Monthly Archives: February 2009

Is Leach Worth It for Tech?

Posted on by
Reply

A fascinating dispute between Texas Tech football coach Mike Leach and Texas Tech University highlights the tension in the relationship between the business of big-time college football and academia.

According to this Examiner.com article (a more-detailed Don Williams/Avalanche Journal article is here and a Double-T Nation blog post is here), Leach and Tech have agreed on the financial terms of an extended contract, but are hung up over several issues relating to termination and buyout of the contract, including Tech’s demand that Leach agree to pay the school $1.5 million if he interviews for another head coaching job without Tech’s permission.

Thus, despite Leach being Tech’s most successful football coach, Tech isn’t all that secure about Leach. And despite Leach’s success at Tech, Leach isn’t all that thrilled about being at Tech, which is evidenced by his continually seeking other head coaching jobs.

Tech apparently thinks that Leach’s wanderlust makes Tech look bad, so Tech is seeking to restrain Leach’s efforts to obtain another job by making it expensive for him to do so. However, by making such a demand, Tech reinforces to Leach that he really would prefer to be somewhere else.

So, Tech is caught in a conundrum.

On one hand, Leach has generated profitable attention for Tech; thus, it makes sense to pay big money to keep him.

However, on the other hand, Leach turns around and disparages Tech in the coach marketplace by continually trying to leave. Why pay big money to someone who is diminishing the value of your product?

Nevertheless, Tech is probably over-thinking this issue.

Leach is a good coach, but not the best diplomat. Pay him a salary commensurate with Tech’s financial capability and Tech’s position in the Big 12, and then require a hefty buyout to compensate Tech if another program hires Leach.

Don’t worry much about Leach’s wanderlust — a large buyout will deter most programs from pursuing Leach.

Trying to restrict Leach’s wanderlust by imposing a penalty is counterproductive in that it forces Tech to endure a coach who really does not want to be there while reducing the chance that Tech will realize a windfall from another program hiring Leach and paying Tech the buyout.

Having said all that, is Leach really worth it for Tech? Could Tech’s program do about as well with another (and likely, far less expensive) coach who is truly content with his position at Tech?

It would be refreshing if Tech were to decide to find out.

What the Tour players really think

Posted on by
2

tour player and caddie Golf Digest is running in this month’s issue the results of an interesting survey that the magazine recently took of 25 of the top PGA Tour players.

Clear Thinkers favorite and longtime Houstonian Steve Elkington scores highly in one of the most important questions:

WHO’S THE BEST JOKE-TELLER ON TOUR?
Todd Hamilton: 17%
Steve Elkington: 13%
Harrison Frazar: 8%
Neal Lancaster: 8%
OTHERS RECEIVING VOTES: Paul Azinger, Rich Beem, Tim Clark, Carlos Franco, Paul Goydos, Peter Jacobsen, Peter Lonard, Nick Price, Chris Riley, Boo Weekley

And you have to like the answers to the question "Who would you rather have dinner with, Phil Mickelson or Vijay Singh?"

Phil: 50%
Vijay: 50%
COMMENTS: "What are we eating?" … "So either I listen to Phil tell me everything he thinks he knows, or I sit with Vijay while he says nothing." … "Give me a choice!"

Moreover, in response to the "What’s the worst course you play on Tour?" question, La Cantera in San Antonio was the runaway winner (good thing that tournament is moving to a new course next year), while the Shell Houston Open’s Tournament Course at Redstone is one of a half-dozen courses in the "Others Receiving Votes" category for that question. That will go over like a lead balloon at Houston Golf Association’s offices.

But my favorite answer came in the "Others Receiving Votes" category to the question "Who’s the Slowest Player on Tour?"

"Any Swede."

Thinking about Cheney’s remarks

Posted on by
5

dick-cheney Many Americans were repulsed by the methods former Vice-President Dick Cheney used to consolidate and exercise war powers in the Executive Branch during the administration of George W. Bush.

Unfortunately, that controversy clouds many people’s judgment on Cheney’s many noteworthy accomplishments during his 30-year career in public service. He has been an extraordinary public servant.

My sense is that Cheney based his aggressive exercise of war powers during the Bush Administration in large part on classified information regarding the risk of more attacks on U.S. citizens after the attacks of September 11, 2001, a point that Barton Gellman notes in his seminal but generally critical book on the Cheney vice-presidency, Angler: The Cheney Vice-Presidency (Penguin 2008).

Cheney’s public comments from earlier this week appear to be consistent with my impression regarding his assessment of the risk of further attacks.

Given that, when you have 25 minutes or so, take the time to watch the video below of Irwin Redlener’s recent TED lecture on how the nature of a nuclear attack threat on the United States has changed, but our generally deficient approach to preparing for one has not.

As Dick Cheney says, fighting those who would levy such an attack on the U.S. is “a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business.”

Here’s hoping that the Obama Administration is up to the task.

Blogging NASA

Posted on by
Reply

wayne_hale_pressbriefing.sized One of my favorite new blogs is Wayne Hale’s blog in which he discusses working at NASA generally and on the Space Shuttle program specifically. Despite being a political football from time-to-time, NASA remains a fascinating place.

Every one of Hale’s blog posts is interesting, and most of them are downright capitvating. His most recent post — "Don’t Call Him Willy Any More" — is representative:

Back when the world was much younger than it is now, I was a young shuttle flight controller working in the MCC on several early flights.  We were all learning about the shuttle in those days, and one fellow I knew actually saved the shuttle because he knew what to do when the unexpected happened. [.  .  .]

Willy was an up and coming Captain in the USAF and made a great GNC.  He knew the guidance, navigation, and flight control systems forwards and backwards.  We worked together a lot in those days since the PROP console (mine) was responsible for the attitude control thrusters, their plumbing, etc., while the GNC console was responsible for the Auto Pilot that called on those thrusters to maintain attitude.  Even in those days, Willy demonstrated what military men call "command presence".

But almost as important, Willy could do the most devastatingly funny imitation of our legendary boss, Gene Kranz.  Willy had the mannerisms down exactly right, could put the gruff intonation into the right pitch, and deliver a comedy routine that had all of us in the trench in stitches.  Always during LOS or debrief between sim runs, of course.  Never during the training runs, and especially not during a real flight. Hmm. [.  .  .]

After the shuttle main engines cut off and the External Tank is jettisoned, there is still a lot of the main propulsion system propellant — liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen – trapped in the large pipes in the orbiter aft compartment.  .  .  . Not really a safety issue, but a nuisance and something that could cause interruptions later on.

The booster guys came up with a dandy plan to get rid of these propellants faster.   .  .   . those actions would cause a more thorough dump and eliminate the pesky vacuum inerting procedures that interrupted later activities.

So we tried it.  Worked great in the simulator.  Hmm.  In flight, . . . .well . ..

Ascent is always a tense time.  Willy, I, and all the other flight controllers were glued to the data.  Everything went nominally all through mainstage.  No systems issues.  MECO, ET sep, dump start, OOOPS!

The increased propellant dump flow out the side of the orbiter caused it to bank sharply — the wing headed for the jettisoned but not distant ET.  Willy, calm as could be, relayed the instructions to the crew to regain attitude control.  The wing missed the tank, by how much I don’t know, but not by much.

It was all over in just a couple of minutes.  We took a deep breath and got about the business of flying the orbiter in space.

After Challenger, all the USAF "detailees" were pulled out of flight control.  I haven’t seen Willy in probably two decades until I ran into him recently.  He has done well in his USAF career, has stars on his epaulets now.  I wouldn’t recommend you call him Willy these days.

But then, I haven’t called him that since the day he saved the shuttle.

And I bet you didn’t even know.

The Rockets at mid-season

Posted on by
2

houston_rockets_wallpaperThe Rockets narrative— i.e., "Tracy McGrady is a superstar and the Rockets can’t win in the playoffs without him, but he’s not the type of clutch superstar who can win in the playoffs, blah, blah blah." — continues to be the dominant theme among most of the mainstream media in regard to the local NBA team.

In reality, McGrady is long past being a bona fide NBA superstar and really is not much more than a bit above-average NBA player at this point in his career.

However, despite McGrady’s and newcomer Ron Artest’s relative mediocrity this season, the Rockets are muddling along with a 29-19 record and — barring further injuries — are in the thick of the race for an upper division Western Conference playoff spot.

Given the Rockets’ narrative, how is that possible? Let’s take a look at the numbers.

Dave Berri doesn’t rely on subjective narratives and instead continues to provide some of the best objective analysis of what is really happening in the NBA over at his Wages of Wins blog. Here are his mid-season player rankings (organized by team here), which are much more revealing than the Rockets narrative.

Berri’s ratings, which he calls the "Wins Produced Model," begins with a player’s statistics — his points scored, shot attempts, rebounds, steals, turnovers, etc.. — and translates them into how many wins those statistics create over the course of a season. 

Under Berri’s system, players who do many things well — such as former stars Oscar Robertson, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan and Hakeem Olajuwon, as well as current stars LeBron James, Shaquille O’Neal, Tim Duncan, and Kevin Garnett — are among the most productive players, just as most of us know intuitively.

On the other hand, players who only score a lot of points but who have deficiencies such as low shooting efficiency, high turnover rates, and poor rebounding skills are not as productive as many folks believe based on their high scoring. Current examples of that type of player are Allen Iverson, Antoine Walker, and Carmelo Anthony.

Finally, players who are excellent rebounders — such as the aforementioned Russell or Dennis Rodman, or current players Ben Wallace and Marcus Camby — are usually much more productive than most folks give them credit for.

So, players who do not shoot efficiently, or who turn the ball over frequently, do not help their team win many games.  On the other hand, players who generate large numbers of rebounds, or who score consistently and efficiently, or who create steals — they generally help their teams win more games than average.

Thus, Berri’s Wins Produced statistic tells us how productive a player has been. What it does not tell us is why a player shoots inefficiently, commits turnovers, rebounds well or creates steals. That’s a question for team management and coaches to figure out.

Having said all that, the following are few observations on the mid-season statistics:

The most productive players by position are as follows:

  • Point guard: Chris Paul, who is currently the most productive player in the NBA with a 15.9 WP (an average NBA player’s WP is 1.0). Paul is the best NBA point guard since Magic Johnson.
  • Shooting guard: Dwyane Wade
  • Small forward: LeBron James
  • Power forward: Kevin Garnett
  • Center: Dwight Howard

The Rockets most productive player so far this season is Yao Ming, who is the NBA’s 17th most productive player at 7.1 WP, which is only three spots below the Lakers’ Kobe Bryant (7.4 WP).

The Rockets second most-productive player this season is not McGrady, or Artest (120th-ranked at 2.0 WP), or PG Rafer Alston. It’s PF Luis Scola (62nd most productive at 3.8 WP).

Even with all his physical problems, McGrady (73rd-ranked at 3.2 WP) is the third most productive player on the team. Having said that, the Rockets aren’t any more productive by playing McGrady than SF Carl Landry (74th-ranked at 3.2 WP).

Are the Rockets ever going to have a highly productive point guard again (Alston — 134th-ranked at 1.6 WP; Aaron Brooks — 196th-ranked at .7 WP)?

Also, SF Shane Battier (157th-ranked at 1.3 WP) is a marginal starter at this point in time, although fan favorite Von Wafer (173rd-ranked at 1.1 WP) really isn’t a better alternative.

Although the Rockets do not have many highly-productive players, they also do not have any players who are actually counter-productive — i.e., who have a negative WP. Most teams have at least a few counter-productive players.

If McGrady and Artest ever get healthy, then the Rockets’ best chance of finally winning a playoff series (it has been 12 years now) may well be playing a lineup of McGrady at the point with Artest at shooting guard, Landry at SF with Scola at PF, and of course Yao at C.

By the way, in view of all this, why do so many folks continue to expect so much from McGrady?

Call it the curse of the big contract — McGrady is pulling down a total of $40 million guaranteed over this season and next. Many folks just can’t come to terms with the fact that sometimes the player gets the better of management in contact negotiations.

Me, I just think McGrady has a good agent. ;^)

Sound thoughts to start the week

Posted on by
Reply

the_thinker Felix Salmon:

It may or may not be true that we would have avoided much of this crisis had credit default swaps never been invented. I suspect it’s not true, and that the CDS market, in allowing people to short the credit market, actually helped at the margin to stop the credit bubble from expanding. But even if it is true, that doesn’t mean that the solution is to ban or unwind the CDS market which now exists. It was foolish to sell protection too cheaply on risky debt; it was sensible to buy that protection when it was cheap. So let’s not punish the sensible people and bail out the foolish ones by abrogating those contracts.

Peter Gordon:

"Animal spirits", Keynes’ view of capitalists, reeks of detachment and some condescension. Trouble is no one really knows how to incite the barnyard or rattle the cage. The past six months of ad hoccery have not helped and I am pessimistic about the next chapter, guessing that whatever comes out of the Washington sausage factory will do more harm than good. Bad times do breed bad policy. And there is now very little sympathy for getting the taxman (and the politician) out of the way.

Gordon again:

There are some very smart people who claim that desperate measures are called for. But desperate measures can also make matters worse. Printing money to finance questionable projects that enrich lobbyists, empower bureaucrats and entrench politicians is surely not a promising signal to investors here or abroad.