52 thoughts on “February 22, 2018: Hockey Spoilers”

  1. 'Spoiler' SelectShow
      1. 'Spoiler' SelectShow
    1. Aquinas had some teeth pulled the other day, and when he put them under his pillow he left a Laffy Taffy for the tooth fairy too, because he figured she'd enjoy the humor. In addition to the usual, she printed off some tooth-related jokes, including this one, to leave for him. Kind of funny that it would pop up again here so soon, as I don't recall ever having heard this one before.

            1. Our oldest will turn 7 in the end of April, and just lost his first last weekend. He also has a huge noggin, so you might be on to something there. The oldest kids on his baseball team are 9 years old, and he's the only one on his team who needs a medium/large sized hat; most of the other kids got size small, and they're still so big on them that they fall off.

        1. Kernel turned 6 in late August, and has thus far (past 3 months) lost the middle two on the bottom. Middle two on top are loose, and have been for a few months ... but the emerging 'adult' teeth are crookedAF, and have not pushed the baby's out yet ... bottom two new teeth are also wonky. Yay braces.

    1. The money shot: "Sorry, I’m now dissecting terrible old Souhan columns, a fool’s errand if ever there was one."

    2. Apologies for the forthcoming Bolshevist diatribe.

      Speak up, comrade; they aren’t listening in the back.
      ...
      And, just because it’s fun to track this:

      Dude SLG TB
      Mauer .443 2856
      “Mauer w/Power” .412 1465
      NL Mauer .403 2457
    3. The math therein is pretty off:

      The Twins pulled in $253 million in revenue in 2017, and Forbes last valued the franchise at $1.03 billion in 2017 — a 3,219% return on the Pohlad’s $32 million initial investment. If you factor in inflation, $32 million in 1984 is (very roughly) $76.3 million in 2017 money, good for a 1,350% ROI.

      The best comparison isn't inflation, but the expected investment return on a portfolio.
      Since 1984, the S&P 500 is up 1513% (1/1/84 to 1/1/17), or about 8.8% annualized.
      The value of the Twins is up 3119% 1984 to 2017, or about 11.1% annualized. A good return, but not super given the amount of time involved. Had they invested the S32M in an S&P index fund in 1984, its value would have been S516M in 2017.

      If the Twins put $195M into Target Field without any assets to show for it, that should also be figured into it (and any assets should be included in the team's valuation). For simplification, let's assume that their outlay was paid at the beginning of 2010 (which is conservative as, they surely paid something in the year before Target Field opened). The S&P 500 in that time is up 139% (13.2% annualized).
      So had they invested that $195M in the stock market in 2010 (which is a conservative assumption, as it surely didn't come out all at once), its value in 2017 would have been $466M.

      $516M + $466M = $982M, so $1,030M isn't particularly good returns over the much-less risky diversified "market portfolio".
      So the value of Carl's investment in the Twins has been worth pretty much whatever net-positive revenue streams they've not invested back into the team, or about $???M (±$?M ).

      1. Owning an MLB team involves risk? When's the last time an owner lost money on his investment?

        I don't think the S&P is a good benchmark here.

        1. Jeffrey Loria begs to differ:

          Jeffrey Loria’s lawyers and accountants prepared a summary that is supposed to explain how Loria lost money on the Marlins’ sale. According to that document, the gross proceeds of the sale – in other words, the money received before taxes and expenses are paid – was $1.128 billion. But Loria says that the Marlins had about $280 million in debt, taxes on the sale of $297 million, and $33 million paid to financial advisors who managed the sale. All in all, the summary says that Loria lost over $140 million on the sale.

        2. Well the teams' values are all largely correlated. (Even teams across different sports and leagues.) It wasn't known at the time that team values would all go up.
          What's not to say that cities would stop building stadiums for teams or fan numbers would drop. Who could have forseen the MLB advanced Media gravy train or television rights?

  2. OFR, but I've never been a fan of deciding hockey games by shootout, it's too much like flipping a coin in my book. Sudden death, play until somebody scores, no matter how long it takes. Old time hockey, like Eddie Shore.

    1. Ha. Yeah, I don't bowl regular anymore, and when I do, my body doesn't do what it used to do. So I confidently stride up and then throw the ball into the 4 pin. My handicap was 155 at my peak, and now I average around 110-120 when I go. And then I ache afterwards.

      1. Tomorrow will be interesting. We'll see if I can pick anything up with my right hand. I did leave the building thinking if I joined a league again, I could get back to a 190 average. Consistency was my biggest problem today. That, and I think my ball is too aggressive for the oil pattern they had on.

      2. the last time i bowled was the first time in a long time. the lane appeared to have not been oiled since the place originally opened and i throw a curve. not sure what my current ability level is.

    1. It seems the Twins suddenly have need for a roster spot then? Pending acquisition? If it's a trade, it would involve acquiring 1 more player for the 40-man than they are giving up.

    1. I don’t know if it’s on tv, but all the full replays of all the curling matches are available on demand through NBC Sports webpage or app. It does require login through a cable or satellite provider, though.

  3. I don't think I'll even make it to the first end... Trying to bide my time watching "Everything Sucks," which isn't "The End of the F***ing World", but it's good... I'll save more comments for a movie day.

    Episode 7 is hitting home.

    1. Holy crap. Just had a pack of coyotes howling and yelping yards from my window.
      Still couldn't see them... Maybe they were under my deck?

      1. I finished it last night, too. Around 12:25. I think I got another 5 minutes into S2E1 of Bojack Horseman before I zonked out.
        I didn't think first episodes were awful, but they did a lot more of the heavy "Hey We're in the 90's!" signalling.

          1. I can see that. I called it "That 90's Show" to EAR. I think "That 70's Show" also started out with similarly broad characters and shallow references.

Comments are closed.