Recently, I’ve listened to two interviews with the author,
Michael Lewis: one on NPR’s “Fresh Air” which is part of my nightly podcasts lineup, and the other, a sixty-minute interview on “Charlie Rose”. Charlie doesn’t
often give sixty full minutes to current heads of state, let alone nonfiction writers. Why did he do so this time?
Because Michael Lewis is really interesting. Uncommonly so.
Lewis first crossed my radar about seven years ago, when my
father recommended “Moneyball” to me. Though it was written in 2003, Moneyball has gained more recognition in the past few months because it is about to hit
theatres as a big-budget movie starring Brad Pitt. This strikes me as peculiar because the book is about….baseball statistics; specifically, On Base Percentage.
On Base Percentage, for those of you smart enough not to concern yourself with such a thing, is a stat that calculates exactly what it says – the percentage of times a player reaches base. How do you make a movie about On
Base Percentage that Brad Pitt wants to star in? I have no idea.

“Moneyball” follows the story of the Oakland A’s, a small
market team, that started winning consistently in the nineties; a highly unlikely scenario as their player payroll was one of the lowest in the league and should not have enabled them to even be competitive, let alone successful. Lewis peels the onion on a team that found a new way to use statistics to find players that were undervalued in the marketplace – players that could produce
but that the market didn’t see as valuable, because the market valued big-time hitters. One of the lines from the book that has always stuck with me is, (paraphrasing)
“With two outs, anything and everything is still possible. With three outs, nothing is.” What the A’s figured out that no one else caught on to was that On Base Percentage was a measure that told you whether a player was likely to become
an “out”, ultimately leading his team closer to its third out, and killing all opportunity to score. So, the A’s started recruiting players that didn’t have stellar
hitting stats or RBI’s (because these players were highly valued and had the price tag to go with that skill) but had high On Base Percentage stats which nobody
in the conventional scouting world cared much about. Because players with a high On Base Percentage were overlooked and undervalued, the A’s could afford
them. This lesson wasn’t really about statistics – it was about a team that found a way to value something that no one else did and used that advantage to win.
What the A’s learned about how to find value in the “unvaluable” is something I’ve often tried, in vain, to apply to my life in business. I am a marketer – the job of a marketer is to find a marketplace (aka customers) for a
product or service. At first glance, marketers often go after the biggest customers or the largest market. After all, if you want to eat well, you either catch the biggest fish or you catch the largest number of smaller fish. However, the
biggest customers and the largest markets are highly valued and therefore most expensive to reach – that billboard in Times Square will buy you a lot of newspaper ads in the “Bridgewater Bulletin”. As a result, you quickly learn in
business school that the best marketplace is not always the largest one but the most underserved or undervalued. The trick is to identify new customers that are ignored by others so you can acquire them faster and cheaper because you’re
not competing with all of the other fishermen. Knowing where to fish is easier said than done. The A’s found a way to do this and Moneyball tops my list of the books that should be required reading for anyone that ever wanted a job in
business.
Now, does it strike you as odd that Moneyball is the kind of
book that a father recommends to his 30-something year old daughter? Well, firstly, you must know my father. He recommends books all the time because he reads
– a lot. Like, eight books at a time. He is a compulsive book buyer – he literally can’t go in to or through an airport without coming away with at least two
books from whatever crappy bookstore he can find there. As I type this, I’m positive he’s giving himself a hernia carting his tomes around like an albatross in his leather briefcase. He’s the only guy I know who buys e-books
on his Kindle and also, buys them in hard cover so that he can have both the physical and digital copies. However, my Dad’s literary tastes and mine don’t always run parallel. He likes spy novels and encyclopedic histories about World
War II. I like fiction written by women (something my father does not read). Think about it – when was
the last time any man that you know – your father, brother, husband, friend read a book by a female author? Maybe Annie Proulx? Maybe PD James back in the
day because they didn’t know she was a woman? Even music – my husband has maybe 1,500 songs on his iPhone and I’ll bet there are less than 100 by women.
Dad thought I would like “Moneyball” because it was about a
subject that we had in common. You see, my Dad used to teach me how to keep the box score of baseball games when I was a little girl. I learned what a 6-4-3 double play was, I marked large “K’s” on the sheet for strike outs, I could
tell you that the shortstop was number 6. I wanted to know how to mark a specific error so that it would be correct. So, the wonderful world that is baseball stats became a language that my father and I could share. I could ask
him for the umpteenth time how to calculate Slugging percentage and he would patiently walk me through it again and again. Now, as a teenage girl, did I have an innate love of baseball? A sport I didn’t play and a game that I didn’t
really relate to? No. I watched those Montreal Expos games on French CBC with my box score sheet and a #2 pencil in hand because it was a means to an end – the end being something highly valuable: 2-3 hours of uninterrupted time with my Dad. I loved, and still love, watching sports with him. I even read David Cone’s biography because my father said that it was a good story – even if he did pitch his perfect game against the Expos.
So, Moneyball, was like apple pie for me; a piece of
nostalgia from my childhood, and highly relevant to my current life in business. Indeed, it was even more than those things. I’m fascinated with Michael Lewis’ writing because he has a skill that I find incredibly powerful yet rare –
he takes complicated subjects and makes them simple. Most of the people I know in business, academia, or communications of any kind place a premium on making
simple things sound complicated. People spit things into the “Jargonator” and out comes dribble that only sounds smart and compelling. I’m Exhibit “A”. My prized possession in college was my thesaurus. I used it to take the ill-formed
ideas in my essays and replace them with multi-syllable words and run-on sentences in an attempt to mask the fact that I didn’t have the first clue what I was talking about. Ahhhhh, but I was handsomely rewarded with many A’s for papers that were long on pretense and short on substance. Why? Because pretense is valued in our society – we’re all so afraid of looking stupid that we put up with a lot of obscure thoughts. I can’t tell you the number of times in a day
that we use three-letter acronyms at work and no one has the guts to ask what they actually stand for – it’s assumed that if it’s complicated or unclear, it must be profound in some way. It’s taken me a long time to figure out that it takes
a much smarter mind to simplify things than it does to complicate them.
Whether Lewis’ subject is sports strategy or, more recently,
the global financial meltdown, he tells it like the yarn an Irishman would tell you in a Dublin pub over several pints of Guinness. Because Lewis knows one fundamental truth – that all subjects, all stories, all problems are ultimately
stories about people. People are at the core of every subject and it is the personal stories and decisions of people that create the world around us. Focus on what motivates people to do things, to take action and you can boil down the
most complex topic to its essence.
Apparently, Lewis has written two riveting books about
mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps and how the world’s economies are collapsing. I wouldn’t know because I haven’t read “The Big Short” or “Boomerang”
yet. I’ve recently become a Mom so I’ve read exactly one book in the past seven months. However, I have both books on hold at my local library because everything I’ve heard says that these two books are the best accounts to-date
on the housing/financial crisis in the US, and why European countries like Iceland, Ireland, and Greece are going belly up faster than the IMF and Angela Merkel can bail them out. It’s as though Michael Lewis is an anthropologist looking down on baseball, on Wall St., or on European banks and telling us, the foreigner, what is happening in these distant lands and cultures. What does their language mean? How do the people within these closed communities relate
to one another? What do they value? At their heart, Moneyball and Michael Lewis’ writings about the financial crisis ask the same question, “What do we value?
Are we placing value on the right things?” Whether it’s a baseball scout using new statistics to get a deal on a player in the minor leagues or Lehman Brothers signaling to the world that mortgage-backed securities were the next
great money maker – often the notion of “what is valuable” is riddled with false assumptions that we never get around to questioning.
In short, I’m learning that what is truly valuable are those
things that are simple, so boring and overlooked that we become blind to them –our On Base Percentage.
So, I’ve started a blog. Not with any particular audience in
mind – mostly, for myself. Simply to make some time for introspection. The act of writing helps me sort through what to value. Thanks Michael Lewis and Dad for the inspiration.