1 00:00:15,564 --> 00:00:28,324 Speaker 1: Pushkin the Risky Business listeners. Nate and I are busy 2 00:00:28,364 --> 00:00:31,364 Speaker 1: this week at a different poker tournament, but since the 3 00:00:31,484 --> 00:00:33,964 Speaker 1: NBA is back in season, we wanted to reshare an 4 00:00:34,004 --> 00:00:36,364 Speaker 1: interview that we did on the podcast last year that 5 00:00:36,484 --> 00:00:37,804 Speaker 1: both of us really enjoyed. 6 00:00:38,204 --> 00:00:40,564 Speaker 2: We talked to friend of the pod, Darryl Morey, who 7 00:00:40,604 --> 00:00:43,364 Speaker 2: was the president of basketball operations for the Philadelphia seventy 8 00:00:43,404 --> 00:00:47,324 Speaker 2: six Ers and one of the truly og statnerds that 9 00:00:47,404 --> 00:00:48,964 Speaker 2: made it big and professional sports. 10 00:00:49,284 --> 00:00:51,524 Speaker 1: Yeah, we talked about the seventy six Ers strategy for 11 00:00:51,564 --> 00:00:54,684 Speaker 1: their championship run last year, and we talked in general 12 00:00:54,724 --> 00:00:58,324 Speaker 1: about what you need to do to build a championship team. 13 00:00:58,964 --> 00:00:59,164 Speaker 3: Yeah. 14 00:00:59,204 --> 00:01:02,764 Speaker 2: I look six Ers have made some further high risk bets. 15 00:01:02,804 --> 00:01:05,044 Speaker 2: They directed VJ. Edgecombe, who is one of the brighton 16 00:01:05,124 --> 00:01:07,084 Speaker 2: stars in the NBA. I think things looking a little 17 00:01:07,244 --> 00:01:10,964 Speaker 2: better overall for the franchise. I'm getting the interview with Darryl, 18 00:01:12,084 --> 00:01:14,084 Speaker 2: but like we think you'll get a lot of insight. 19 00:01:13,844 --> 00:01:17,924 Speaker 1: Out of this. Yeah. We've also both played poker with Darryl, 20 00:01:18,044 --> 00:01:22,244 Speaker 1: so we recapped some tournament play, including the absolutely horrific 21 00:01:22,284 --> 00:01:25,044 Speaker 1: summer I had at the World Series last year. Anyway, 22 00:01:25,084 --> 00:01:33,844 Speaker 1: we hope you'll enjoy this. I'm really excited for this conversation. 23 00:01:34,644 --> 00:01:36,644 Speaker 1: Nate and I have both known Darren for a while. 24 00:01:37,564 --> 00:01:41,924 Speaker 3: And Aaron, I said, Darryl, he said, he said, there, 25 00:01:42,764 --> 00:01:44,084 Speaker 3: let's let's see. Let's good to I. 26 00:01:45,564 --> 00:01:48,724 Speaker 2: Use a replay challenge. 27 00:01:48,764 --> 00:01:52,804 Speaker 3: I thought, I thought you were doing really well, Maureene 28 00:01:52,844 --> 00:01:56,404 Speaker 3: and I and I fucked it all up. I'm excited 29 00:01:56,444 --> 00:01:59,124 Speaker 3: to be on because you guys are all about decision making. 30 00:01:59,244 --> 00:02:03,604 Speaker 3: That's the only thing I do. So I'm on. I'm 31 00:02:03,644 --> 00:02:07,644 Speaker 3: on twenty twenty two years. I think. I think that's right. Yeah, 32 00:02:07,724 --> 00:02:12,044 Speaker 3: of just making this for teams, so for people. 33 00:02:11,764 --> 00:02:14,884 Speaker 2: Who don't know you are a true Ravarian to use 34 00:02:14,924 --> 00:02:16,804 Speaker 2: a term from the book, cald like you even play. 35 00:02:16,884 --> 00:02:19,724 Speaker 2: I mean, you're really competitive and you like analytics, but 36 00:02:19,764 --> 00:02:20,444 Speaker 2: you really want to win. 37 00:02:22,124 --> 00:02:23,684 Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly exactly. 38 00:02:24,604 --> 00:02:26,604 Speaker 1: I think I think that's a motivation that we can 39 00:02:26,764 --> 00:02:28,924 Speaker 1: we can all relate to. 40 00:02:29,604 --> 00:02:34,844 Speaker 3: It's funny because of you. Thank you. Sorry, no no. 41 00:02:35,364 --> 00:02:40,804 Speaker 1: I was giving a talk in Miami at uh at 42 00:02:40,804 --> 00:02:42,684 Speaker 1: a conference where where there were a lot of people 43 00:02:42,724 --> 00:02:46,084 Speaker 1: who were very into analytics, and we were talking about, 44 00:02:46,084 --> 00:02:48,524 Speaker 1: you know, different strategies and all this, and I was 45 00:02:48,564 --> 00:02:50,644 Speaker 1: like you know what, but like the bottom line is, 46 00:02:50,684 --> 00:02:53,284 Speaker 1: like I love poker, but like I want to fucking win, 47 00:02:53,764 --> 00:02:56,084 Speaker 1: right you guys. 48 00:02:56,164 --> 00:03:01,484 Speaker 3: That congrats on the bracelet. You're you're You're one up 49 00:03:01,524 --> 00:03:04,124 Speaker 3: on Nate as far as I know on zero. 50 00:03:04,364 --> 00:03:07,884 Speaker 1: So it's thank you so much, Daryl. 51 00:03:08,084 --> 00:03:11,404 Speaker 2: Dear so, I've played Poker Institute two or three times 52 00:03:11,524 --> 00:03:15,524 Speaker 2: or something. Darryl, I'm just gonna tell people has very 53 00:03:15,524 --> 00:03:20,324 Speaker 2: bad chip etiquette. You're supposed to stack your chips and 54 00:03:20,404 --> 00:03:23,884 Speaker 2: miles of twenty twenty. Absolutely, if you don't do that, 55 00:03:23,884 --> 00:03:26,044 Speaker 2: that's actually kind of a disadvance of the players. I 56 00:03:26,044 --> 00:03:27,164 Speaker 2: can't see a many chips you have. 57 00:03:28,764 --> 00:03:30,684 Speaker 1: Those assets. Daryl. I like you so much. 58 00:03:30,844 --> 00:03:32,884 Speaker 3: Don't know totally. 59 00:03:32,564 --> 00:03:34,964 Speaker 2: Like if a player is seen as good for the game, 60 00:03:35,644 --> 00:03:37,164 Speaker 2: there might be less requests. 61 00:03:38,324 --> 00:03:42,524 Speaker 3: No, I uh, Sadly, I haven't put the time into poker, 62 00:03:42,844 --> 00:03:44,924 Speaker 3: and I get invited to a lot of games and 63 00:03:44,964 --> 00:03:47,284 Speaker 3: I'm not sure why. Maybe because I don't win very often. 64 00:03:47,324 --> 00:03:50,204 Speaker 3: So yeah, I will say though, Maria, you're you're a pro. 65 00:03:50,324 --> 00:03:54,564 Speaker 3: So it's Nate. I try to at least let my ego. 66 00:03:54,964 --> 00:03:56,684 Speaker 3: Given the fact that I don't win poker a lot, 67 00:03:57,164 --> 00:03:59,524 Speaker 3: I handle it by pointing out that I'm usually playing 68 00:03:59,524 --> 00:04:02,644 Speaker 3: with two or three pros and it doesn't seem very fair. 69 00:04:04,364 --> 00:04:07,524 Speaker 1: If you guys, absolutely not fair, And I promise I'll 70 00:04:07,564 --> 00:04:09,404 Speaker 1: be nice to you if you let me play. 71 00:04:11,964 --> 00:04:14,444 Speaker 3: You definitely want me in your game area, that's sure. 72 00:04:14,724 --> 00:04:15,764 Speaker 2: You are very aggressive. 73 00:04:16,164 --> 00:04:16,924 Speaker 3: Do you use. 74 00:04:18,724 --> 00:04:21,964 Speaker 2: Game theory in any way in decision making? 75 00:04:22,644 --> 00:04:26,644 Speaker 3: Yeah? So, I mean probably the easiest one to talk 76 00:04:26,684 --> 00:04:29,644 Speaker 3: through is like the two for one is a pretty 77 00:04:29,644 --> 00:04:33,444 Speaker 3: easy sort of game theory problem. No one's really gotten 78 00:04:33,484 --> 00:04:37,004 Speaker 3: to the extreme game theory, but it's coming. It's definitely coming. 79 00:04:38,124 --> 00:04:40,404 Speaker 3: So two for one. Just for your audience, there's a 80 00:04:40,404 --> 00:04:43,444 Speaker 3: twenty four second shot clock in the NBA. If you 81 00:04:43,484 --> 00:04:47,004 Speaker 3: have the ball, let's say forty seconds or thirty five 82 00:04:47,044 --> 00:04:50,364 Speaker 3: to forty seconds. You can either run your normal offense 83 00:04:50,644 --> 00:04:53,484 Speaker 3: and get a shot in twenty seconds and now there's 84 00:04:53,484 --> 00:04:55,644 Speaker 3: fifteen remaining, so you get one shot and they get 85 00:04:55,684 --> 00:05:00,604 Speaker 3: one shot, and or you can take a shot quickly 86 00:05:00,684 --> 00:05:02,524 Speaker 3: and then the other team only it's went for seconds, 87 00:05:02,524 --> 00:05:04,164 Speaker 3: so you'll get the ball back. Well, it turns out 88 00:05:04,924 --> 00:05:07,524 Speaker 3: in thousands of thousands of trials at every level of basketball, 89 00:05:07,564 --> 00:05:09,364 Speaker 3: this is going to shock your audience, which I'm sure 90 00:05:09,484 --> 00:05:12,844 Speaker 3: is pretty sophisticated. Two shots are better than one shot. 91 00:05:12,924 --> 00:05:16,324 Speaker 3: I know, I know that will surprise people, but even 92 00:05:16,444 --> 00:05:20,284 Speaker 3: even even even materially worse, two shots are better than 93 00:05:20,324 --> 00:05:24,644 Speaker 3: one shot. There are some exceptions in the fourth quarter 94 00:05:24,844 --> 00:05:26,964 Speaker 3: and things like that, but but in the first three 95 00:05:27,044 --> 00:05:30,964 Speaker 3: quarters it's pretty straightforward. Well, obviously, if the other team says, okay, 96 00:05:31,004 --> 00:05:33,044 Speaker 3: I'm gonna shoot such that I force you into the 97 00:05:33,044 --> 00:05:36,924 Speaker 3: two for one, the other side isn't just this blod 98 00:05:37,404 --> 00:05:41,444 Speaker 3: you know, undynamic opponent. They can then shoot even faster, 99 00:05:41,644 --> 00:05:44,524 Speaker 3: faster back at you. In fact, the Utah Jazz when 100 00:05:44,564 --> 00:05:46,444 Speaker 3: Joey Sloan was there, would do this more than any 101 00:05:46,524 --> 00:05:50,324 Speaker 3: team that I can recall. And then so now there's 102 00:05:50,804 --> 00:05:54,084 Speaker 3: there's a whole set of other strategies that if they 103 00:05:54,164 --> 00:05:56,364 Speaker 3: somehow manipulate the clock better than you, you can then 104 00:05:56,404 --> 00:05:59,724 Speaker 3: regenerate the two for one, like fouling them or being 105 00:05:59,804 --> 00:06:02,444 Speaker 3: super aggressive to speed up their offense. There's a whole 106 00:06:02,684 --> 00:06:05,724 Speaker 3: set of things. So that's just one off the top. Obviously, 107 00:06:05,724 --> 00:06:09,044 Speaker 3: there's game theory and in in game in terms of 108 00:06:09,124 --> 00:06:12,084 Speaker 3: like how do you react to you know, they put 109 00:06:12,204 --> 00:06:14,524 Speaker 3: five out shooting lineups on the floor, how do you 110 00:06:14,604 --> 00:06:15,724 Speaker 3: guard that things. 111 00:06:15,524 --> 00:06:21,284 Speaker 1: Like that, So, and what about when you're making roster decisions, 112 00:06:21,324 --> 00:06:23,444 Speaker 1: when you're when you're thinking about trading, and when you 113 00:06:23,484 --> 00:06:27,364 Speaker 1: actually have to think about yourself as one player in 114 00:06:27,404 --> 00:06:30,844 Speaker 1: a multiplayer game because there are other yous out there 115 00:06:31,164 --> 00:06:33,804 Speaker 1: who are responsible for other teams who are going to 116 00:06:33,804 --> 00:06:36,604 Speaker 1: be making different moves and responding to you. So how 117 00:06:36,604 --> 00:06:38,204 Speaker 1: do you think about it off the court in that 118 00:06:38,364 --> 00:06:39,284 Speaker 1: kind of that metagame? 119 00:06:39,644 --> 00:06:44,004 Speaker 3: That's right, And it's a heavily repeating game because you know, 120 00:06:44,004 --> 00:06:47,644 Speaker 3: it's the same thirty teams. What's really interesting is it's 121 00:06:47,644 --> 00:06:51,164 Speaker 3: a heavily repeating game, but they can replace the key 122 00:06:51,204 --> 00:06:53,364 Speaker 3: decision maker, so it's actually a repeating game at the 123 00:06:53,404 --> 00:06:56,604 Speaker 3: ownership level more than it is at my level where 124 00:06:56,644 --> 00:06:59,164 Speaker 3: people can get fired. So there have been such sort 125 00:06:59,164 --> 00:07:02,764 Speaker 3: of these famous examples of people, you know, making future 126 00:07:02,804 --> 00:07:06,444 Speaker 3: promises or things like that that they then try to 127 00:07:07,244 --> 00:07:09,964 Speaker 3: duck out of and things like that. So, so yeah, 128 00:07:10,004 --> 00:07:13,364 Speaker 3: we're in a repeating game that can work to advantage 129 00:07:13,364 --> 00:07:17,524 Speaker 3: if you treated as such. Again, your audience probably probably 130 00:07:17,604 --> 00:07:20,604 Speaker 3: pretty familiar with like what non repeating or repeating game 131 00:07:20,684 --> 00:07:21,924 Speaker 3: type differences. 132 00:07:22,004 --> 00:07:27,324 Speaker 2: So so NBA teams place an extremely high premium on 133 00:07:27,484 --> 00:07:31,204 Speaker 2: superstar talent, especially in the short term. You know, the 134 00:07:31,204 --> 00:07:33,004 Speaker 2: New York Knicks what they give up for Bridges like 135 00:07:33,004 --> 00:07:37,964 Speaker 2: four or five first round picks and he's a good player, 136 00:07:38,044 --> 00:07:42,284 Speaker 2: but probably the third best player on a contending team. 137 00:07:43,084 --> 00:07:47,364 Speaker 2: Are gms too short term focused because of the incentive issue, 138 00:07:47,484 --> 00:07:51,124 Speaker 2: or are like analytics nerds doing the math wrong and say, actually, 139 00:07:51,124 --> 00:07:54,764 Speaker 2: these draft picks are not that valuable and superstars are 140 00:07:54,884 --> 00:07:58,484 Speaker 2: very valuable, because if you run it through some model, 141 00:07:58,524 --> 00:08:02,484 Speaker 2: it's like, okay, well, the draft picks worth like, you know, 142 00:08:02,524 --> 00:08:07,164 Speaker 2: twenty five million dollars a year in excess returns, and 143 00:08:07,524 --> 00:08:09,884 Speaker 2: Bridges is underpaid by ten million, And I don't know, 144 00:08:10,444 --> 00:08:11,444 Speaker 2: you know what I'm saying. 145 00:08:12,284 --> 00:08:15,524 Speaker 3: Yeah, I think teams are basically wrong at both extremes. 146 00:08:15,764 --> 00:08:20,724 Speaker 3: So they're both not aggressively long term enough. You probably 147 00:08:20,724 --> 00:08:22,644 Speaker 3: like if you actually run the math and you just 148 00:08:22,684 --> 00:08:26,204 Speaker 3: say that you're optimizing you know p you guys talked 149 00:08:26,244 --> 00:08:29,444 Speaker 3: about P doom on your list of the PE Championship 150 00:08:29,524 --> 00:08:32,884 Speaker 3: over three years, if you actually were just optimizing that variable, 151 00:08:33,324 --> 00:08:37,004 Speaker 3: and I can promise you no team actually does do that. Really, 152 00:08:37,084 --> 00:08:40,084 Speaker 3: like twenty something like twenty four of the team should 153 00:08:40,124 --> 00:08:44,564 Speaker 3: be fully rebuilding just long term every year, because if 154 00:08:44,604 --> 00:08:46,724 Speaker 3: you don't have a top five player, your odds of 155 00:08:47,244 --> 00:08:53,404 Speaker 3: PE championship are extremely low. So it's so I would say, 156 00:08:53,564 --> 00:08:56,604 Speaker 3: you know, that's sort of the first thing. The second thing, 157 00:08:56,644 --> 00:08:59,204 Speaker 3: I just just wanted to set up the for people 158 00:08:59,284 --> 00:09:03,484 Speaker 3: to quite understand why the superstars are so important and 159 00:09:03,484 --> 00:09:06,084 Speaker 3: why it's important to sort of save your assets for 160 00:09:06,244 --> 00:09:10,644 Speaker 3: those moves. I think the easiest way I describe it 161 00:09:10,644 --> 00:09:13,884 Speaker 3: as take show Hao Tani, you know the best hitter 162 00:09:13,924 --> 00:09:18,404 Speaker 3: in baseball. Now, when show Heo Tany hits a home 163 00:09:18,484 --> 00:09:22,364 Speaker 3: run against the Mets, he then has to wait eight 164 00:09:22,444 --> 00:09:26,884 Speaker 3: more times before he gets to hit again. Basketball is 165 00:09:26,924 --> 00:09:29,164 Speaker 3: like show Heyo Tany. He comes on the floor, hits 166 00:09:29,164 --> 00:09:30,844 Speaker 3: a three, and then when he comes on the floor 167 00:09:30,844 --> 00:09:32,924 Speaker 3: again and he goes like, I'm still the best player, 168 00:09:33,444 --> 00:09:36,924 Speaker 3: so I'm shooting again. So just imagine show Heo Tony 169 00:09:37,004 --> 00:09:39,684 Speaker 3: being able to hit every single time with Sho Heo 170 00:09:39,764 --> 00:09:42,044 Speaker 3: Tiny's on the base. So that's what you can do 171 00:09:42,044 --> 00:09:45,964 Speaker 3: in bastball. It's actually gotten worse lately, and this will 172 00:09:45,964 --> 00:09:48,284 Speaker 3: be a little bit for the NBA nerds, But because 173 00:09:48,364 --> 00:09:50,404 Speaker 3: a lot of these players who are so great can 174 00:09:50,444 --> 00:09:53,524 Speaker 3: only be guarded by switching pick and roll. So pick 175 00:09:53,564 --> 00:09:56,804 Speaker 3: and roll is one of the staples of our sport. Basically, 176 00:09:56,844 --> 00:09:59,964 Speaker 3: someone knocks your man off from guarding you. It's pretty simple. 177 00:10:01,044 --> 00:10:03,724 Speaker 3: The easiest way to guard that, but one that hadn't 178 00:10:03,764 --> 00:10:05,644 Speaker 3: been used because you can end up with seven feet 179 00:10:05,684 --> 00:10:08,684 Speaker 3: people on six foot people is you just switch the 180 00:10:08,724 --> 00:10:12,324 Speaker 3: screen and that the person who gets hit stays with 181 00:10:12,364 --> 00:10:14,484 Speaker 3: the guy that they were hit on, and the other 182 00:10:14,524 --> 00:10:20,244 Speaker 3: person switches. So the smart NBA players, you know, see 183 00:10:20,244 --> 00:10:24,924 Speaker 3: that now, and they they can basically screen and decide 184 00:10:24,924 --> 00:10:27,324 Speaker 3: who guards them. So now imagine show, hey, Tony not 185 00:10:27,364 --> 00:10:29,964 Speaker 3: only bats every time he's up, he gets to select 186 00:10:30,004 --> 00:10:32,444 Speaker 3: the pitcher on the other team, he gets to go 187 00:10:32,524 --> 00:10:35,524 Speaker 3: against every time down the floor. So and now you 188 00:10:35,604 --> 00:10:38,884 Speaker 3: understand why you know, someone like Lebron James can at 189 00:10:39,004 --> 00:10:42,484 Speaker 3: his peak be worth thirty, like close to thirty wins 190 00:10:42,524 --> 00:10:45,924 Speaker 3: on eighty two games, like an insane impact that is 191 00:10:45,964 --> 00:10:50,764 Speaker 3: not even closely replicated in any other sport. So back 192 00:10:50,804 --> 00:10:52,964 Speaker 3: back to original question, Nate, which now I feel like 193 00:10:53,004 --> 00:10:57,604 Speaker 3: I've gone far afield, But it's a podcast. The entire 194 00:10:58,284 --> 00:11:00,044 Speaker 3: is that how it works? Is that how works it is? 195 00:11:00,124 --> 00:11:00,444 Speaker 2: It is? 196 00:11:00,604 --> 00:11:04,484 Speaker 3: Yeah? Yeah, that did I answer your original question. I 197 00:11:04,484 --> 00:11:04,924 Speaker 3: feel like I. 198 00:11:04,884 --> 00:11:09,124 Speaker 2: Didn't, well, because you're famous for having this kind of 199 00:11:09,964 --> 00:11:13,484 Speaker 2: in fantasy basically call the stars and scrubs yep approach, 200 00:11:13,564 --> 00:11:16,844 Speaker 2: Like not to denigrate the back half of the current 201 00:11:16,884 --> 00:11:19,524 Speaker 2: seventy six ers roster, but like they're all they're all 202 00:11:19,564 --> 00:11:23,524 Speaker 2: a minimum. Salaries are just barely above minimum. Is that 203 00:11:23,564 --> 00:11:27,044 Speaker 2: partly because you think that you can actually get the 204 00:11:27,204 --> 00:11:29,324 Speaker 2: average talent instead of replacement level talent. 205 00:11:29,484 --> 00:11:31,764 Speaker 3: Yeah, so I think that becomes a linear this is 206 00:11:31,884 --> 00:11:33,724 Speaker 3: the this is the geek podcast, so I can geek 207 00:11:33,764 --> 00:11:35,884 Speaker 3: out of it. It becomes a linear It becomes a 208 00:11:35,924 --> 00:11:40,964 Speaker 3: linear programming problem. So the most efficient spending in the 209 00:11:41,044 --> 00:11:45,204 Speaker 3: league are on minimums and draft picks who are playing 210 00:11:45,284 --> 00:11:49,364 Speaker 3: above their above their weight, essentially where you can they 211 00:11:49,364 --> 00:11:52,324 Speaker 3: can be worth double or triple while you're paying them. 212 00:11:52,684 --> 00:11:55,244 Speaker 3: The problem is you can only put about eight players 213 00:11:55,284 --> 00:11:59,964 Speaker 3: on the floor, so you can't actually fully capture that efficiency. 214 00:12:00,044 --> 00:12:03,844 Speaker 3: Like if I could put sixty draft picks or minimum 215 00:12:03,884 --> 00:12:07,244 Speaker 3: players that I've you know, carefully selected that are worth 216 00:12:07,284 --> 00:12:09,364 Speaker 3: more than I'm paying them, I could, and I could 217 00:12:09,524 --> 00:12:12,284 Speaker 3: do that, I could win the game. But unfortunately you're 218 00:12:12,284 --> 00:12:14,124 Speaker 3: only allowed to put five on the FLOORI ADA time, 219 00:12:14,164 --> 00:12:17,644 Speaker 3: and only really eight even play, usually especially in a 220 00:12:17,644 --> 00:12:22,324 Speaker 3: playoff series. So when you look at the how do 221 00:12:22,364 --> 00:12:27,124 Speaker 3: you like generate the most wins? Even a player who 222 00:12:27,204 --> 00:12:30,724 Speaker 3: is just worth his salary, that's highly paid, is actually 223 00:12:30,724 --> 00:12:33,604 Speaker 3: more important than these players who are worth double or 224 00:12:33,604 --> 00:12:36,724 Speaker 3: triple worth. They're paid at the minimum. Then on top 225 00:12:36,764 --> 00:12:39,804 Speaker 3: of that, because of the mac salary, often the top 226 00:12:39,804 --> 00:12:42,284 Speaker 3: player you have is not only paid the most, but 227 00:12:42,324 --> 00:12:44,204 Speaker 3: also worth quite a bit more than what you're paying 228 00:12:44,244 --> 00:12:48,004 Speaker 3: them because of the dynamics I said before, which is 229 00:12:48,124 --> 00:12:51,844 Speaker 3: so yes, I really really love good players and I 230 00:12:51,884 --> 00:12:55,284 Speaker 3: can't get enough, and people talk about it, but the 231 00:12:55,324 --> 00:12:59,404 Speaker 3: reality is, like USA basketball, what works? I mean, you know, 232 00:12:59,804 --> 00:13:02,604 Speaker 3: if you get lots of highly skilled basketball players together, 233 00:13:03,364 --> 00:13:04,844 Speaker 3: it generally works really well. 234 00:13:06,164 --> 00:13:09,924 Speaker 1: How do you factor in kind of the uncertainty factor 235 00:13:09,964 --> 00:13:13,484 Speaker 1: when you're in a game of individuals and champions, right 236 00:13:13,564 --> 00:13:18,044 Speaker 1: when you're dealing with people who are superstars. How does 237 00:13:18,084 --> 00:13:20,284 Speaker 1: your thinking work or do you just kind of not 238 00:13:20,324 --> 00:13:23,204 Speaker 1: even think about it in terms of injury and that 239 00:13:23,404 --> 00:13:26,564 Speaker 1: risk probability? Where right? If you actually, like if you 240 00:13:26,604 --> 00:13:31,044 Speaker 1: invest everything in one superstar and like game one, shit happens, Like, 241 00:13:31,204 --> 00:13:32,404 Speaker 1: how do you think about that. 242 00:13:32,324 --> 00:13:37,404 Speaker 2: Because the superstar happens to be injury prone hypothetically hypothetical. 243 00:13:37,444 --> 00:13:40,804 Speaker 3: Yeah, it's very analogous to the starting pitcher issue that 244 00:13:41,004 --> 00:13:45,644 Speaker 3: baseball teams have. But just multiply it by ten again. Again, 245 00:13:46,204 --> 00:13:49,484 Speaker 3: if we were trying to just be the fifth best team, 246 00:13:49,964 --> 00:13:54,604 Speaker 3: then it would become a much harder problem because then 247 00:13:54,684 --> 00:13:57,924 Speaker 3: the trade offs of injured superstar comes in. But because 248 00:13:57,964 --> 00:14:01,724 Speaker 3: you're trying to be the best of thirty, you have 249 00:14:01,804 --> 00:14:04,084 Speaker 3: to buy risk all over the place. And it's really 250 00:14:04,124 --> 00:14:05,844 Speaker 3: just like what risk are you buying? Are you buying 251 00:14:05,924 --> 00:14:07,844 Speaker 3: risks that they're not good enough, You're buying risks that 252 00:14:07,884 --> 00:14:10,564 Speaker 3: they're bad people? And right off the court, are you 253 00:14:10,564 --> 00:14:12,604 Speaker 3: buying risks that they're injured all the time, or are 254 00:14:12,644 --> 00:14:15,724 Speaker 3: you buying risks that they're shot, might might fall apart? 255 00:14:15,764 --> 00:14:18,364 Speaker 3: Like what what risk are you buying? Because if if 256 00:14:18,364 --> 00:14:20,684 Speaker 3: you're not buying risks, you're not going to win, right 257 00:14:20,724 --> 00:14:23,364 Speaker 3: you have, like beating the SMP by three to five 258 00:14:23,364 --> 00:14:26,404 Speaker 3: percent is not winning you the title. So I tend 259 00:14:26,444 --> 00:14:30,964 Speaker 3: to like buying injury risk because when if if it 260 00:14:31,084 --> 00:14:33,564 Speaker 3: all hits together, you have a team that can win, 261 00:14:34,364 --> 00:14:37,724 Speaker 3: I'll take I'll take that over a player who's twenty 262 00:14:37,764 --> 00:14:41,164 Speaker 3: percent worse but available all the time. And I'm pretty 263 00:14:41,204 --> 00:14:44,484 Speaker 3: sure the math depends out on that. 264 00:14:45,684 --> 00:14:49,204 Speaker 2: You know, I tried that for my fantasy basketball league 265 00:14:49,284 --> 00:14:51,564 Speaker 2: last year. I had Embiid, I had Persius, I had 266 00:14:51,644 --> 00:14:56,044 Speaker 2: John Morant right Cade Cunningham, all these injury risks, and 267 00:14:56,084 --> 00:14:58,524 Speaker 2: it totally felt in his face I was the worst 268 00:14:58,524 --> 00:14:59,924 Speaker 2: team in the league so far. 269 00:15:00,004 --> 00:15:03,844 Speaker 3: Because I can't believe, like you're arguing with the anecdote, Date, 270 00:15:03,924 --> 00:15:07,284 Speaker 3: I can't can't believe it. Well, Nate, what has happened? 271 00:15:08,004 --> 00:15:11,804 Speaker 1: You read Nate's book on the Edge, and and we 272 00:15:11,844 --> 00:15:14,844 Speaker 1: talked about this on the podcast. But Nate bet over 273 00:15:14,964 --> 00:15:18,604 Speaker 1: a million dollars on sports for for research in one year, 274 00:15:18,644 --> 00:15:20,924 Speaker 1: and Nate, can you remind me how much you ended 275 00:15:20,964 --> 00:15:23,244 Speaker 1: up winning at. 276 00:15:23,124 --> 00:15:26,044 Speaker 2: One point eight million dollars on the NBA and this 277 00:15:26,084 --> 00:15:26,284 Speaker 2: is not. 278 00:15:28,684 --> 00:15:30,724 Speaker 1: He bet. He bet one point eight and how much 279 00:15:30,724 --> 00:15:31,204 Speaker 1: did you win? 280 00:15:32,844 --> 00:15:35,724 Speaker 2: Five k? So if you do the math, that roughly 281 00:15:35,764 --> 00:15:39,884 Speaker 2: equates to per hour? Do you need to like working 282 00:15:39,924 --> 00:15:45,884 Speaker 2: at KFCU after taxes and even before taxes? 283 00:15:46,004 --> 00:15:49,164 Speaker 3: Yeah, Maria, how are your poker winning? Since you're getting 284 00:15:49,164 --> 00:15:53,444 Speaker 3: on Nate for his UH for his UH sports wagery. 285 00:15:54,364 --> 00:15:57,884 Speaker 3: They're good. They're good per hour. You're looking better than night. Okay, 286 00:15:57,884 --> 00:16:00,244 Speaker 3: that's good, Yes they were, They're better than Nate. 287 00:16:00,924 --> 00:16:05,204 Speaker 1: I had a horrible summer at the World Series during 288 00:16:05,204 --> 00:16:07,684 Speaker 1: the Summer Series and was down over one hundred k, 289 00:16:08,004 --> 00:16:12,564 Speaker 1: which is not good. And then went to EPT Barcelona 290 00:16:13,004 --> 00:16:15,084 Speaker 1: where I had a score for almost one hundred and 291 00:16:15,124 --> 00:16:17,604 Speaker 1: forty thousand, which put me in the black for the year, 292 00:16:18,124 --> 00:16:21,164 Speaker 1: and then went on to you know when when the 293 00:16:21,204 --> 00:16:24,204 Speaker 1: bracelet last week, have an eighth place finish in another 294 00:16:24,244 --> 00:16:28,524 Speaker 1: bracelet event, so and I have a few other deep runs. 295 00:16:28,524 --> 00:16:31,484 Speaker 1: So now I'm now I'm doing more than a five 296 00:16:31,644 --> 00:16:35,164 Speaker 1: K in the black to be fair. To be fair, 297 00:16:35,804 --> 00:16:38,284 Speaker 1: I don't think I've had one point eight million dollars 298 00:16:38,284 --> 00:16:41,284 Speaker 1: in poker buy ins in my entire history of playing 299 00:16:41,284 --> 00:16:44,684 Speaker 1: poker over the last five and a half years, however 300 00:16:44,684 --> 00:16:45,524 Speaker 1: long I've been playing. 301 00:16:45,684 --> 00:16:48,404 Speaker 3: So I'm just actually running a long con on poker 302 00:16:48,444 --> 00:16:50,124 Speaker 3: on Nate. So we're going to do it. 303 00:16:50,324 --> 00:16:51,324 Speaker 1: You're a hustler, Dearly. 304 00:16:51,404 --> 00:16:55,204 Speaker 3: We're doing like we've done like ten events together, where 305 00:16:55,244 --> 00:16:57,164 Speaker 3: he sees how aggressive I am, and then I'll just 306 00:16:57,204 --> 00:17:00,124 Speaker 3: tighten up when he when he's shoving on me one 307 00:17:00,164 --> 00:17:01,444 Speaker 3: of these times. 308 00:17:02,044 --> 00:17:06,284 Speaker 2: Speaking of all in, you had a very aggressive strategy 309 00:17:07,404 --> 00:17:10,324 Speaker 2: this summer where you cleared out all your salary cap 310 00:17:10,324 --> 00:17:13,364 Speaker 2: space and then you traded for is a sign and trade. 311 00:17:13,364 --> 00:17:14,524 Speaker 2: You just signed him out right. 312 00:17:14,484 --> 00:17:17,004 Speaker 3: Just signed out right, Yeah, which is rare, super rare. 313 00:17:17,004 --> 00:17:23,364 Speaker 2: Signed out right, which is rare. The superstar, our superstar 314 00:17:24,164 --> 00:17:27,884 Speaker 2: adjacent player named Paul George. He's a two way player, 315 00:17:28,404 --> 00:17:29,564 Speaker 2: superstar player. 316 00:17:29,444 --> 00:17:31,844 Speaker 3: Top top, you know, he's top in the league. 317 00:17:31,884 --> 00:17:33,924 Speaker 2: Come on, he's a very good player, Paul George, who 318 00:17:33,964 --> 00:17:40,604 Speaker 2: compliments your existing roster. Well, I mean, did you think 319 00:17:40,644 --> 00:17:42,964 Speaker 2: you had a reasonable chance of I want to get 320 00:17:42,964 --> 00:17:45,244 Speaker 2: you in a tampering situation? What was Plan B if 321 00:17:45,284 --> 00:17:46,964 Speaker 2: Paul George hadn't become available. 322 00:17:47,684 --> 00:17:52,284 Speaker 3: Yeah, we didn't love Plan B. Well, to be to 323 00:17:52,324 --> 00:17:54,764 Speaker 3: be clear, when we started off on that plan, there 324 00:17:54,804 --> 00:17:58,844 Speaker 3: were several plan as they just you know there, you know, 325 00:17:58,884 --> 00:18:00,924 Speaker 3: they sort of faded their A one, A two, A 326 00:18:01,004 --> 00:18:04,284 Speaker 3: three or four, But they faded over time, as you know, 327 00:18:04,364 --> 00:18:07,684 Speaker 3: different things happened, different trades, different happiness with team, things 328 00:18:07,724 --> 00:18:12,164 Speaker 3: like that. We felt quite confident this was our best strategy, 329 00:18:12,204 --> 00:18:14,204 Speaker 3: but I would say it's not to be recommended. I 330 00:18:14,244 --> 00:18:18,684 Speaker 3: really don't think people have tried to like write, oh, 331 00:18:18,804 --> 00:18:21,244 Speaker 3: this is like a new way to do things. I 332 00:18:21,284 --> 00:18:25,924 Speaker 3: really don't think. So we we given our team, given 333 00:18:26,044 --> 00:18:28,444 Speaker 3: how our contracts laid out when I came to Philly 334 00:18:28,484 --> 00:18:33,164 Speaker 3: into twenty twenty, this we thought was the right approach. 335 00:18:34,164 --> 00:18:37,284 Speaker 3: But it could have we would have been doing what 336 00:18:37,444 --> 00:18:39,564 Speaker 3: I was talking about, like sort of a waiting move 337 00:18:39,844 --> 00:18:43,084 Speaker 3: again if we were into Plan B, where we were 338 00:18:44,084 --> 00:18:46,844 Speaker 3: doing moves that could be flexible down the road if 339 00:18:47,124 --> 00:18:49,724 Speaker 3: the you know, the next Paul George became available. But 340 00:18:51,044 --> 00:18:54,484 Speaker 3: this one, obviously there's just any move because you know, again, 341 00:18:54,564 --> 00:18:57,684 Speaker 3: only one team wins. So the math is horrible. But 342 00:18:57,884 --> 00:19:00,284 Speaker 3: we ended up sort of on the We ended up 343 00:19:00,324 --> 00:19:03,364 Speaker 3: like we had sort of Maria's arc there. We had 344 00:19:03,364 --> 00:19:06,284 Speaker 3: a last season was sort of our you know, we 345 00:19:06,364 --> 00:19:09,364 Speaker 3: lost whatever we didn't we didn't have a great year, 346 00:19:09,644 --> 00:19:11,964 Speaker 3: and then you know then we you know, sort of 347 00:19:12,084 --> 00:19:17,124 Speaker 3: got the front office bracelet and that we were we 348 00:19:17,244 --> 00:19:18,684 Speaker 3: hit on that sort of high end of what we 349 00:19:18,684 --> 00:19:19,724 Speaker 3: were hoping to do this summer. 350 00:19:25,124 --> 00:19:26,284 Speaker 1: We'll be back right after this. 351 00:19:42,004 --> 00:19:46,444 Speaker 2: What are the incentives like for regular season versus maximizing 352 00:19:46,524 --> 00:19:51,444 Speaker 2: championship potential? So you have a undoubted superstar Joel Embiid 353 00:19:53,124 --> 00:19:55,364 Speaker 2: And you listen to all the NBA podcasts and they're like, 354 00:19:55,484 --> 00:19:59,044 Speaker 2: we think that Joel embiid Is should rest more in 355 00:19:59,084 --> 00:20:01,044 Speaker 2: the regular season. I mean, do you a do you 356 00:20:01,084 --> 00:20:06,124 Speaker 2: have a plan and be philosophically, what are you trying 357 00:20:06,124 --> 00:20:08,684 Speaker 2: to maximize? Because if you're bringing your thirteen year old 358 00:20:08,764 --> 00:20:10,964 Speaker 2: daughter to the six game and buy some nice seats 359 00:20:11,004 --> 00:20:14,164 Speaker 2: and and it's who's your backup, it's on Mobamba, who's 360 00:20:14,164 --> 00:20:17,964 Speaker 2: your you know drummer? Come on, man, I mean you know, look, 361 00:20:19,044 --> 00:20:23,044 Speaker 2: it's a drop off. I'd say excitement and right now, 362 00:20:23,964 --> 00:20:24,364 Speaker 2: drop off. 363 00:20:24,364 --> 00:20:27,724 Speaker 3: He keeps trying to do things like Joel in the preseason, 364 00:20:28,204 --> 00:20:31,564 Speaker 3: which has had mixed mixed results. But we love we 365 00:20:31,604 --> 00:20:35,884 Speaker 3: love Andre. He's definitely gonna buffet when Joel's out. Look, 366 00:20:35,924 --> 00:20:40,884 Speaker 3: I mean, we definitely optimizing for the postseason. A lot 367 00:20:40,924 --> 00:20:43,964 Speaker 3: of the analysis you see out there aren't isn't very 368 00:20:43,964 --> 00:20:48,764 Speaker 3: well structured. They they do all these hyper correlated analysis, like, oh, 369 00:20:48,964 --> 00:20:53,644 Speaker 3: teams in the top four, the ones that win, you know, well, yeah, 370 00:20:53,644 --> 00:20:56,644 Speaker 3: if you happen to get if the Warriors had gone 371 00:20:56,684 --> 00:20:59,724 Speaker 3: through a year when they had Kevin Durant where everyone 372 00:20:59,804 --> 00:21:01,804 Speaker 3: was hurt, but then they're healthy for the postseason. I'm 373 00:21:01,804 --> 00:21:04,484 Speaker 3: pretty sure they're going to make the finals or win 374 00:21:04,564 --> 00:21:08,884 Speaker 3: it that year, so you know it for us, it's like, 375 00:21:09,444 --> 00:21:12,604 Speaker 3: if there's one guiding principle, it's just it's the players stupid, 376 00:21:12,804 --> 00:21:17,204 Speaker 3: Like it's just get the best players. And the analysis 377 00:21:17,404 --> 00:21:20,604 Speaker 3: I talked about before of Shoho Tani it gets even 378 00:21:20,684 --> 00:21:23,644 Speaker 3: more pronounced in the playoffs because players go from playing 379 00:21:23,724 --> 00:21:26,564 Speaker 3: thirty to thirty five minutes to forty to forty five minutes. 380 00:21:28,284 --> 00:21:32,924 Speaker 3: Rotations shrink, so all the impacts of star players actually 381 00:21:33,044 --> 00:21:36,524 Speaker 3: again goes up. Superstar players are also the player Everyone 382 00:21:36,524 --> 00:21:38,524 Speaker 3: gets worse in the playoffs. When I say everyone, I 383 00:21:38,564 --> 00:21:44,084 Speaker 3: mean on average everyone some some get better, but in 384 00:21:44,164 --> 00:21:47,084 Speaker 3: general everyone gets worse as the competition level goes up. 385 00:21:47,084 --> 00:21:50,724 Speaker 3: But superstars drop the least, so they get they they 386 00:21:50,724 --> 00:21:53,284 Speaker 3: don't fall as much as pretty much everyone else. 387 00:21:53,364 --> 00:21:57,764 Speaker 2: So and there's not much advantage to I mean, if 388 00:21:57,804 --> 00:22:00,204 Speaker 2: you start as a seven seed, then it's not actually 389 00:22:00,204 --> 00:22:01,924 Speaker 2: that harmful, right. 390 00:22:01,844 --> 00:22:03,924 Speaker 3: Seven has become a little more harmful because the plan, 391 00:22:04,124 --> 00:22:07,084 Speaker 3: oh you're in the plane, yeah, so six six is 392 00:22:07,204 --> 00:22:10,844 Speaker 3: fine because yes, you know in game series where you're 393 00:22:10,924 --> 00:22:13,964 Speaker 3: one more on the one more on the road it 394 00:22:14,004 --> 00:22:16,404 Speaker 3: turns out to be not I think that's a pretty 395 00:22:16,404 --> 00:22:18,564 Speaker 3: small swing in percentage of think it's like two to 396 00:22:18,604 --> 00:22:20,204 Speaker 3: three percent. It's not massive. 397 00:22:21,204 --> 00:22:29,004 Speaker 2: Why did the NBA get religion on analytics before after baseball, 398 00:22:29,204 --> 00:22:30,524 Speaker 2: I suppose, but maybe not that much. 399 00:22:30,564 --> 00:22:33,124 Speaker 3: In oh, I think even at the league level, I 400 00:22:33,124 --> 00:22:36,844 Speaker 3: think before they were the first to do a lot 401 00:22:36,884 --> 00:22:39,444 Speaker 3: of analytics on the business side that was shared with teams. 402 00:22:40,444 --> 00:22:42,164 Speaker 3: So I would say the NBA was sort of for 403 00:22:42,364 --> 00:22:45,284 Speaker 3: the teams on baseball were before the teams in basketball. 404 00:22:45,284 --> 00:22:48,404 Speaker 3: But at the league level, I think I'm pretty confident 405 00:22:48,524 --> 00:22:50,804 Speaker 3: the NBA was first. Yeah. 406 00:22:51,084 --> 00:22:54,644 Speaker 2: So my pet theory is that this is because the 407 00:22:54,724 --> 00:22:58,884 Speaker 2: NBA tends to attract new money owners, so people in 408 00:22:59,044 --> 00:23:03,364 Speaker 2: financeer tech, who not some old magnate of some shitty 409 00:23:03,444 --> 00:23:06,564 Speaker 2: beer company. You're not to demean, by the way sponsor 410 00:23:06,604 --> 00:23:11,364 Speaker 2: us Bush Bush and bud Light, we weren't sponsorship can 411 00:23:11,404 --> 00:23:13,084 Speaker 2: advertise your hard Seltz probably. 412 00:23:12,844 --> 00:23:16,244 Speaker 3: One of the top agents in basketball is like the 413 00:23:17,524 --> 00:23:23,324 Speaker 3: nephew of the Bush Anheuser Busch empire. So but yeah, no, 414 00:23:23,364 --> 00:23:25,964 Speaker 3: I think you're one hundred percent right, Nate. The owners 415 00:23:27,244 --> 00:23:31,644 Speaker 3: both the price point and you know, the sophisticated owners 416 00:23:31,684 --> 00:23:34,044 Speaker 3: who were buying in in the late nineties through the 417 00:23:34,084 --> 00:23:40,124 Speaker 3: two thousand to the twenty ten twenty fifteen range. They 418 00:23:40,204 --> 00:23:44,444 Speaker 3: all sort of saw the NBA getting more global, getting bigger. 419 00:23:44,484 --> 00:23:48,444 Speaker 3: They saw baseball declining. They saw the cat like the 420 00:23:48,524 --> 00:23:52,324 Speaker 3: cap system and the NBA has better and so yeah, 421 00:23:52,364 --> 00:23:55,004 Speaker 3: all the sophisticated owners came into the NBA, I think 422 00:23:55,124 --> 00:23:58,364 Speaker 3: before pretty much all these other major leagues. 423 00:23:58,484 --> 00:24:03,124 Speaker 2: Yeah, when you're watching a game, would you say you're 424 00:24:03,564 --> 00:24:06,764 Speaker 2: I know the answer this question, So don't lie. Are 425 00:24:06,804 --> 00:24:08,884 Speaker 2: you relatively zen when you're watching a game? 426 00:24:10,044 --> 00:24:12,324 Speaker 3: If I'm watching, I'm very nodsen. You know. That's why 427 00:24:12,324 --> 00:24:15,924 Speaker 3: I know it make a terrible coach. I spent. I 428 00:24:15,964 --> 00:24:19,484 Speaker 3: even have a formula, sadly for when I go nuts, 429 00:24:19,524 --> 00:24:22,284 Speaker 3: and it's it's it's basically just like when the win 430 00:24:22,444 --> 00:24:26,124 Speaker 3: probability of either a game or even a play goes 431 00:24:26,204 --> 00:24:30,324 Speaker 3: way up to where you start, as even a probabilistic thinker, 432 00:24:30,844 --> 00:24:33,164 Speaker 3: you start to go to one instead of point nine, 433 00:24:33,444 --> 00:24:35,884 Speaker 3: you know, in your head, and then it doesn't happen. 434 00:24:36,044 --> 00:24:38,884 Speaker 3: For especially if it doesn't happen for some really dumb 435 00:24:38,924 --> 00:24:41,444 Speaker 3: reason that could have been prevented. It gets Yeah, that 436 00:24:41,484 --> 00:24:44,444 Speaker 3: gets really annoying and hard given how much time and 437 00:24:44,644 --> 00:24:48,204 Speaker 3: work and effort goes into things from the front office, 438 00:24:48,284 --> 00:24:51,564 Speaker 3: from the players, from everything. So example, you know you're 439 00:24:51,644 --> 00:24:54,324 Speaker 3: up twenty five in a playoff game, you know that, 440 00:24:54,804 --> 00:24:57,524 Speaker 3: and you lose it, that gets tough. Or you know 441 00:24:57,884 --> 00:25:01,044 Speaker 3: the small ones which are done, which is like breakaway, 442 00:25:01,164 --> 00:25:03,604 Speaker 3: we get a steal and it's a breakaway and the 443 00:25:03,684 --> 00:25:06,924 Speaker 3: guy like you know, gets fouled from behind, but they 444 00:25:06,924 --> 00:25:08,884 Speaker 3: don't call it. You know that. Like that kind of 445 00:25:08,884 --> 00:25:12,004 Speaker 3: stuff just throws me for a loop. It makes no sense, 446 00:25:12,044 --> 00:25:15,884 Speaker 3: but it does. Yeah, I'm very zen when the when 447 00:25:15,924 --> 00:25:19,924 Speaker 3: the odds of winning drop very low, I just sort 448 00:25:19,964 --> 00:25:23,444 Speaker 3: of like try to like learn things at that point. 449 00:25:23,724 --> 00:25:25,924 Speaker 1: So that's called fatalistic not zend. 450 00:25:26,924 --> 00:25:31,364 Speaker 3: Yeah, I call it pessimistic optimism. That's my it. Is 451 00:25:31,404 --> 00:25:33,964 Speaker 3: it called fatalistic or nihilistic hope? 452 00:25:34,164 --> 00:25:36,204 Speaker 1: Yeah, at that point when you're like, Okay, there's just 453 00:25:36,324 --> 00:25:37,924 Speaker 1: no way in hell this is happening. 454 00:25:38,084 --> 00:25:40,604 Speaker 3: So so what would be the punk requllment? Like you're 455 00:25:40,844 --> 00:25:45,084 Speaker 3: in a hand that you're you're pot you're heavily pot committed, 456 00:25:45,804 --> 00:25:48,564 Speaker 3: Like the right strategy is still to stay in the 457 00:25:48,644 --> 00:25:51,604 Speaker 3: hand even though your odds of winning it at that point, 458 00:25:51,764 --> 00:25:54,084 Speaker 3: you know, have to be like twenty percent or something 459 00:25:54,124 --> 00:25:54,524 Speaker 3: like that. 460 00:25:54,964 --> 00:25:59,204 Speaker 1: No, I mean, I think I think in poker, you know, 461 00:25:59,644 --> 00:26:03,004 Speaker 1: being zen is quite important. And I would say there's 462 00:26:03,044 --> 00:26:05,844 Speaker 1: no situation where your pot committed and you have to 463 00:26:05,844 --> 00:26:07,444 Speaker 1: stay in the hand. If you think your odds have 464 00:26:07,524 --> 00:26:10,004 Speaker 1: dropped to twenty percent, as long as you have any 465 00:26:10,084 --> 00:26:13,244 Speaker 1: chips behind, you can always fold. And I think that 466 00:26:13,244 --> 00:26:15,364 Speaker 1: that's really important. And I think that people who get 467 00:26:15,444 --> 00:26:18,484 Speaker 1: too emotionally invested forget that, they forget that you are 468 00:26:18,524 --> 00:26:20,924 Speaker 1: always allowed to fold, and they get to this point 469 00:26:20,924 --> 00:26:23,044 Speaker 1: where like, no, but like this was supposed to go 470 00:26:23,164 --> 00:26:25,484 Speaker 1: this way, and so they like end up putting those 471 00:26:25,484 --> 00:26:27,524 Speaker 1: final chips in the middle. And I've done that, and 472 00:26:27,564 --> 00:26:29,844 Speaker 1: I've written about doing that, and it's a horrible feeling, 473 00:26:30,124 --> 00:26:32,484 Speaker 1: you know, when you like, either when someone else goes 474 00:26:32,484 --> 00:26:35,124 Speaker 1: you into it or when you go yourself into going 475 00:26:35,164 --> 00:26:38,284 Speaker 1: broke even though you like you knew that you were maid. 476 00:26:38,484 --> 00:26:41,924 Speaker 3: Yeah, and so on your trip sixes or whatever it 477 00:26:42,004 --> 00:26:44,084 Speaker 3: was to knock you out of the World Series at 478 00:26:44,204 --> 00:26:48,204 Speaker 3: place eighty seven, were you Darrel? You're gonna bring that up? 479 00:26:49,444 --> 00:26:51,644 Speaker 3: Is we should talk about it else? 480 00:26:53,404 --> 00:26:56,524 Speaker 2: The twenty seven consecutive miss three pointers. 481 00:26:58,124 --> 00:27:00,884 Speaker 3: We all name us. We all name us twenty five 482 00:27:01,084 --> 00:27:04,044 Speaker 3: because the league report after said they followed us on too. 483 00:27:04,284 --> 00:27:07,804 Speaker 3: So the official the official record for me is twenty 484 00:27:07,804 --> 00:27:13,124 Speaker 3: five misses. So well, you asked how zen I was, 485 00:27:13,204 --> 00:27:17,924 Speaker 3: so it seemed to. 486 00:27:18,644 --> 00:27:21,684 Speaker 2: I mean, you don't really Actually it's a little bit ambiguused. 487 00:27:21,844 --> 00:27:25,084 Speaker 2: You don't really have any influence over the game. I've 488 00:27:25,084 --> 00:27:28,604 Speaker 2: talked about this before. What are you allowed to communicate 489 00:27:29,284 --> 00:27:32,644 Speaker 2: to other people that are on the floor during the game. 490 00:27:33,324 --> 00:27:37,564 Speaker 3: So it's actually even gotten more ridiculous. So they they 491 00:27:38,164 --> 00:27:41,684 Speaker 3: at first the league, even when I first started the league, 492 00:27:41,684 --> 00:27:44,484 Speaker 3: like two thousand and four, I joke with them in 493 00:27:44,524 --> 00:27:48,724 Speaker 3: a very you know, geeky nerdy way. Unfortunately, they they 494 00:27:48,804 --> 00:27:54,444 Speaker 3: banned electromagnetic signals to the bench, like you couldn't text anyone, 495 00:27:55,284 --> 00:27:58,444 Speaker 3: you can't call any common Well it was all data 496 00:27:58,444 --> 00:28:02,164 Speaker 3: calls by then, so but you could still I could 497 00:28:02,204 --> 00:28:05,684 Speaker 3: still sit behind the bench to rows and yell somebody. 498 00:28:05,724 --> 00:28:10,764 Speaker 3: So vibrating molecules are fine for communicating, but electromatic signals 499 00:28:11,164 --> 00:28:14,284 Speaker 3: not allowed by the league, which to this day I 500 00:28:14,324 --> 00:28:16,164 Speaker 3: believe that's the rule. But then they made it even worse. 501 00:28:16,204 --> 00:28:21,804 Speaker 3: This year they passed a ridiculous band on anyone using 502 00:28:21,844 --> 00:28:25,364 Speaker 3: cell phones forty five minutes before the game till after 503 00:28:26,284 --> 00:28:30,364 Speaker 3: which we'll see how that goes. But yeah, I can 504 00:28:30,404 --> 00:28:32,724 Speaker 3: still sit behind the bench and yell to my hearts 505 00:28:32,764 --> 00:28:37,004 Speaker 3: content and hands signals. Yeah, smoke signal like the Popes used. 506 00:28:37,004 --> 00:28:40,044 Speaker 3: We can do that. We have lots of yeah that 507 00:28:40,484 --> 00:28:43,844 Speaker 3: we can well, no, it's electric. Oh shoot, I screwed up. 508 00:28:43,844 --> 00:28:47,004 Speaker 3: We're allowed to use the electromatic spectrum in the visual range. 509 00:28:47,164 --> 00:28:49,884 Speaker 3: I'm sorry. So we can use the ones our eyes 510 00:28:49,924 --> 00:28:52,524 Speaker 3: can see. We're still to use, but all others are banned. 511 00:28:53,724 --> 00:28:57,084 Speaker 3: So yeah, So I to answer your question, I don't 512 00:28:57,084 --> 00:29:01,524 Speaker 3: have much impact. Sometimes there's some halftime things where I'll 513 00:29:01,524 --> 00:29:06,004 Speaker 3: mention something, but our coaches are very good. It's never 514 00:29:06,044 --> 00:29:09,364 Speaker 3: anything relevant that would change the outcome of something. 515 00:29:09,844 --> 00:29:14,404 Speaker 2: So are there examples of where the nerds have gone 516 00:29:14,404 --> 00:29:17,724 Speaker 2: too far? Things that were kind of superficial conclusions based 517 00:29:17,764 --> 00:29:18,444 Speaker 2: on the analytics? 518 00:29:18,604 --> 00:29:21,084 Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean hot hands, the easy one. Yeah, I 519 00:29:21,124 --> 00:29:23,164 Speaker 3: think anyone who played which I did play, that was 520 00:29:23,244 --> 00:29:25,484 Speaker 3: you know best. Suppose my sport I wasn't very good. 521 00:29:25,644 --> 00:29:27,804 Speaker 3: I can play at the pro level, of course, but 522 00:29:28,724 --> 00:29:32,164 Speaker 3: you do sort of get that feeling of muscle memory 523 00:29:32,364 --> 00:29:35,964 Speaker 3: and all that. The hot hand was thought to not exist, 524 00:29:36,004 --> 00:29:38,764 Speaker 3: mostly because they didn't factor for people who think they're 525 00:29:38,804 --> 00:29:41,804 Speaker 3: hot shooting really hard shots. So once once you adjust 526 00:29:41,844 --> 00:29:45,604 Speaker 3: for that effect, there is a hot hand effect. That's 527 00:29:45,724 --> 00:29:50,044 Speaker 3: one I think, gosh, there's got to be a bunch. 528 00:29:49,884 --> 00:29:55,924 Speaker 2: Like I mean, clutch performance. You are the former possessor 529 00:29:56,044 --> 00:29:58,404 Speaker 2: of Ben Simmons's NBA playing rights. 530 00:30:01,764 --> 00:30:06,524 Speaker 3: Yeah, I think that one's a tough one. No, they're 531 00:30:08,084 --> 00:30:11,204 Speaker 3: you just never have enough end to confidently say. But 532 00:30:11,484 --> 00:30:14,044 Speaker 3: for sure, when people look back, they can show player 533 00:30:14,164 --> 00:30:16,564 Speaker 3: X or Y was more clutch and high leverage moments, 534 00:30:17,444 --> 00:30:19,004 Speaker 3: but no one's been able to show that they could 535 00:30:19,004 --> 00:30:24,484 Speaker 3: predict that. You know X post. So clutch is a 536 00:30:24,564 --> 00:30:29,244 Speaker 3: good one. 537 00:30:29,244 --> 00:30:46,524 Speaker 2: And we'll be right back after this break. We're going 538 00:30:46,564 --> 00:30:48,084 Speaker 2: to try to wrap up in the next few minutes. 539 00:30:48,964 --> 00:30:53,084 Speaker 3: To Nate, though I have to call it Nate yesterday please. 540 00:30:53,644 --> 00:30:58,684 Speaker 3: So Nate, being a very good Chicago crad, assumed efficient 541 00:30:58,764 --> 00:31:03,244 Speaker 3: market theory is correct, and he managed he managed to 542 00:31:03,284 --> 00:31:05,764 Speaker 3: stumble into like one of the areas of which there's 543 00:31:05,804 --> 00:31:09,164 Speaker 3: thousands of papers where it's not correct, and there's a 544 00:31:09,164 --> 00:31:13,084 Speaker 3: lot of hypotheses and even some leading hypotheses. We not, 545 00:31:13,164 --> 00:31:16,684 Speaker 3: so he took an anti momentum stance. And to be clear, 546 00:31:16,764 --> 00:31:19,684 Speaker 3: you have to get very very geeky and say, like, 547 00:31:19,804 --> 00:31:22,764 Speaker 3: yes there is a it is mostly a random walk 548 00:31:22,884 --> 00:31:25,964 Speaker 3: from day to day, which I think you mentioned the 549 00:31:26,884 --> 00:31:29,124 Speaker 3: stock market. We're in the stock market, but you use 550 00:31:29,204 --> 00:31:31,964 Speaker 3: like the stock markets a proxy of live momentum can't 551 00:31:32,004 --> 00:31:36,884 Speaker 3: exist in political markets or probably doesn't exist when momentum 552 00:31:37,084 --> 00:31:40,724 Speaker 3: is for sure a factor to use the quant So 553 00:31:40,844 --> 00:31:42,884 Speaker 3: ray I would ask you who used to run quantic 554 00:31:42,884 --> 00:31:45,604 Speaker 3: gold sacks, and I you know, I have a lot 555 00:31:45,644 --> 00:31:49,164 Speaker 3: of money in that factor because it's worked for one 556 00:31:49,244 --> 00:31:52,964 Speaker 3: hundred years, hundreds of years. And they think that momentum 557 00:31:53,124 --> 00:31:55,124 Speaker 3: is a real thing in the stock market that you 558 00:31:55,164 --> 00:31:57,684 Speaker 3: can trade on, even though everyone knows it. It breaks 559 00:31:57,724 --> 00:32:02,524 Speaker 3: every for a couple of reasons. One, they think that 560 00:32:02,804 --> 00:32:04,564 Speaker 3: there's a lot of papers when people are slow to 561 00:32:04,604 --> 00:32:08,764 Speaker 3: react to information, so you know, there's some news and 562 00:32:08,804 --> 00:32:11,404 Speaker 3: people don't the beginning to realize how big that might 563 00:32:11,604 --> 00:32:15,724 Speaker 3: end up being until multiple days later. So so of 564 00:32:15,724 --> 00:32:17,804 Speaker 3: course you can be wrong. But again the the the 565 00:32:17,884 --> 00:32:21,524 Speaker 3: overall bet is the momentum does slightly work and you 566 00:32:21,564 --> 00:32:24,044 Speaker 3: can trade it. The second one is that there are 567 00:32:24,164 --> 00:32:26,884 Speaker 3: these you know, to use a there are these whale 568 00:32:27,044 --> 00:32:33,164 Speaker 3: insiders that move markets, and you're basically free writing on 569 00:32:33,404 --> 00:32:37,324 Speaker 3: their information when they when they first make those first 570 00:32:37,324 --> 00:32:40,404 Speaker 3: make those bets. So those are two of the reasons. 571 00:32:41,084 --> 00:32:45,724 Speaker 2: So number number go up on number strategy if done 572 00:32:45,844 --> 00:32:49,204 Speaker 2: very characters sophisticated, I would I would definitely recommend that 573 00:32:49,324 --> 00:32:54,244 Speaker 2: both of you put some some percentage of your of 574 00:32:54,244 --> 00:32:57,644 Speaker 2: your wealth and a momentum stock because it's you know. 575 00:32:57,564 --> 00:32:59,324 Speaker 3: It's similar to do you know about the long shot 576 00:32:59,364 --> 00:33:02,404 Speaker 3: bias and gambling. I'm sure you do. They ain't sure. 577 00:33:02,884 --> 00:33:08,884 Speaker 3: So people don't like to bet sure things. They like 578 00:33:08,924 --> 00:33:10,964 Speaker 3: to bet long shots. So because of that, the sure 579 00:33:11,044 --> 00:33:14,684 Speaker 3: things have this long, long history and it still exists 580 00:33:14,884 --> 00:33:18,404 Speaker 3: if they let you put any money down, it still 581 00:33:18,444 --> 00:33:21,364 Speaker 3: exists that if you bet the favorites and you bet 582 00:33:21,404 --> 00:33:27,084 Speaker 3: that with enough money that you can that you can 583 00:33:27,764 --> 00:33:30,844 Speaker 3: you know, overall win essentially, and I know people have 584 00:33:30,884 --> 00:33:34,484 Speaker 3: funds that do exactly that. Oh there's one last reason 585 00:33:34,564 --> 00:33:37,884 Speaker 3: they think momentum still exists. It's that's because people hate 586 00:33:38,044 --> 00:33:43,964 Speaker 3: losing their money, right, and there's a fatter tail on 587 00:33:44,084 --> 00:33:47,324 Speaker 3: the downside of momentum, then there is on an upside. 588 00:33:47,324 --> 00:33:51,004 Speaker 3: Does that make sense? So so you you're more likely 589 00:33:51,204 --> 00:33:56,044 Speaker 3: to lose big with momentum strategies in certain in certain 590 00:33:56,084 --> 00:34:01,444 Speaker 3: market environments than others. But over yeah, but but over 591 00:34:01,524 --> 00:34:07,844 Speaker 3: time it absolutely wins over one hundred years plus. So yeah. Yeah. Oh, 592 00:34:07,924 --> 00:34:10,444 Speaker 3: can I ask so, given you just got a crash 593 00:34:10,484 --> 00:34:14,124 Speaker 3: course in quant momentum, is there any I would think 594 00:34:14,164 --> 00:34:16,484 Speaker 3: one of those fits that that if people are betting 595 00:34:16,484 --> 00:34:22,404 Speaker 3: heavily on Trump or or or Kamala, that there may 596 00:34:22,444 --> 00:34:26,124 Speaker 3: be signal that the market hasn't picked up yet. 597 00:34:27,084 --> 00:34:34,084 Speaker 2: Could I am skeptical about empirically the betting markets underperform okay, 598 00:34:35,044 --> 00:34:37,444 Speaker 2: under from polling based methods, got it? 599 00:34:37,644 --> 00:34:41,084 Speaker 3: I mean it's been weird. Let's say just polls. Can 600 00:34:41,164 --> 00:34:44,884 Speaker 3: you is their momentum to polls the potentially there's a 601 00:34:44,924 --> 00:34:45,444 Speaker 3: good question. 602 00:34:45,564 --> 00:34:48,804 Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it's you can get these feedback effects, 603 00:34:48,884 --> 00:34:51,964 Speaker 2: and it's some question as whether they're real or whether 604 00:34:51,964 --> 00:34:54,684 Speaker 2: they're fake. Right, But like in principle, can it has 605 00:34:54,724 --> 00:34:57,324 Speaker 2: a good poll that that gets good media coverage, which 606 00:34:57,524 --> 00:35:00,804 Speaker 2: gets more polling, But then the equilibrium kind of shifts 607 00:35:01,324 --> 00:35:03,604 Speaker 2: because people get bored and now expectations are higher, so 608 00:35:03,644 --> 00:35:06,324 Speaker 2: you kind of wind up with like a sine wave pattern. 609 00:35:06,404 --> 00:35:08,564 Speaker 2: But yeah, no, I mean it's it's a lot of 610 00:35:08,644 --> 00:35:12,964 Speaker 2: things where to a first approximation, ignore the hot hand, 611 00:35:13,404 --> 00:35:15,684 Speaker 2: ignore momentum. Then you start studying and it's like, okay, 612 00:35:15,764 --> 00:35:17,604 Speaker 2: now we're advanced enough where we have to think about 613 00:35:17,604 --> 00:35:22,564 Speaker 2: the second approximation and a third order effects and so forth, 614 00:35:22,684 --> 00:35:25,964 Speaker 2: and you know, the sophistication of the NBA now or 615 00:35:26,004 --> 00:35:27,804 Speaker 2: of Wall Street or a poker are such that, like 616 00:35:28,804 --> 00:35:30,404 Speaker 2: you do have to take into account the edge case 617 00:35:30,404 --> 00:35:31,204 Speaker 2: stuff sometimes. 618 00:35:31,604 --> 00:35:34,004 Speaker 3: Can I ask him, Maria, because you're probably the best 619 00:35:34,004 --> 00:35:35,484 Speaker 3: poker player on here is my guess. 620 00:35:37,004 --> 00:35:39,444 Speaker 1: How much do you are winning the World Series of Needles? 621 00:35:41,684 --> 00:35:41,964 Speaker 1: Do you. 622 00:35:43,564 --> 00:35:46,564 Speaker 3: What is what is the meta? Like? Do you have 623 00:35:46,724 --> 00:35:48,884 Speaker 3: to train with like a solver all the time or 624 00:35:48,964 --> 00:35:50,604 Speaker 3: do you just play a lot? Or how do you 625 00:35:50,684 --> 00:35:52,684 Speaker 3: get reinforcement learning? Yeah? 626 00:35:53,004 --> 00:35:56,644 Speaker 1: Yeah, I think these days, because the solvers are quite 627 00:35:56,684 --> 00:36:00,604 Speaker 1: good and there are really great ais that you can 628 00:36:00,684 --> 00:36:03,804 Speaker 1: play against, I think that that's actually quite important so 629 00:36:03,924 --> 00:36:05,924 Speaker 1: that you can get that feedback and see what the 630 00:36:05,964 --> 00:36:09,924 Speaker 1: optimal strategy would be. And then it's like with every thing, right, 631 00:36:10,044 --> 00:36:13,604 Speaker 1: that's your baseline and then you absolutely deviate, right, because 632 00:36:14,084 --> 00:36:17,164 Speaker 1: the people you're playing against in large field events do 633 00:36:17,444 --> 00:36:20,404 Speaker 1: not play like the solver, right unless I am playing 634 00:36:20,484 --> 00:36:22,844 Speaker 1: like the ten best players in the world, Like, they're 635 00:36:22,884 --> 00:36:25,564 Speaker 1: not going to be playing optimal strategy. And sometimes they 636 00:36:25,604 --> 00:36:28,604 Speaker 1: don't even understand what optimal strategy is in the sense 637 00:36:28,724 --> 00:36:29,724 Speaker 1: that like, so. 638 00:36:29,844 --> 00:36:33,284 Speaker 3: Aren't there mix is aren't there mixed player simulators? 639 00:36:33,404 --> 00:36:37,404 Speaker 1: Or yeah, yes, well no there aren't there. There aren't 640 00:36:37,564 --> 00:36:40,884 Speaker 1: unless unless what you do, so you can play around 641 00:36:40,924 --> 00:36:43,964 Speaker 1: with the ranges, right, This is like any algorithm garbage in, 642 00:36:44,044 --> 00:36:47,244 Speaker 1: garbage out, yeah, right, and and good stuff and good 643 00:36:47,284 --> 00:36:50,884 Speaker 1: stuff out. And so you make assumptions about hand ranges 644 00:36:51,004 --> 00:36:53,524 Speaker 1: before you before you do any of this, before you 645 00:36:53,644 --> 00:36:56,684 Speaker 1: run sims, before you kind of do a hand deconstruction 646 00:36:56,764 --> 00:36:58,924 Speaker 1: where you say, I think the player in this position 647 00:36:59,124 --> 00:37:01,724 Speaker 1: is opening these hands, right, and I think that this 648 00:37:01,844 --> 00:37:04,564 Speaker 1: player is playing these hands. And you can be right 649 00:37:04,684 --> 00:37:06,444 Speaker 1: or you can be wrong. But there's a thing called 650 00:37:06,564 --> 00:37:09,324 Speaker 1: node locking, which is something that you can do when 651 00:37:09,444 --> 00:37:12,084 Speaker 1: you mimic bad players, right, So you can node lock 652 00:37:12,164 --> 00:37:14,324 Speaker 1: it to say, Okay, no, you're telling me that the 653 00:37:14,404 --> 00:37:16,804 Speaker 1: correct thing here is to raise, but I'm going to 654 00:37:16,844 --> 00:37:19,164 Speaker 1: say that this person never raises right, So I'm going 655 00:37:19,244 --> 00:37:19,844 Speaker 1: to node lock. 656 00:37:19,924 --> 00:37:23,084 Speaker 3: It is not an option. I've been noad locking my 657 00:37:23,164 --> 00:37:25,564 Speaker 3: whole career. I've been node locking then. 658 00:37:25,764 --> 00:37:27,964 Speaker 1: So then you can see how the strategy changes, so 659 00:37:28,044 --> 00:37:30,164 Speaker 1: you can play with the solvers to show you how 660 00:37:30,204 --> 00:37:33,124 Speaker 1: to deviate against specific opponent types. But you know, as 661 00:37:33,244 --> 00:37:36,484 Speaker 1: Nate said, like when it comes to when it comes 662 00:37:36,524 --> 00:37:38,804 Speaker 1: to anything like, it can be dangerous, Like you need 663 00:37:38,844 --> 00:37:41,244 Speaker 1: to make sure you really understand the baseline and that 664 00:37:41,364 --> 00:37:45,284 Speaker 1: you really like have the ground strategy really solid, So 665 00:37:45,684 --> 00:37:47,244 Speaker 1: you have to do both. But these days, I do 666 00:37:47,404 --> 00:37:49,844 Speaker 1: think you need to use the solvers and the analytics 667 00:37:50,764 --> 00:37:53,524 Speaker 1: as well. So I think that's important. And I know 668 00:37:53,604 --> 00:37:56,524 Speaker 1: that we're basically out of time, Nate. Between you and 669 00:37:56,724 --> 00:38:01,164 Speaker 1: Darryl needling each other, it was definitely a nice reality 670 00:38:01,284 --> 00:38:05,604 Speaker 1: TV edition of Risky Business. So I hope everyone has 671 00:38:05,724 --> 00:38:08,764 Speaker 1: enjoyed that very much. And I've loved being I've really 672 00:38:08,884 --> 00:38:10,684 Speaker 1: enjoyed like just being a fly on the wall for 673 00:38:11,044 --> 00:38:12,364 Speaker 1: those back and forth exchanges. 674 00:38:12,404 --> 00:38:12,724 Speaker 3: I love it. 675 00:38:12,804 --> 00:38:14,404 Speaker 1: Let's let's do it more, Daryl. We'll have to have 676 00:38:14,524 --> 00:38:14,884 Speaker 1: you back. 677 00:38:15,884 --> 00:38:17,684 Speaker 3: He resisted any nicks zings. 678 00:38:19,124 --> 00:38:20,484 Speaker 2: Thank you name, Darryl. 679 00:38:20,564 --> 00:38:21,164 Speaker 3: I mean I look. 680 00:38:21,244 --> 00:38:23,404 Speaker 2: It was a great series. You guys fought hard. You 681 00:38:23,444 --> 00:38:25,524 Speaker 2: guys fought hard. It was an excellent basketball series, and 682 00:38:25,524 --> 00:38:27,164 Speaker 2: as a Knicks fan, I was happy with the outcome. 683 00:38:27,244 --> 00:38:28,884 Speaker 2: So thank you for that and thanks for coming on. 684 00:38:29,244 --> 00:38:30,644 Speaker 3: Thanks, Thanks Branda, Thanks Man. 685 00:38:42,244 --> 00:38:44,004 Speaker 1: Let us know what you think of the show. Reach 686 00:38:44,044 --> 00:38:47,244 Speaker 1: out to us at Risky Business at pushkin dot Fm. 687 00:38:47,964 --> 00:38:50,844 Speaker 1: Risky Business is hosted by me Maria Kanakova and. 688 00:38:51,004 --> 00:38:52,084 Speaker 3: By me Nate Silver. 689 00:38:52,764 --> 00:38:56,004 Speaker 2: The show was a cool production of Pushing Industries and iHeartMedia. 690 00:38:56,484 --> 00:38:59,764 Speaker 2: This episode was produced by Isaac Carter. Our associate producer 691 00:38:59,844 --> 00:39:03,564 Speaker 2: is Sonya gerwit Lydia, Jean Kott and Daphne Chen are 692 00:39:03,604 --> 00:39:07,684 Speaker 2: our editors, and our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein. Mixing 693 00:39:07,844 --> 00:39:08,644 Speaker 2: by Sarah Bruger. 694 00:39:09,404 --> 00:39:11,484 Speaker 1: If you like the show, please rate and review us 695 00:39:11,524 --> 00:39:14,164 Speaker 1: so other people can find us too, But once again, 696 00:39:14,324 --> 00:39:16,124 Speaker 1: only if you like us. We don't want those bad 697 00:39:16,164 --> 00:39:18,284 Speaker 1: reviews out there. Thanks for tuning in.