Okay, I'll do it. Send over the paperwork.

Develop and manage a talented staff (developers, analysts, and consultants)

So what would a Supervisory Nerd make?

Not quite qualified to do that, but you guys hiring interns? I'm at school at Kellogg and would love to be involved with baseball in any way.

I thought anyone who actually met tango IRL had to go into witness protection.

Consider this job as an opportunity for dialogue and education.

I thought Tango was in black ops for NSA. How is it he isn't already a long-time staff member of some organization?

Even if I was a GM who disagreed with him most of the time, I'd hire him to improve my decision making and to keep him from other teams.

So we'll finally get to know Tango's real name.

Tango, if you're reading this, if the Cubs under your watch win the World Series and you do anything more than just get coffee for Theo drinks will be on me whenever I see you.

So you're employed, that's the good side. The bad side is now you'll have me pointing all the stupid moves your business is making.

I hear Steve Bartman is available.

Edit: wrong thread

So we'll finally get to know Tango's real name.

I doubt it. Since he's just consulting I'm guessing he's working from home and will rarely be in Chicago. Will probably just speak to you on the speaker phone like Charlie did to his Angeles.

I'm sorry, but "work flows"? "Data flow diagrams"? Aren't these just big words losing teams use to make themselves feel smart?

I'm fired, aren't I.

He forgot to add synergy and leverage.

I have no real qualifications other then I love baseball is that enough to get hired?

I have no real qualifications other then I love baseball is that enough to get hired?

For a baseball job? I'm pretty sure that you have to overqualified, willing to work sweatshop hours, AND related to the boss by blood.

So we'll finally get to know Tango's real name.

Turns out he's Jack Morris.

Turns out he's Jack Morris

.

Nah, he has to be someone suspended or banned from baseball..Neifi Perez?...Pete Rose?...Is Marge Schott still alive?

My condolences.

So I'm not clear here...

Is this a 'Director' position or an 'Analyst' position --- because the next time I meet a 'Director' who does actual 'analysis' it would be the first.

So I'm not clear here...

Is this a 'Director' position or an 'Analyst' position --- because the next time I meet a 'Director' who does actual 'analysis' it would be the first.

It's a weird posting. They say they want someone to develop and manage a staff, run the budget, interact with the senior management team, etc., but then they require:

Demonstrated expertise with R, STATA, SPSS, SAS, or similar software.
Demonstrated expertise with SQL Server, Microsoft Access, My SQL, Oracle, database administration/structuring, data warehousing and data modeling.
Knowledge and demonstrated ability in the areas of programming, software-coding, ETL, and/or machine learning techniques.

Those are rarely the same people. You want you hardcore quant/programming skills from your analysts. You wan't your director to direct and interpret the analysis, have managerial skills, and be able to translate between the quants and the top management. There's zero reason the director needs to know how to code or build models, as long as he/she can interpret the output properly.

Is it hits divided by at-bats, or at-bats divided by hits? Anyway, I require a standing town car and sixteen weeks paid vacation.

Huh, I think I actually am qualified for this (ETL aside, and which is not to say an optimal hire).

Anyway, I'm with snapper.

Those are rarely the same people. You want you hardcore quant/programming skills from your analysts. You wan't your director to direct and interpret the analysis, have managerial skills, and be able to translate between the quants and the top management. There's zero reason the director needs to know how to code or build models, as long as he/she can interpret the output properly.

Right - it's helpful, in many cases, even necessary to have some basic understanding of db architecture - I can't count the number of times I've seen something flop miserably because loads of data get dumped on a dba and s/he is just left to guess at how to structure it.

You rarely get a 'developer' proficient in multiple disciplines is also critical -- I mean, a SQL whiz also proficient in semantic data analysis/mining? Great... let me know when you find one of those... Unless they're paying an obscene salary - which seems unlikely - I see several developers here. Otherwise, you're gonna get a tinkerer/jack of all trades/master of none. What's more - even if you found a single person with expertise in all things, I think you're wasting such a person's talents having him or her write code to begin with. Of course - the data sets here aren't that large (relatively speaking) so maybe you can get by with a tinkerer.

Still, this is one thing that drives me nuts on a daily basis... too many people at decision making levels have this bad idea that 'technology is technology' - so when you try to make clear that a program or project requires some multi-discipline work, eyes glaze over and you can't get a champion in a critical area that bombs the whole thing.

Strange, because I would have assumed that all clubs, especially Theo's Cubs, would already have these positions created and filled. Unless Tango has been tapped to start his own intra-organisational counter-ops statistical team. Which would be awesome and is what I choose to believe.

It does seem like they're trying to do it on the cheap, though, and combine the analyst's and manager's jobs. It would take a very special individual to do both of those jobs well.

Congrats, Tango. I'm glad to see my season ticket money going to a worthwhile effort. I hope you're part of something historic. Shouldn't you now change your name to TangoCub?

#19 got a good chuckle out of me. Well done.

Sigh... back in the 90's I would've been all over this - fully qualified and would have a blast but with 3 kids and living in Thunder Bay it just wouldn't make sense (not to mention the visa issues which I went through back in 92 when I tried for a job with Stats Inc. - hours on the phone with no luck getting it) unless I could work from home which I somehow doubt would be feasible. Price of growing up.

Sigh... back in the 90's I would've been all over this - fully qualified and would have a blast but with 3 kids and living in Thunder Bay it just wouldn't make sense (not to mention the visa issues which I went through back in 92 when I tried for a job with Stats Inc. - hours on the phone with no luck getting it) unless I could work from home which I somehow doubt would be feasible. Price of growing up.

Don't worry, the pay's probably terrible.

I'm not seeing anything about snark and animated gifs.

For most baseball teams, this job winds up being very hands-on because the budget doesn't permit hiring a lot of staff; the director ends up doing a lot of the work.

-- MWE

For most baseball teams, this job winds up being very hands-on because the budget doesn't permit hiring a lot of staff; the director ends up doing a lot of the work.

-- MWE

You mean they're cheap, right? Because a MLB payroll (even Miami's) should leave room to hire lots of analysts.

It's really a waste to have a $150-200K Director (making up numbers, but anyone good is going to cost) doing analyst work when there are scads of bright 20-somethings who'll work like dogs for $40K in order to get an MLB gig.

#29 I suspect they're cheap because there's no real buy in as to the value of the work. Most of what I've read from the guys doing this work for teams talks about how they're rarely taken seriously.

I think things have changed a little in recent years but it's still likely a pretty frustrating job.

#29 I suspect they're cheap because there's no real buy in as to the value of the work. Most of what I've read from the guys doing this work for teams talks about how they're rarely taken seriously.

I think things have changed a little in recent years but it's still likely a pretty frustrating job.

Sounds pretty typical of corporate America. Spend enough to make it wasteful, but not enough to get real results.

It's really a waste to have a $150-200K Director (making up numbers, but anyone good is going to cost) doing analyst work when there are scads of bright 20-somethings who'll work like dogs for $40K in order to get an MLB gig.


I'm thinking the director would make 40k and his assistants would be unpaid interns if he got any at all.

28. Mike Emeigh Posted: January 29, 2013 at 01:40 PM (#4357450)
For most baseball teams, this job winds up being very hands-on because the budget doesn't permit hiring a lot of staff; the director ends up doing a lot of the work.

-- MWE

That just seems awfully penny-wise and pound foolish...

I mean, replace your 3-4-5 million MR with a couple of NRIs or your guaranteed 1.5 mil 5th OF with a AAAA guy and even with a very generous salary and full benefits, you could have your individual devs under a director working appropriately.

I'm thinking the director would make 40k and his assistants would be unpaid interns if he got any at all.

With the skillset they're asking for!?!? Expert in analytics, stats, programming, and managerial ability, with an advanced degree?

$150-200K was already a discount for it being MLB. That guy makes $300-400K easy working in finance.

Thank you for submitting your resume. Our management team is reviewing your qualifications and will contact you if there is a match with our current open positions.

We appreciate your interest in Chicago Cubs Baseball Club, LLC. and wish you the best of luck in your job search.

For most baseball teams, this job winds up being very hands-on because the budget doesn't permit hiring a lot of staff; the director ends up doing a lot of the work.

"Develop and manage a talented staff (developers, analysts, and consultants)" seems to me to imply a staff of at least four, presuming the consultants aren't actually on staff. Of course, that may be intentional - applicants are supposed to think they'll have a sizable staff under them, when it's really just some unpaid college students.

With the skillset they're asking for!?!? Expert in analytics, stats, programming, and managerial ability, with an advanced degree?

$150-200K was already a discount for it being MLB. That guy makes $300-400K easy working in finance.

Yes but this is sports and not finance. The sports world gets young guys who could be making a ton of money elsewhere but work in sports for peanuts instead all the time. You don't really need to pay anyone when half your pool of applicants will do the work for peanuts.

With the skillset they're asking for!?!? Expert in analytics, stats, programming, and managerial ability, with an advanced degree?

$150-200K was already a discount for it being MLB. That guy makes $300-400K easy working in finance.

Agreed that the 150-200 is way too high. There isn't even much value add to the job, and it reports to the Assistant GM. Finance guys write programs and algos that make banks wheelbarrows full of money. The difference between that, and clueing in an Assistant GM to the virtues of the Jeremy Giambis and Ken Phelpses and Franklin Gutierrzes of the world is, one assumes, self-evident.

It's really a waste to have a $150-200K Director (making up numbers, but anyone good is going to cost) doing analyst work when there are scads of bright 20-somethings who'll work like dogs for $40K in order to get an MLB gig.

I'm 31 and meet all of the qualifications, though I'm probably a bit stronger on the analytical stuff and less so on the programming side. I make significantly less than $150k now, but also significantly more than $40k; I would take a big pay cut to get this job for sure. It would be a labor of love.

Interesting that people working in a baseball front office are routinely expected to take less than market value in salary because of the psychic benefit of working for a baseball team, but god forbid that a baseball owner be willing to lose money on his team because of the psychic benefit of owning a baseball team.

If I didn't have some of my specific commitments in terms of kids and such, I would apply as well - MLB should pay low... there's a lot of us out there.

"Develop and manage a talented staff (developers, analysts, and consultants)" seems to me to imply a staff of at least four, presuming the consultants aren't actually on staff. Of course, that may be intentional - applicants are supposed to think they'll have a sizable staff under them, when it's really just some unpaid college students.

Again, more penny-wise and pound foolish...

Considering your data needs are going to change over time, you put yourself in a never-ending mode of 'chasing it' because rather than bringing on a skilled, experienced dba --- who understands from a practical level the importance of designing to grow and change (together with good direction and requirements the possibilities for growth and change), you end up with a novice who builds like it was... well... what s/he has probably been doing in school: creating a deliverable that will be done and done, never to be touched again (and from an intern's perspective, that's actually correct, considering this isn't an intern with an hope of a full-time dba position post-internship...)

If I didn't have some of my specific commitments in terms of kids and such, I would apply as well - MLB should pay low... there's a lot of us out there.

But that's the other thing - and why I wouldn't want to go complete 'interns and peanuts'... Sure, leverage the market - you're going to get a lot of applicants that willing to work below 'market rate' per the skill sets.

However, set aside the relative peanuts in regards to what it costs the organization to actually have a couple of real, full-time, with-benefits positions on the staff and in a very short amount of time -- your R&D team is running circles around everyone else because you've actually got an infrastructure, rather than a one-off toy.

Would it be worth it? Well, again - the cost to do it right is less than it costs to give an NRI a ticket/roster spot north. What's it worth to have a system that give you a leg-up on deciding better than everyone else which NRIs to hand out each winter?

I'm 31 and meet all of the qualifications, though I'm probably a bit stronger on the analytical stuff and less so on the programming side. I make significantly less than $150k now, but also significantly more than $40k; I would take a big pay cut to get this job for sure. It would be a labor of love.

Do you have experience managing a team of analysts, and presenting/interpreting data/analysis for very senior management (like CFOs, CEOs, etc)?

Because that's where the job gets tricky to fill. Yes, you can get good analysts for $100K, but most of them have neither the ability or the inclination to spend half their lives making powerpoint presentations, and explaining their work to people who are largely ignorant of analytics.

Good analysts and modelers want to analyze and model. They tend to be introverts by nature, and don't want to "get their head out of the spreadsheets." You need someone to manage them who has enough analytic chops to direct/interpret the results, but can also translate for the top management, who will usualy have zero analytics background. Those people are relatively rare, and tend to be very well paid.

But that's the other thing - and why I wouldn't want to go complete 'interns and peanuts'... Sure, leverage the market - you're going to get a lot of applicants that willing to work below 'market rate' per the skill sets.

However, set aside the relative peanuts in regards to what it costs the organization to actually have a couple of real, full-time, with-benefits positions on the staff and in a very short amount of time -- your R&D team is running circles around everyone else because you've actually got an infrastructure, rather than a one-off toy.

Would it be worth it? Well, again - the cost to do it right is less than it costs to give an NRI a ticket/roster spot north. What's it worth to have a system that give you a leg-up on deciding better than everyone else which NRIs to hand out each winter?

Exactly. We're talking maybe $1M for a full team of 5, including office space, computers, software, etc. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.

Do you have experience managing a team of analysts, and presenting/interpreting data/analysis for very senior management (like CFOs, CEOs, etc)?

I have managed projects involving teams of analysts, if not managing them directly, and I've presented on fairly involved analytical projects to the CEO and other non-analytical SVPs in my company of ~350 people many times (as well as to senior managers of my comapny's clients). This is not to say I'm the perfect candidate or something, but that's exactly what a big part of my job is now.

All that said, this would be a truly unique experience. I'd do it for a lot less than I'd do basically anything else.

All that said, this would be a truly unique experience. I'd do it for a lot less than I'd do basically anything else.

But that's thing -- to do this right, you want a repeatable, scalable, reusable system and infrastructure... in order to get that right, you don't want to fill the opening at the Director level or even dev/analysis staff below with a bunch of people solely in it "for the experience"... I think it's absolutely fair to say you can still get people below 'market rate' solely because there would certainly be a level of interest in this work that doesn't apply in other fields. However, you need to structure it such that you're not dealing with a revolving door of people that are just gone once the internship is done or they've had enough of the 'experience' and want to make enough money to actually support a family.

I wouldn't want to structure this silo in a way that I'm constantly running through people that would enjoy the short-term (6-10-18 month) 'experience'... I would want to structure positions to be true, professional career paths - and not just those that end in "I'm gonna be a GM someday!"

There are costs for turnover, training, etc -- why bake them in as sunk costs just so you can get away with $10-20-whateverK on the individual compensation for the role.

Analytics people are paid what they are paid because (a) the perceived value-add is enormous and (b) there's a perceived scarcity of talent. I don't believe that either of these - especially the latter - are true in fact (I think that the reason there's a perceived shortage of talent is the heavy emphasis on tool knowledge over anaytical skills).

In sports, I think that if anything the value-add is smaller and there's far more analytics talent out there than in the other industries, thus sports teams will not be willing to pay as much. As far as they are concerned they aren't competing with the financial industries and the like for talent - there are still more people who want to work for sports teams than there are jobs.

-- MWE

I have managed projects involving teams of analysts, if not managing them directly, and I've presented on fairly involved analytical projects to the CEO and other non-analytical SVPs in my company of ~350 people many times (as well as to senior managers of my comapny's clients). This is not to say I'm the perfect candidate or something, but that's exactly what a big part of my job is now.

All that said, this would be a truly unique experience. I'd do it for a lot less than I'd do basically anything else.


Then you are worth, and should expect, a sizeable paycheck, even from the Cubs.

But that's thing -- to do this right, you want a repeatable, scalable, reusable system and infrastructure... in order to get that right, you don't want to fill the opening at the Director level or even dev/analysis staff below with a bunch of people solely in it "for the experience"... I think it's absolutely fair to say you can still get people below 'market rate' solely because there would certainly be a level of interest in this work that doesn't apply in other fields. However, you need to structure it such that you're not dealing with a revolving door of people that are just gone once the internship is done or they've had enough of the 'experience' and want to make enough money to actually support a family.

I wouldn't want to structure this silo in a way that I'm constantly running through people that would enjoy the short-term (6-10-18 month) 'experience'... I would want to structure positions to be true, professional career paths - and not just those that end in "I'm gonna be a GM someday!"

There are costs for turnover, training, etc -- why bake them in as sunk costs just so you can get away with $10-20-whateverK on the individual compensation for the role.

Agree completely.

The other thing is you want this analytics director to be able/willing to stand up in a meeting and say "That seven-year contract Jed wants to offer to Alfonso Soriano (pt.2) is a horrible idea. We've run the studies on player aging for his skill type (present cogent summary), and he's likely to be a major albatross by year 4."

A guy who's just happy to be in MLB isn't going to take that stand, and risk his job. I want a guy who is equally willing to go back to his old industry if his opinions aren't respected.