February 10, 2008
MIT Sloan Sports Business Conference Summary
My congratulations go out to the staff of the MIT Sloan Sports Business Conference held Saturday at the Cambridge campus. They provided a star studded set of panels covering everything from owning a team to inventing new fantasy games. I especially liked Wyc Grousbeck's keynote address. He encouraged the business school students to go into a business that they love. He noted that business analysts would not have recommended he buy the Celtics. They would have valued the team between $298 million and $302 million dollars, far short of the $360 million Wyc needed to buy the franchise. Wyc, however, knew the cash flow of the club, and also knew how much he could raise in capital and how much in debt. His quick figuring told him the cash flow could cover the debt, so he bought the franchise he loved. As someone who also decided to do what he enjoyed the most, I have to agree with Wyc that it's a wonderful experience.
I was surprised that all four GMs who took part in the Defending the Title Panel gave so much weight to character. The question arose due to the various scandals that hit the major sports. However, these team architects seemed more interested in character in terms of how the player will function with the team than in the player's personal life. They want someone who is hard working and focused.
I was impressed with the cross pollination that goes on between leagues. Brian Burke of the Ducks attended the orientation session the Red Sox hold to prepare their prospects for the major leagues. Without saying what he saw, Burke called his secretary before heading back to Anaheim to make changes to the Ducks procedures. The club of GMs extends beyond their individual sports.
The most lively panel was the final one on improving the game. Bill James and John Walsh got into a lively discussion about how much broadcasters should control when the games start, both making good points. Rick Carlisle, however, appeared to be a bit out of his league. Bill was wondering if leagues really needs a strong franchise in New York, and pointed to the NBA as an argument against that. Rick categorically stated that basketball does need a strong franchise in the city. Bill asked how Rick knew that, and he said, "I just know." The audiences reaction was one of laughter. Daryl Morey noted that they were at MIT and you have to prove what you know.
Randy Vataha was quite provocative in his ideas that you need salary caps for all personnel involved in the sport. As someone who is very free market, I object to that on principle, and I was a bit surprised that in a large group of MBA students, no one challenged him on that.
Once again, the staff did a fantastic job of organizing everything from the food to the venue. I look forward to the third in the series.
Other panels covered:
P.S. For the Mets fans out there, the analytics panel was asked who was the one player that would want to start a ballclub, and Bill James named David Wright.
Posted by David Pinto at
12:42 PM
|
Management
|
TrackBack (0)
David Wright, good choice. I would be very interested to know (thought not necessarily from this panel) what one executive industry people would say is the one person they would choose to start a franchise with.
I'm not sure how much I bought the "character" thing. What if someone from the Patriots was there - could they really say that as well, after getting guys like Moss, Dillon, and Meriwether?
Out of 30 potential first round draft picks, SOMEONE has to be the worst in terms of "character". If the skills would dictate this person to be the 15th best player, where are they actually getting picked? 16th? 20th?
Of course, the easy explanation is that these successful execs from successful franchises put more value in character, and let the other clubs pick up the players with less character. But if a pretty quantitative-minded club like the Red Sox is putting a lot of weight in character, you've got to figure a team like the SF Giants does as well.
I dunno, just saying... the whole "we value good character" just stinks of pro-athlete interview jargon. I don't believe it any more than I believe athletes when they speak of momentum in the same breath as taking "one game at a time."
The conference was excellent. MIT Sloan and the organizers were terrific and the panels were very interesting and entertaining.
As far as the whole "character" thing is concerned, I believe that what is said behind closed doors is very different from what is said at a conference like this. How would it look if an executive said they didn't value character? It would be an insult to the players and would upset the fans.