Zack Scott

And it's very easy to be humbled, but it's important to always just keep that in mind.

You don't want it to paralyze you.

So it's this balancing act of you want to be able to move

make decisions confidently, knowing that some percentage of them are going to fail.

So you can't get to a place where you're so afraid of that you don't know something or you're missing something, you're doing something wrong, that you get paralyzed by it.

And so it was finding that sweet spot, which I think Theo's case, he was really good at that.

Well, I think with the challenge that's happened lately is you do have all these really useful tools that come from your analytics department.

Using an example of one of them, it's like an asset value model, right?

Putting dollar values on players.

And that's really helpful as a framework to help you make decisions, really to prevent you from making the Pablo Sandoval type mistakes is something that's like, well, we value them at this.

And his market's now like twice as much as what we value him as, what are we doing?

And that was part of that conversation back then.

But I think the way people use these tools now is a little different.

But what I think happens is people get caught up in this sense of false precision with those things, because there's a distribution of potential outcomes around those numbers.

Those numbers are the median number, right?

So 50% chance that

guy's worth more than that 50% chance he's worth less than that.

So it's good to anchor yourself in something objective.

But to be to act like that's the end all be all is just not realistic.

And so I think when people start to be faced with decisions where the market is deviating from their internal valuation systems, it becomes really hard because you have a GM making a decision