Thursday, October 28, 2010

Sloan Sports Conference

"Statistics are like bikinis. They're really nice to look at but they don't tell you the whole story" - Brent Barry, former NBA player

Alright, so enough about operations. Why am I really here?

I first read about the Sloan Sports Analytics Conference a couple years ago in a Bill Simmons column on ESPN.com. It's an event where a bunch of people in sports, media and academia get together to talk about all sorts of topics related to the business of sports. Specifically, one of the main goals of the conference is to have a forum to discuss the role that data analysis is increasingly playing in sports. And, as Brent Barry was getting at in his gem of a quote above (which might be stolen), the conference is also meant to help answer the important question of how to balance data analysis with the more "gut feel" type measures that make sports so appealing to follow.

The conference is only a few years old but already one of the premier events at Sloan. In addition to the Sports Guy, the 2011 conference (March 4-5) will include Malcolm Gladwell, Mark Cuban, Jeff Van Gundy and a lot of other big names. Last year Michael Lewis moderated the keynote panel, which also included Bill Polian and Jonathan Kraft.

Sloan students play a major role in putting together the conference. We work very closely with the two co-chairs, Daryl Morey (a Sloan alum and currently GM of the Houston Rockets) and Jessica Gelman (HBS grad; currently VP of Consumer Marketing & Strategy for the Kraft Sports Group). There are a lot of ways for us to get involved, from helping organize the logistics of the event to planning and coordinating the different panel discussions.

As part of the conference, people from the academic and business world also submit research papers on different sports analytics topics, which is the part I'm most directly involved with. We're currently going through this year's initial round of abstract submissions to determine which we think should submit final papers and perhaps present at the conference itself.

It's really cool to read about all of the new ways that sports-following nerds are trying to analyze sports data- everything from owner economics to selecting the best fantasy teams to better ways to analyze player performance. The analytical rigor of the papers also varies significantly, from relatively simple regression analysis to all sorts of complicated math that I don't understand. Last year, the paper that made the biggest splash was one that improved upon the adjusted +/- technique to analyze NBA players (check it out). I think in just a year a lot of NBA teams have adopted it or are looking to use it.

This year the number of submissions is up pretty substantially from last year. We definitely have a lot of cool ideas, which should make for some interesting and popular presentations at the conference. I think that order for a paper to have widespread appeal, it needs to be unique and analytically sound, though not so complicated that someone without a PhD in statistics can't understand the basic idea.

Stepping back a bit, it's obviously not easy to decide what activities you should get involved with and how much time to devote to them, because there is so much you can potentially do here. Should you spend time on activities that will help you find a job, things you're generally interested in, or both? I think it's worth exploring a lot of different options, but ultimately deciding on a very small number of things that you can actually devote time to. This conference is a no-brainer for me, just because it's such an interesting topic. I don't know if I'll ever pursue a career in sports, but I think it'll be an awesome experience regardless.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Applying

Today was LGO Ambassador Day, a full-day event for potential applicants. The day consisted of a couple of student/alum panels, some presentations about the program, and an opportunity for prospective students to sit in on an engineering or b-school class. We had a pretty good turnout, and I'm glad that I had the opportunity to meet a few people who will make up the class of 2013 (or 2014). A few of them actually read this blog (nice!).

It's hard to believe that I was in that position just a year ago. Not actually, because I didn't go to Ambassador Day, even though I should have. But I was going through the application process.

For those who are considering applying, that's awesome. You should. I just wanted to write something about the process and some of the more common questions I've been getting, both today and in general. I don't have a ton of advice to give beyond what you've probably already heard. The one area in which I can probably help is for those not coming from a technical background. Having worked only in finance, I was a little concerned that my experience wouldn't be relevant enough to be considered for the program, or that the admissions committee would doubt my seriousness about wanting to go into an operations role after graduation.

Instead of letting that hurt my application, I tried to use my differentiated background to my advantage. In my essays I talked about how I'm fortunate to have been exposed to the business world, given that finance and sales skills are essential to managerial roles in any industry. I also tried to highlight the ways in which I sometimes brought in a unique quantitative or engineering perspective to what was a pretty traditional finance role. Of course, it probably helped that I had an Operations Research undergrad degree, but I don't think that was necessary.

A couple of other things-

Recommendations: it seems pretty obvious, but make sure the people writing your recommendations know how you're pitching yourself. It helps when they all tie together. I actually still haven't read any of mine, but I was told during my interview that they were all similar, which was surprising given that the people who wrote them have very different personalities. I think it helped that I had honest conversations with all of them about what I wanted to do and why.

Essays: Yes, they're important. I think the most useful way to think about them is to fill out whatever profile you want to get across with things that can't be inferred from your resume/transcript/test scores/recommendations. For example, analytical skills are obviously very important, but if you've done really well in the engineering classes you've taken and on the quant part of the GMAT, maybe it'd be better to emphasize something else in your essays.

Other than that, I don't have a lot to add. Based on my classmates' and my own experience with the application, it's clear that people approached the process very differently. Some people started working on it months in advance, and some waited until right before it was due (so yes, it is still possible to apply if you haven't started the application yet, but you should probably get started right now). Just do whatever works for you.

If you have any questions, feel free to post them here.

Good luck!