Category: Sports

What should I ask Michael Moritz?

Yes I will be doing a Conversation with him, based around his new book Ausländer: One Family’s Story of Escape and Exile.  Mike of course was a pioneering venture capitalist through Sequoia, and before that had a distinguished career as a journalist, which included books on Chrysler, Apple (the first such book I believe?), and soccer coach Alex Ferguson of Manchester United.  Here is his Wikipedia page.

So what should I ask him?

Cricket and the railways

Railways are a golden thread in the history of cricket, making national competition possible in every current Test-playing nation (with the exceptino of the West Indies and Afghanistan).  In later years, we will see railway workers as exporters of cricket to Scotland and Wales and beyond to Britain’s formal and informal commercial empires.  We will see enduring railway-based teams, including in Pakistan the winners of cricket’s most comprehensive first-class victory.

That is from Richard Heller and Peter Oborne, Full Circle: A History of Cricket.  And I had not realized this: “As recently as 1945, 98 percent of Australians had their family origins in Great Britain or Ireland.”

Dean Karlan has a Substack

He starts his new essay with this:

In 2014 I wrote in The New York Times that if your own team is not in the World Cup, you should root for the one whose victory would do the most good. Add up the happiness a title would create, more where more people care, more where incomes are lower, and more where a win would be a first rather than a habit, and root for the country on top. That year it was Nigeria. With 48 teams in 2026, and more of the world’s poorer and first-time sides in the field, I rebuilt the guide, with more nuance and, thanks to AI, at a fraction of the old cost. It updates itself as the games are played.

At least for now, you should root for the DRC he argues.

Safety and nation-building in Mexico

That is the topic of my latest Free Press column, here is one excerpt:

Consider the special nature of Mexican politics. First and foremost, Mexico is still not a mature nation-state. By one estimate, drug gangs may control as much as one-third of its territory. That might sound bizarre, but from the standpoint of Mexican history, it is not new or unusual.

Start with the 19th century. When Mexico won its independence from Spain in 1821, what we now call Central America joined the new country only briefly and then split off, even though that land was under the same Spanish jurisdiction. Those cultures and economies were not sufficiently unified to come along.

After independence, the state of Yucatán rebelled repeatedly, almost claiming its independence. In the 1840s, the U.S. declared war on Mexico and took away about half of its territory. Texas already had seceded to become an independent republic. In 1857, Mexico fought a civil war. The French invaded in 1861, and by 1864 they helped install a Habsburg, Maximilian, as emperor. Yet Maximilian never came close to controlling the entire country, and was quickly deposed and executed. The 1910 Mexican Revolution killed about 10 percent of the population by some estimates.

The rest of the 20th century was more peaceful, but much of Mexico never fell under unitary rule as did the U.S. and Western Europe. The more remote areas were mostly on their own, and they regarded the government as a potential oppressor rather than a savior. So when the drug trade heated up in Mexico in the 1990s as Colombian traffickers were partially thwarted, drug gangs were able to operate in many parts of Mexico with impunity. Eventually, they became the de facto rulers of those territories, supplying public goods such as general protection in addition to running their illegal businesses. All for a high price, of course, as extortion is still the ruling principle in those parts of the country. If you buy avocados from Mexico, for instance, there is a good chance that part of your money is going to pay tribute to drug gangs.

Another significant fact about Mexico is the size and power of its central government. It spends just short of 23 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), relatively low for a country of its level of development. By contrast, Brazil, which has roughly comparable living standards, has a central government that spends over 32 percent of that country’s GDP. If the Brazilian government is too large, Mexico’s is too weak and too small, most of all because Mexico cannot beat back its drug gangs by brute force or preempt them in the first place.

Mexico as a topic will never become obsolete, not for the United States at least.

A market-based solution to NBA draft tanking?

Zach Lowe shares a tanking solution idea that came up in the GMs meeting that intrigued a few General Managers:

A proposal to not get rid of the draft entirely, but get rid of the draft order. Every team gets 100 draft credits let’s say. You bid your draft credits on every individual slot in the draft. You can also trade your draft credits like a veteran player for 40 draft credits if you want to go in a rebuilding direction. As teams advance in the playoffs, they lose draft credits so the best teams would have less to bid on individual picks. So you can take all your credits and bid on the number 1 pick in the draft if you want. Or if you think next years draft is better, you roll your credits over.

Can that work?  Here is the tweet.

My email on NBA anti-tanking rules

I fear that bad management is a recurring problem with those teams. So perhaps no system of incentives can fix that.

I am not sure that bidding and superstar teams are so unpopular with the fans, especially as the NBA has become more international. Maybe ten superstars sell the league in any case, and you want them to be on very good teams.

…The incentives system also has to be palatable and explicable to the very casual fan, which I think rules out some of the more complex options. If the fans are asking “is my team trying to win or to lose now?” the system is maybe already broken.

Claudia Goldin and the WNBA

After Claudia Goldin became the first woman to win a solo Nobel in economics in 2023, she received hundreds of invitations and requests. She accepted just three.

One of them was advising the WNBA players union as the women prepared to negotiate a new labor deal with the league.

When Goldin replied via email to Terri Carmichael Jackson, executive director of the players union, “I remember just reading it and screaming,” Jackson said. Goldin had one requirement: She refused to be paid.

This month, the two sides reached a collective bargaining agreement that gave Women’s National Basketball Association players a nearly 400% raise. Starting this season, players’ average salary will top $580,000.

It isn’t just the biggest pay increase in U.S. league history. It is, as far as Goldin is aware, the biggest increase any union anywhere has ever negotiated.

“It’s astounding,” the 79-year-old Harvard economist said.

Mike Bass, a spokesman who represents both the National Basketball Association and the WNBA, called the deal “transformational.”

…More recently, as the pay negotiations stretched on, Goldin said she stayed focused not on the countless separate points in the typical lengthy labor deal but on one central equation: the fraction of league revenue going to players’ salary and benefits.

Goldin’s calculations had a calming effect on the players, said Jackson, the union’s executive director.

Here is more from the WSJ.  Via Anecdotal.

University of Chicago fact of the day

A team largely composed of economics majors who know their way around Milton Friedman and Gary Becker, Chicago (23-4) is a DIII powerhouse currently in the DIII Sweet 16 and chasing its first-ever NCAA national title.

“Nobody’s ever going to confuse this with Alabama football,” says head coach Mike McGrath, “but if you think about the student-athlete model, I think we show you can do both of those things very, very well.”

…“Obviously, the kids are really smart,” he says. “You can’t B.S. them. They’re going to challenge everything that you tell them, you have to be prepared for that…there’s a need to understand the why behind things.”

…a friend of the program, Chicago professor John List, is working with students on an analysis of player positioning.

Here is more from the WSJ, via Rama Rao.

The economics of the NBA trading deadline (from my email)

From an anonymous correspondent:

Perhaps, as NBA fan, there’s a column to be written about the incentives that drove the NBA trade market: namely the all-out search to avoid/get out of the luxury tax and the looming “tank” battle among the 6 worst teams.  These are both direct results of the recent NBA collective bargaining agreement changes. Of course, as these attempts to regulate behavior go, the ‘benign’ intentions of the regulators are far different from the actions of the rational actors having to live within the system.

The funniest behavior-following-incentive example was orchestrated by the Minnesota Timberwolves.  In step-by-step:

–They traded Mike Conley Jr. + a 1st round pick to the Bulls for “cash”.

–Why would they do this? For two reasons: one above board, one below board.

–Above board: the trade freed up cap room to trade for another Bulls guard, in a separate trade (Ayo Dosunmo). They could not have done that trade, according to cap rules, with Conley on board.

Now the below board, cap and rule circumvention steps:

–The Bulls then re-traded Conley to the Hornets as a ‘throw-in’ portion of a larger trade.

–The Hornets then waived Conley

–Why these moves? Because now Minnesota can re-sign Conley after he was waived.  They would not have been allowed to re-sign him if the Bulls cut him.  (You can’t re-sign a player you traded…unless that player is re-traded).

There will, of course, be no evidence that Minnesota set this whole process up during the step 1 portion.  But, human intuition would say: of course this was all part of Minnesota’s original plan.

And then economically: I challenge any business, anywhere, to have executed a better cost-savings strategy than the Boston Celtics did this year.  They left last off-season with a looming $540mm salary + luxury tax bill for this 2025-26 season.  Through a series of trades, they have cut that down to $190mm – and have fully avoided the luxury tax. Most amazingly: they are a better team today than they were at end of last year. That is $350mm in savings in one year, with a quality improvement to boot! Unheard of efficiency.

Sadly: the worst part of the NBA overregulation world will now commence.  6-8 teams will spend the rest of the year trying to lose every game.  Losing profits in this world, through the ‘logic’ of the NBA draft lottery.

At any rate, a fun day for any NBA fan – but especially for the economically-minded. Incentives matter!

TC again: I would not have expected the major trade stories to involve the Washington Wizards…

Who is good at soccer?

This study explores the psychological profiles of elite soccer players, revealing that success on the field goes beyond physical ability. By analyzing a sample of 328 participants, including 204 elite soccer players from the top teams in Brazil and Sweden, we found that elite players have exceptional cognitive abilities, including improved planning, memory, and decision-making skills. They also possess personality traits like high conscientiousness and openness to experience, along with reduced neuroticism. Using AI, we identified unique psychological patterns that could help in talent identification and development. These insights can be used to better understand the mental attributes that contribute to success in soccer and other high-performance fields.

That is from a new paper by Leonardo Bonetti, et.al., via Yureed Elahi.

Those new service sector jobs

Basketball Expert (Fans, Journalist, Commentator, etc.)

Role Overview

We’re looking for Basketball experts — avid fans, sports journalists, commentators, and former or semi-professional players — to evaluate basketball games. You’ll watch basketball games and answer questions in real time assessing the quality, depth, and accuracy of AI insights, helping us refine our AI’s basketball reasoning, storytelling, and strategic understanding.

Key Responsibilities

  • Game Evaluation: Watch basketball games and review AI-generated play-by-play commentary and post-game analysis.

  • Performance Scoring: Rate the accuracy, insight, and entertainment value of AI sports coverage.

  • Context & Understanding: Assess the AI’s grasp of player performance, game flow, and strategic decisions.

  • Error Detection: Identify factual mistakes, poor interpretations, or stylistic inconsistencies.

  • Feedback Reporting: Provide clear written feedback highlighting strengths, weaknesses, and improvement opportunities.

  • Collaboration: Work with analysts and developers to enhance the AI’s basketball-specific reasoning and realism.

From Mercor, pays $45 to $70 an hour.  For background on Mercor, see my very recent CWT with Brendan Foody.  Via Mike Rosenwald, wonderful NYT obituary from him here.

My Conversation with the excellent Gaurav Kapadia

Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is the episode summary:

Gaurav Kapadia has deliberately avoided publicity throughout his career in investing, which makes this conversation a rare window into how he thinks. He now runs XN, a firm built around concentrated bets on a small number of companies with long holding periods. However, his education in judgment began much earlier, in a two-family house in Flushing that his parents converted into a four-family house. It was there where a young Gaurav served as de facto landlord, collecting rent and negotiating late payments at age 10. That grounding now expresses itself across an unusual range of domains: Tyler invited him on the show not just as an investor, but as someone with a rare ability to judge quality in cities, talent, art, and more with equal fluency.

Tyler and Gaurav discuss how Queens has thrived without new infrastructure, what he’d change as “dictator” of Flushing, whether Robert Moses should rise or fall in status, who’s the most underrated NYC mayor, what’s needed to attract better mayoral candidates, the weirdest place in NYC, why he initially turned down opportunities in investment banking for consulting, bonding with Rishi Sunak over railroads, XN’s investment philosophy, maintaining founder energy in investment firms and how he hires to prevent complacency, AI’s impact on investing, the differences between New York and London finance, the most common fundraising mistake art museums make, why he collects only American artists within 20 years of his own age, what makes Kara Walker and Rashid Johnson and Salman Toor special, whether buying art makes you a better investor, his new magazine Totei celebrating craft and craftsmanship, and much more.

Excerpt:

COWEN: Now, I don’t intend this as commentary on any particular individual, but what is it that could be done to attract a higher quality of candidate for being mayor of New York? It’s a super important job. It’s one of the world’s greatest cities, arguably the greatest. Why isn’t there more talent running after it?

KAPADIA: It is something that I’ve thought about a great deal. I think there’s a bunch of little things that accumulate, but the main thing that happens in New York City is, people automatically assume they can’t win because it’s such a big and great city. Actually, the last few presidential elections and also the current mayoral election have taught people that anyone could win. I think that, in and of itself, is going to draw more candidates as we go forward.

What happened as an example, this time, people just assumed that one candidate had the race locked up, so a lot of good candidates, even that I know, decided not even to run. It turns out that that ended up not being the case at all. Now that people put that into their mental model, the new Bayesian analysis of that would be, “Oh, more people should run.”

The second thing: New York has a bunch of very peculiar dynamics. It’s an off-year election, and the primaries are at very awkward times. I believe there’s a history of why the primary shifted to basically the third week of June, in which there’s a very low turnout. The third week of June in New York City, when the private schools are out and an off-year election. You’re able to win the Democratic nomination and therefore the mayoral election with tens of thousands of votes in a city this big. That is absolutely insane.

A couple of things that I would probably do would be to make the primary more normal, change the election timing to make it on-cycle, even number of years. You’d have to figure out how to do that. Potentially have an open primary as well.

COWEN: If we apply the Gaurav Kapadia judgment algorithm to mayoral candidates, what’s the non-obvious quality you’re looking for?

KAPADIA: Optimism.

COWEN: Optimism.

KAPADIA: Optimism.

COWEN: Is it scarce?

KAPADIA: Extraordinarily scarce. I think there’s much more doomerism everywhere than optimism. At the end of the day, people are attracted to optimism. If you think about the machinery of the city and the state, having a clear plan — of course, you need all the basics. You need to be able to govern. It’s a very complicated city. There’re many constituents.

But I think beyond that, you have to have the ability to inspire. For some reason, almost all of the candidates, over the last couple of cycles, have really not had that — with the exception of probably one — the ability to inspire. I think that is the most underrated quality that one will need.

COWEN: I have my own answer to this question, but I’m curious to see what you say. What is, for you, the weirdest part of New York City that you know of that doesn’t really feel like it belongs to New York City at all?

Definitely recommended.

My excellent Conversation with John Amaechi

Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  As I said on Twitter, John has the best “podcast voice” of any CWT guest to date.  Here is the episode summary:

John Amaechi is a former NBA forward/center who became a chartered scientist, professor of leadership at Exeter Business School, and New York Times bestselling author. His newest book, It’s Not Magic: The Ordinary Skills of Exceptional Leaders, argues that leadership isn’t bestowed or innate, it’s earned through deliberate skill development.

Tyler and John discuss whether business culture is defined by the worst behavior tolerated, what rituals leadership requires, the quality of leadership in universities and consulting, why Doc Rivers started some practices at midnight, his childhood identification with the Hunchback of Notre Dame and retreat into science fiction, whether Yoda was actually a terrible leader, why he turned down $17 million from the Lakers, how mental blocks destroyed his shooting and how he overcame them, what he learned from Jerry Sloan’s cruelty versus Karl Malone’s commitment, what percentage of NBA players truly love the game, the experience of being gay in the NBA and why so few male athletes come out, when London peaked, why he loved Scottsdale but had to leave, the physical toll of professional play, the career prospects for 2nd tier players, what distinguishes him from other psychologists, why personality testing is “absolute bollocks,” what he plans to do next, and more.

Excerpt:

COWEN: Of NBA players as a whole, what percentage do you think truly love the game?

AMAECHI: It’s a hard question to answer. Well, let me give a number first, otherwise, it’s just frustrating. 40%. And a further 30% like the game, and 20% of them are really good at the game and they have other things they want to do with the opportunities that playing well in the NBA grants them.

But make no mistake, even that 30% that likes the game and the 40% that love the game, they also know that they like what the game can give them and the opportunities that can grow for them, their families and generation, they can make a generational change in their family’s life and opportunities. It’s not just about love. Love doesn’t make you good at something. And this is a mistake that people make all the time. Loving something doesn’t make you better, it just makes the hard stuff easier.

COWEN: Are there any of the true greats who did not love playing?

AMAECHI: Yeah. So I know all former players are called legends, whether you are crap like me or brilliant like Hakeem Olajuwon, right? And so I’m part of this group of legends and I’m an NBA Ambassador as well. So I go around all the time with real proper legends. And a number of them I know, and so I’m not going to throw them under the bus, but it’s the way we talk candidly in the van going between events. It’s like, “Yeah, this is a job now and it was a job then, and it was a job that wrecked our knees, destroyed our backs, made it so it’s hard for us to pick up our children.”

And so it’s a job. And we were commodities for teams who often, at least back in those days, treated you like commodities. So yeah, there’s a lot of superstars, really, really excellent players. But that’s the problem, don’t conflate not loving the game. And also, don’t be fooled. In Britain there’s this habit of athletes kissing the badge. In football, they’ve got the badge on their shirt and they go, “Mwah, yeah.” If that fools you into thinking that this person loves the game, if them jumping into the stands and hugging you fools you into thinking that they love the game, more fool you.

COWEN: Michael Cage, he loved the game. Right?

But do note that most of the Conversation is not about the NBA.

They solved for the Kansas City Chiefs enforcement equilibrium

We examine how financial pressure influences rule enforcement by leveraging a novel setting: NFL officiating. Unlike traditional regulatory environments, NFL officiating decisions are immediate, transparent, and publicly scrutinized, providing a unique empirical lens to test whether a worsening financial climate shapes enforcement behavior. Analyzing 13,136 defensive penalties from 2015 to 2023, we find that postseason officiating disproportionately favors the Mahomes-era Kansas City Chiefs, coinciding with the team’s emergence as a key driver of TV viewership/ratings and, thereby, revenue. Our study suggests that financial reliance on dominant entities can alter enforcement dynamics, a concern with implications far beyond sports governance.

That is from a new piece by Spencer Barnes, Ted Dischman, and Brandon Mendez.  Via the excellent Kevin Lewis.