Thread Tools

Display Modes

maxiep · 07-14-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Chaos

Yes, that is a lot of money to me and most average folks. Yet, that is very little when compare to over 30 million bucks.

$1.5MM is a lot of money any way you slice it. Even if you have $30MM.

BlazerCaravan · 07-14-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxiep

$1.5MM is a lot of money any way you slice it. Even if you have $30MM.

I think you can place the "playing for a winner versus playing for a weiner" value as more than 1.5MM, in which case, the Blazers offered less, but Portland offered more... if you catch my meaning.

Blazer Maven · 07-14-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxiep

You all make a common mistake. There's a field out there called behavioral finance. If you're interested in it, Richard Thaler is among the best there is. Read "The Winner's Curse". The bottom line is that human thinking is backward. When dealing with small amounts, the mind thinks in terms of actual numbers. When dealing with large amounts, the mind thinks in terms of percentages. The reason for this phenomenon is that the mind is wired to be able to conceptualize small numbers well and large numbers poorly.

You want to change your mind to think exactly the opposite. Let's say you're spending $40,000 on a car. Let's say three miles away is a dealership that will give you the exact same car for $20 less. Most would say to themselves given $40,000, a Jackson isn't worth squabbling over. The more mathematically inclined would say to themselves it's only 5/100ths of a percent of the purchase price. The vast majority wouldn't drive to save that amount (this phenomenon has been objectively measured).

Now say you were purchasing a $0.25 pencil and the same price difference exists. Only the foolhardy would spend $20.25 for a pencil if a $0.25 pencil existed three miles away.

Would I move for $5,000 to Detroit over five years? Of course not. The hassle cost makes that a negative alpha proposition. Would I move to Detroit for $1.5MM over five years? Probably. As long as I could have summers off.

Nice book. To take something from the reviews, the Blazers may find themselves suffering the winner's curse by potentially bidding too high for Joel's services at the recent free agent auction.

However, you assume that Joel's motivations are the same as your own and that he would have taken the most $$ regardless of who offerred it. Joel just had the opportunity to take the most $$ in a location he happened to prefer.

If Chicago had not signed Ben, we may have seen how much value he truly placed on staying in Portland.

For a franchise and city that could use some good publicity, having your most popular player return to the team citing the city's quality of life as a contributing factor, can only help in the long run.

Utherhimo · 07-14-2006, 02:21 PM

i wish i had a 1/30th of that 1.5mm

maxiep · 07-14-2006, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blazer Maven

Nice book. To take something from the reviews, the Blazers may find themselves suffering the winner's curse by potentially bidding too high for Joel's services at the recent free agent auction.

I think if any team will be suffering that curse, it will be Chicago. The Winner's Curse is a condition of an unrestricted market bidding war. Neither Chicago nor Detroit had limitations other than the maximum contract allowed by the NBA. The Joel contract was defined by the MLE and the EBE.

If we would have had Joel's full Bird Rights and Chicago wanted him and the bidding would have gone up to Chandler/Dalembert/Nene levels I would be concerned. For a starting quality big man, the EBE is a steal.

It's_GO_Time · 07-14-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxiep

You all make a common mistake. There's a field out there called behavioral finance. If you're interested in it, Richard Thaler is among the best there is. Read "The Winner's Curse". The bottom line is that human thinking is backward. When dealing with small amounts, the mind thinks in terms of actual numbers. When dealing with large amounts, the mind thinks in terms of percentages. The reason for this phenomenon is that the mind is wired to be able to conceptualize small numbers well and large numbers poorly.

You want to change your mind to think exactly the opposite. Let's say you're spending $40,000 on a car. Let's say three miles away is a dealership that will give you the exact same car for $20 less. Most would say to themselves given $40,000, a Jackson isn't worth squabbling over. The more mathematically inclined would say to themselves it's only 5/100ths of a percent of the purchase price. The vast majority wouldn't drive to save that amount (this phenomenon has been objectively measured).

Now say you were purchasing a $0.25 pencil and the same price difference exists. Only the foolhardy would spend $20.25 for a pencil if a $0.25 pencil existed three miles away.

Would I move for $5,000 to Detroit over five years? Of course not. The hassle cost makes that a negative alpha proposition. Would I move to Detroit for $1.5MM over five years? Probably. As long as I could have summers off.

Either you didn't bother to go into enough detail about that study or that study is weak . . . and I have studied and been to seminars on business relationship. There are so many more factors involed when deciding which company people decide to do business with . . . and we both know there are hundreds of books on this topic, so just because you read a throry doesn't make it true.

1.5 million is not alot any way you slice it. Slice it into the national deficit, slice it into the cost of the Iraq war, slice it into the cost of advertising v. the return for the advertising, slice it into the amount the fines micrsoft recieves for antitrust v. how much they make for doing business their way . . . I could slice 1.5 million a 1.5 million ways to show it's not a lot of money any way you slice it.

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here. I thought is that you are implying Joel decided to chase the cash and proving this because the Blazers offered him the most money. Step back away from the ecomonic theories (there are thousands) and just look a the sitaution. Roughly: Detroit, 30 million over five years v. Blazers, 31.5 million over five years.

Niether of us know Joel so we can only guess. If you think Joel is just chasing the money, OK. I would hope that when one decides where and who to work for the next five years, and those are the numbers, that the numbers become a very small factor relative to all the other factors. Maybe that is hard to understand, but makes sense to me.

We know what Joel said, but if you don't want to belive him then we will just have to guess what motivated him. If he decided to pick Ptd because of the 1.5 million, I feel sorry for him and think he has his priorities in life all screwed up.

maxiep · 07-14-2006, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiss_My_Darius

Either you didn't bother to go into enough detail about that study or that study is weak . . . and I have studied and been to seminars on business relationship. There are so many more factors involed when deciding which company people decide to do business with . . . and we both know there are hundreds of books on this topic, so just because you read a throry doesn't make it true.

1.5 million is not alot any way you slice it. Slice it into the national deficit, slice it into the cost of the Iraq war, slice it into the cost of advertising v. the return for the advertising, slice it into the amount the fines micrsoft recieves for antitrust v. how much they make for doing business their way . . . I could slice 1.5 million a 1.5 million ways to show it's not a lot of money any way you slice it.

I'm not sure what you are trying to argue here. I thought is that you are implying Joel decided to chase the cash and proving this because the Blazers offered him the most money. Step back away from the ecomonic theories (there are thousands) and just look a the sitaution. Roughly: Detroit, 30 million over five years v. Blazers, 31.5 million over five years.

Niether of us know Joel so we can only guess. If you think Joel is just chasing the money, OK. I would hope that when one decides where and who to work for the next five years, and those are the numbers, that the numbers become a very small factor relative to all the other factors. Maybe that is hard to understand, but makes sense to me.

We know what Joel said, but if you don't want to belive him then we will just have to guess what motivated him. If he decided to pick Ptd because of the 1.5 million, I feel sorry for him and think he has his priorities in life all screwed up.

Congratulations on your business seminar attendance. It's amazing with the quality level of those things you keep missing the point. I guess the delicious snack bar they provided at the Jantzen Beach Red Lion was too much for you to pay attention. $1.5MM is an absolute amount. It's a good deal of money regardless of what it's compared to. The point is the comparison is irrelevant. The fact you're looking at it as a percentage shows you have no understanding of behavioral finance. That's cool, not everyone understands it.

As to what I'm arguing, I'm not arguing anything. It is others that seem to have their panties in a twist. I'm just saying this is one of those serendipitous times when we can tell ourselves Joel stayed for loyalty, even though we just happened to be the club that offered him the most.

It's_GO_Time · 07-14-2006, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxiep

Congratulations on your business seminar attendance. It's amazing with the quality level of those things you keep missing the point. I guess the delicious snack bar they provided at the Jantzen Beach Red Lion was too much for you to pay attention. $1.5MM is an absolute amount. It's a good deal of money regardless of what it's compared to. The point is the comparison is irrelevant. The fact you're looking at it as a percentage shows you have no understanding of behavioral finance. That's cool, not everyone understands it.

As to what I'm arguing, I'm not arguing anything. It is others that seem to have their panties in a twist. I'm just saying this is one of those serendipitous times when we can tell ourselves Joel stayed for loyalty, even though we just happened to be the club that offered him the most.

What the hell is with your attitude. "you all make the common mistake" "congratulations on your business seminar" "too much for you to pay attention" "not everyone understands it" something about snacks.

Get off your high horse, no one is buying it. I disagree with the study, that 1.5 million is a lot of money and that Joel chased the money. Do those points drive the need for you to be an ***?

Fine you aren't arguing anything. You just felt the need to point out that Joel signed for the most money. Great point.

BlazerCaravan · 07-14-2006, 05:27 PM

Again, the negative value of Portland being the worst team in the NBA outweighs the 1.5mil over five years. There's some people like Joe Johnson who sign with bad teams for *a lot* more than the good team they were on could offer. But 1.5mil difference? The Blazers offered less than Detroit with that in mind. However, Portland isn't a sinkhole of depravity, and Joel liked what he saw this summer. 1.5mil is less than will be taken out in taxes each year; it's hardly a big "bonus" worthy of "chasing the money." Joel did not come back to Portland so they could "CTC."

maxiep · 07-14-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiss_My_Darius

What the hell is with your attitude. "you all make the common mistake" "congratulations on your business seminar" "too much for you to pay attention" "not everyone understands it" something about snacks.

My attitude? I wasn't the one who brought up their extensive business education. If you're going to bring up business seminars you've attended in support of your contention, you can expect me to address them and have a good snicker. There are all types of people on these forums with all types of backgrounds and specialties. Some will be impressed by business seminars, some less so.

Quote:

Get off your high horse, no one is buying it. I disagree with the study, that 1.5 million is a lot of money and that Joel chased the money. Do those points drive the need for you to be an ***?

You may not be buying it and may disagree with the field of behavioral finance all you wish, but know plenty of others are buying it. Billions are made off of its main thesis every day--that there are exceptions to the economic model of human beings as rational actors. The discipline finds where humans don't seek to maximize their utility and offers a roadmap to take advantage of it.

And I'm glad you're so wealthy that you disagree $1.5MM is a lot of money. Which one of us is on their high horse, scoffing at such a figure?

As for the namecalling, I can tell you're a bit frustrated, so I won't take it personally.

Quote:

Fine you aren't arguing anything. You just felt the need to point out that Joel signed for the most money. Great point.

You wanted to argue with me, when I wasn't really forwarding an argument but rather making a comment. You can try to build a castle out of smoke, but eventually it will just blow away.

It's_GO_Time · 07-14-2006, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxiep

My attitude? I wasn't the one who brought up their extensive business education. If you're going to bring up business seminars you've attended in support of your contention, you can expect me to address them and have a good snicker. There are all types of people on these forums with all types of backgrounds and specialties. Some will be impressed by business seminars, some less so.

You may not be buying it and may disagree with the field of behavioral finance all you wish, but know plenty of others are buying it. Billions are made off of its main thesis every day--that there are exceptions to the economic model of human beings as rational actors. The discipline finds where humans don't seek to maximize their utility and offers a roadmap to take advantage of it.

And I'm glad you're so wealthy that you disagree $1.5MM is a lot of money. Which one of us is on their high horse, scoffing at such a figure?

As for the namecalling, I can tell you're a bit frustrated, so I won't take it personally.

You wanted to argue with me, when I wasn't really forwarding an argument but rather making a comment. You can try to build a castle out of smoke, but eventually it will just blow away.

Yea, I'm real frustrated with you. Let's see, your a being a jerk on another thread, you have a history of it on O-live, you have no idea what you are talking about and you think a certain amount of money is either a lot or little and it doesn't matter who you are. Yep, you got me nailed.

What I laugh at is you are so inconsistent with your own logic. If I don't feel 1.5 million is alot, what does it matter if I'm weathly or not. According to you, 1.5 is a definite amount and it doesn't matter how you slice it or who you are, 1.5 million is a lot.

Dude, you are making no sense. I know it is hard to understand for you, but to some people, 1.5 is not a lot of money. To some people 100 dollars is a lot of money. You can spew all day long (I know that because I unfortunately have read you spew all day long) but it isn't going to change the fact that your idiotic theory is lauagble.

And I mention I attended business seminars so your going to have fun with it . . . I'm a merchant banker . . . and not be so impressed . . . I'm a merchant banker. . . . because you would never try to impress anyone . . . I'm a merchant banker . . . and would expect people . . . I'm a merchant banker. . .to have fun with you if you did something like that . . .I'm a merchant banker . . . oh and have I told you I'm a merchant banker who studies behavioral finance that has to be correct because it is making billions and billions of dollars . . . I'm a merchant banker . . .

Oh wait, I know I had too many snacks . . . I wish I was eating snacks during your enlighting "comment"

maxiep · 07-14-2006, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kiss_My_Darius

Yea, I'm real frustrated with you. Let's see, your a being a jerk on another thread, you have a history of it on O-live, you have no idea what you are talking about and you think a certain amount of money is either a lot or little and it doesn't matter who you are. Yep, you got me nailed.

Well, you seem to know a lot about me from my O-Live postings. What is your moniker there? I used to be maxiep, but now I'm RiggoDrill because of an unfortunate foray into the Mlive Pistons forum. Fair is fair.

As to me being a jerk on another thread, that's your opinion. I'm merely defending myself against some nasty name calling. Note that I haven't returned it in that thread, yet you're calling me a jerk and letting the others off with a free pass. I frankly think you're being a little bit hostile, but to each his own.

In terms of me having no idea what I'm talking about, when it comes to basketball I'll agree. I'm just a fan who likes to learn about the game from the insights of others. In terms of Economics, well, that's another issue. I would tell you more about my background, but you appear to be so insecure, you would call my statements of fact bragging.

Quote:

What I laugh at is you are so inconsistent with your own logic.

Actually, my logic hasn't moved. Perhaps you're Mother Earth and you have yet to discover Capernicus was correct. To you it looks like my logic is moving all about, but that's because you have mistakenly assumed that you are viewing it from a stationary position. My initial point was that Joel Przybilla had the luxury of saying that he stayed for loyalty when in fact we don't know that to be true because we also paid him more than any other team. I also made the objective statement that $1,500,000 is a lot of money.

Quote:

If I don't feel 1.5 million is alot, what does it matter if I'm weathly or not. According to you, 1.5 is a definite amount and it doesn't matter how you slice it or who you are, 1.5 million is a lot.

Dude, you are making no sense. I know it is hard to understand for you, but to some people, 1.5 is not a lot of money. To some people 100 dollars is a lot of money. You can spew all day long (I know that because I unfortunately have read you spew all day long) but it isn't going to change the fact that your idiotic theory is lauagble.

Re-read your post and ask which one of us isn't making sense. You seem to be flailing wildly.

My point is that $1.5MM can purchase many goods and services. In fact, US median per capita income is roughly $40K. $1.5MM by my rudimentary math equals 37.5 times that figure. The normal person works 45 years. If you asked the average person if 83.3% of their lifetime earnings was a lot of money, the average person would agree with you. Conversely, if you walked up to Bill Gates, Warren Buffet or P

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes