New NYT Sports Columnist

[lcjjdnh]

Joe Nocera moving over from the Op-Ed page.

NYT business columnist Joe Nocera joins the sports department | Poynter.

That didn’t take long. A couple days after POLITICO reported that Joe Nocera’s business column would be discontinued, a staffing change has ordained that the longtime opinionator become a sports columnist for The New York Times, effective immediately.

The memo, from Executive Editor Dean Baquet and Sports Editor Jason Stallman, says Nocera will be making sense of various big sports stories in his new role: gambling, professional aspirations among the NCAA players and an infusion of big money in college football

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Nocera will take the important Times sports columnist role as resident scorn and moralist busybody. They've always had one for at least the last 30 years -- Selena Roberts, et. al.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Nocera will take the important Times sports columnist role as resident scorn and moralist busybody. They've always had one for at least the last 30 years -- Selena Roberts, et. al.

Yep. The passing mention of "gambling" in the memo makes me think that this is the latest gambit in the NYT's weird war on DraftKings and FanDuel.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Gambling, football brain injuries, NFL corruption, high price of tickets, you name it. They always have many good writers, but there's always been that strain in the Times sports section that people should be ashamed of themselves for liking sports.

 

[bigpern23]

I don't think it's weird for a news organization to set its sights on Draftkings and FanDuel. They're the two biggest players in the explosion of DFS and they're shady as ****.

 

[Dick Whitman]

I don't think it's weird for a news organization to set its sights on Draftkings and FanDuel. They're the two biggest players in the explosion of DFS and they're shady as ****.

I do think it's odd that they hummed along unnoticed for the last four or five years. Then they stepped up their advertising. And then everyone lost their collective ****.

 

[bigpern23]

I do think it's odd that they hummed along unnoticed for the last four or five years. Then they stepped up their advertising. And then everyone lost their collective ****.

No, it was when that dude accidentally leaked the player ownership info and everyone realized they were cheating that everyone lost their collective ****.

That incident just happened to coincide with the increase in advertising.

 

[Dick Whitman]

No, it was when that dude accidentally leaked the player ownership info and everyone realized they were cheating that everyone lost their collective ****.

That incident just happened to coincide with the increase in advertising.

And then an outside law firm independently investigated it, and said there wasn't anything shady about that.

Regardless, the biggest component of criticism I see isn't that the sites are shady.

It's that: People are gambling in this establishment!?

#ClutchPearls

 

[bigpern23]

And then an outside law firm independently investigated it, and said there wasn't anything shady about that.

Regardless, the biggest component of criticism I see isn't that the sites are shady.

It's that: People are gambling in this establishment!?

#ClutchPearls

What investigation was this? I haven't seen that.

And regardless of that, the biggest component of criticism I see are states, casinos and other gambling entities trying to protect their own gambling interests, which, frankly, is not unfair. No reason DFS shouldn't be treated the same way as other forms of gambling.

If you want to argue other forms of gambling should be expanded, I'm right there with you.

However, DFS needs Better oversight. There are currently two types of regular DFS players: the winners who cheat and the losers who don't.

And regardless of that, there's nothing weird about NYT staying on top of this.

 

[Dick Whitman]

There are currently two types of regular DFS players: the winners who cheat and the losers who don't.

I'm with you on most of your post, but not this part. They outwork and outsmart people. That's not cheating.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Employees of one site using proprietary data to bet on another site is insider trading pure and simple. Cheating by definition.

 

[bigpern23]

I'm with you on most of your post, but not this part. They outwork and outsmart people. That's not cheating.

No they don't. They run lineup optimization software that allows them to play hundreds of games with enough variation to virtually guarantee victory and exploit those who do not use similar software. In addition, many are using inside information to gain an edge over other players.

The one thing almost none of them are doing is studying harder and it's naive to think they are winning because they are smarter or work harder at it.

 

[Dick Whitman]

Employees of one site using proprietary data to bet on another site is insider trading pure and simple. Cheating by definition.

That's not what BigPern23 is referring to, I don't think, and certainly not what I'm referring to.

And it's inaccurate that people with insider information - which he didn't have, by the way - are the only ones winning.

 

[Dick Whitman]

No they don't. They run lineup optimization software that allows them to play hundreds of games with enough variation to virtually guarantee victory and exploit those who do not use similar software.

That's not cheating.

In addition, many are using inside information to gain an edge over other players.

I don't think this is the case.

The one thing almost none of them are doing is studying harder and it's naive to think they are winning because they are smarter or work harder at it.

Of course they are. That's what "run[ning] lineup optimization software that allows them to play hundreds of games with enough variation to virtually guarantee victory" is.

 

[User 11148]

Whence came this optimization software? Did they click their Eccos together three times and say "There's nothing like a pigeon, there's nothing like a pigeon"?

 

[justgladtobehere]

There has been no direct proof that employees with knowledge of the players' lineups for their site have been using that information to play on other sites. There is some circumstantial evidence that it may occur, but nobody has provided a single example of it happening.

 

[bigpern23]

There has been no direct proof that employees with knowledge of the players' lineups for their site have been using that information to play on other sites. There is some circumstantial evidence that it may occur, but nobody has provided a single example of it happening.

So we don't think the dude who accidentally leaked player ownership info was using that information? He just happened to have won $350,000 on FanDuel because he studied harder? Are we expected to believe that?

 

[Dick Whitman]

So we don't think the dude who accidentally leaked player ownership info was using that information? ?

This has been investigated. His lineup was locked before he had the information. It was independently investigated by a major law firm.

He just happened to have won $350,000 on FanDuel because he studied harder? Are we expected to believe that?

Yes, kind of. It's his life. He studies this stuff incessantly. Someone has to win the $350,000, or whatever the big prize is, in any given pool. It's not surprising that it's the guy who makes his living following fantasy sports and fantasy sports strategies.

Also: We know he won $350,000. We don't know how much he's dumped into it and lost.

 

[bigpern23]

That's not what BigPern23 is referring to, I don't think, and certainly not what I'm referring to.

And it's inaccurate that people with insider information - which he didn't have, by the way - are the only ones winning.

I was referring to that, as well as the lineup optimization software.

 

[Dick Whitman]

I was referring to that, as well as the lineup optimization software.

I don't understand how lineup optimization software is "cheating." Didn't they write the code? You can write the code, too, and get free money, if it doesn't take hard work or intelligence to do so. Is Theo Epstein cheating, too? Is Dayton Moore cheating? Is Bill Belichick cheating? (OK, scratch that last one.)

You're talking to a board here in which 3/4 of the members seemingly still don't believe that sabermetrics are predictive, and that reflects, I imagine, the public at large's opinion. It's not cheating to take advantage of such stupidity.