious if something happens like somebody just mysteriously shorts a poo poo load of stock in a company that they have some connection to that suddenly tanks very shortly thereafter. It's generally only a short term strategy as the best stock strategy is to just play the fact that the stock market just trends upward overtime. Pretty much every stock investment strategy other than index funds is bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
britain was legitimately a mistake
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
spit on my clit posted:britain was legitimately a mistake There is a concerted effort to fix that at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 07:20
|
|
|
Doctor Spaceman posted:There is a concerted effort to fix that at the moment. i'll believe it when i see it
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 07:28
|
|
|
spit on my clit posted:i'll believe it when i see it Britain can't be a mistake if there isn't a Britain.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:As a bonus the gamergate people hate USS Callister so you know it's good.  Thanks for reminding me of this, I nearly forgot. I'd be delighted to know why specifically they hate this episode, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 08:22
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Wait, what? The game actually pauses for commercials? They have actual time allocated to put commercials in while the people physically at the game, what, just sit around waiting? There are commercial breaks, yes. Usually they are timed so happen during natural pauses in the game, but when I go to like hockey games sometimes there will be a commercial time out after a penalty or something and you use it to go to the bathroom or get something to eat, or just wait. It feels much shorter than it does on TV if you're actually there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 13:30
|
|
|
Yeah at a real game you’re surrounded by other people, often drinking, and there’s stuff to focus on besides a doritos ad. I wonder how much revenue sports sponsorships generate. Like, stadiums have so many loving logos and “AT&T sponsors Toyota’s Yum! Foods Stadium’s Half-Time Exxon Extravaganza!” that it all just blends into one capitalist morass in my head. Edgar Allen Ho has a new favorite as of 14:56 on Jan 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 14:54
|
|
|
Commercial breaks in hockey is where you get to bet your friends which hot dog is going to win the race on the Jumbo-tron (always bet on relish) or argue with your section about who the best hockey player of all time was, Gretzky or Howe ( the answer is Howe, and this is coming from a Hawks fan).
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 15:00
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I wonder how much revenue sports sponsorships generate. Like, stadiums have so many loving logos and “AT&T sponsors Toyota’s Yum! Foods Stadium’s Half-Time Exxon Extravaganza!” that it all just blends into one capitalist morass in my head. Judging by the fact that a majority of construction revenue comes from taxpayers without their consent, I'm gonna estimate "A loving shitload," and it's this kinda bullshit that keeps me from being able to respect or enjoy professional athletics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Commercial breaks in hockey is where you get to bet your friends which hot dog is going to win the race on the Jumbo-tron (always bet on relish) or argue with your section about who the best hockey player of all time was, Gretzky or Howe ( the answer is Howe, and this is coming from a Hawks fan). But both of those are wrong, it's Lemieux. (this is the part where we start a fight in the stands and get our season tickets taken from us)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
It’s Lemieux and not just because of his name. gently caress the penguins though
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 15:36
|
|
|
gently caress IRL penguins too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 15:45
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:
[laughs Americanly]
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 16:00
|
|
|
yeah I eat rear end posted:But both of those are wrong, it's Lemieux. If Lemieux cared about hockey then he wouldn't have gotten cancer.  Lemieux was my hands down favorite player as a kid, but then he swept my Blackhawks in the Cup in '92. So now the jersey of him sits in my mom's closet next to my orange and white Tampa Bay Bucs letterman jacket that will never ever fit me again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
They're both terrible really but the hobbit movies were slightly better than the lotr ones just for being visually more interesting
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 19:32
|
|
|
My opinion is that buying avatars or custom titles for other people on this forum to "get" at them for whatever reason is very silly because spending money on people you don't like is very foolish. (It's bad enough spending money on people you do like.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
Wheat Loaf posted:My opinion is that buying avatars or custom titles for other people on this forum to "get" at them for whatever reason is very silly because spending money on people you don't like is very foolish. (It's bad enough spending money on people you do like.) Lowtax has to pay for his spine somehow
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
I like myself and spend money on me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 20:22
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:They're both terrible really but the hobbit movies were slightly better than the lotr ones just for being visually more interesting 
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 20:28
|
|
|
I have no idea how anyone could have that opinion. Like the first lord of the rings is pretty much all beautiful visual stuff and the others aren't bad except when they are near mordor. The hobbit, meanwhile, just looked...fake. Especially scenes like that river scene with the barrels. It seemed more CGI than natural.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
Hobbits are worse than Star Wars prequels
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2019 20:33
|
|