he gone.

With gambling now legal in IL, i thought I'd start a MLB only gambling thread. I send my picks out to a group of guys everyday on a text thread, I figure might as well send them here too. (obvious disclaimer, don't take my advice, or do so at your own peril) The way i underwrite my picks is via a number of factors, but mostly focused on things like groundball vs. fly ball, exit velocities, xWoba, etc. etc. It's very stats driven. I've been hitting at a nice clip this year, so figure why not share. I'll try and update daily. Feel free to share your angles and thoughts! Tonights Games: Padres/Angels - Heaney has pretty bad splits, don't love what Clevinger has done, walking guys, settled down of late. Angels not hitting of late, near the bottom. Staying away from Clevinger tonight, but really liking the Padres TT. Angels bullpen bad too. Padres Over 4.5TT Passing on other games, considered the Blue Jays ML - they haven't been hitting well of late, but do very well against Lefties. Sox also hit lefties well. I think we should put some runs on the board tonight, but I don't like chasing the Sox. Maybe game over. But passing there too, just keeping the money in the pocket.

Also in regards to stocks, tech in particular I read something from one of my favorite investors - Chamath Palihapitiya "Some people scratch their heads when they see valuations of stocks justified by 2024E or 2025E numbers. Their instinctive reaction is to be dismissive but that's lazy thinking. Her's a secret hiding in plain sight .. Everything in the public markets are valued against a "risk free rate". This risk-free rate is the safest way to make money and is what the government pays you via US bonds or other securities that have "zero default risk". This is in quotes for a reason. When you buy something (a stock, a bond, a house) you are implicitly or explicity deciding to sign up for the return that it will give you vs. the risk free rate which you could otherwise get. In 2000, when the 10-yr risk free rate was 6%, we had a top of the Tech Bubble. The bubble burst, in part, because you could get 6% from Uncle Sam. Many companies with hi flying stock prices back then had revenue growth but no near term cash flow. This drove analysts nuts. So at some point enough people said "Why buy these stocks when the US Government will pay me 6%" That became a better and better question. And when enough people asked this question they sold their stocks (bubble burst) and bought bonds. Now think about the similarities and differences with today. The similarities are, to some, that we are again focused on long term growth and no near term cash flow. The big difference though is that our risk free rate in 2020 is now 0.66% v 6% 20 years ago. Huge. If you sell an "expensive" stock today what do you do? Buy bonds? But they no longer give you near term cash flow. So for many it's better to own a stock (all stocks have an embedded option for future cash flow) v. a zero cash flow bond today with zero option value in the future. But what about "zero default risk" Isn't that worth something? In part, the Fed's policies have eroded people's trust that it is worth anything. It's more likely that AAPL or AMZN are zero default risk today than the USG. When you put all this together it creates two trends: people become open to looking further in the future for a company to deliver cash flows - hence pricing stocks on 2024/25 models today v. when rates were 6% (those models were 2-3 years max). 2. Investors, frustrated wtih a worthless risk free rate become increasingly biased to equities. All of this can change quickly, especially if rates rise but we've just been told by the Fed that they will be more permissive with low rates for the time being. Summary: Risk free rates are important. Currently they are zero. As rates go down, people tend to model equity returns over a LONGER periods of time. As rates go up, people tend to model equity returns over a shorter period of time. Because of this, investors will likely own equities by justifying them using 2/4/5+ year models" Personally I think PE ratios are insane, but people want to put their money somewhere. Sitting in the banks or in bonds doesn't return anything. As much as I don't want my personal portfolio to be skewed as heavily into stocks, I think there is truth to what he says. Maybe not in RDFN (haha), but in AMZN. I've been doing it for some time, but I don't keep much of a bank balance at all, i basically just dollar cost average my paycheck into AMZN. It's about as risk free as you'll get in the market nowadays and for the foreseeable future. Now did i think it'd return 100%+ over the last 3 years, not at all, But to Chamath's point I don't think that trend is going to slow anytime soon. Got to play the game to win the game.

A) regardless how these conversations go, I'm glad to have financial discussions going on this board. B) I will disagree, and as you said one of could be flat wrong, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle C) I don't think any company today will be the same as it is in 10 years. Companies continue to develop and innovate. I think that Redfin will do so as well. That's part of my bet. D) So their business plan of taking 3-4% commisssion instead of 5% may be what they're doing now, but I don't necessarily think that's the horse their riding to success E) I think it's insane to pay $25k on a $500k sale. I don't think the agent brings even close to that value. F) I think it still remains true, even for someone like SoxBadger, traffic is being driven to these websites at very high volume and I don't see that trend reversing. Brand recognition leads to brand loyalty. G) So now you say, who is going to own that market - and at this point it's Zillow and Redfin. And how do you monetize the traffic? And i think that's the key. My bet is monetizing an inefficient process. Right now it may be a point of the commission, but what is it 5 years from now? 10 years from now? As an investment i think it has all the keys -- an inefficient and costly industry, that has not really had much innovation for decades, which has traffic/captive market, and also has a new generation (millennials) who are purchasing their first home and/or upgrading their homes. My bet is the amount of young people who will see the value in saving $5k (1% on a $500k sale) or possibly more will continue to grow. And then the second part is Redfin innovating and building their business model.

Also, i'm not sure why Redfin is such a hot topic/button issue. Simply put the agent doesn't add as much value as they charge & the process is wildly inefficient. Technology will win.

It's frothy out there. As much as i think the market is due for a correction like this 5X over, there's powers that be that will keep this thing running. Also doesn't hurt that money is free for the foreseeable future. Will end up fueling another half decade of PE deals.

That's that TWTW. the will to win. Data wins. Sorry. "Sears has the reputation, it has the friendly people, they really have great customer service, I just don't believe Amazon, a website, can replace commerce." That's what you sound like. Find me a sector of business that has been digitized and goes back to the old school way. Digitization and efficiency comes through like a train, it's not slowing down.

That's the part I disagree with. Looks are driven by price/comps/pictures/house, not agent. Agents dont add the value that they charge. From the buyers perspective i think the norm is finding your house online via these sites and then telling your agent this is what i want. I have so many friends that all found their home via Zillow and Redfin, contacted their agent to set up a showing, and then bought. I think the idea of going to an agent blind and asking them to drive you around and look is declining each year. From the sellers perspective: you like an agent to set the comps, indication of the market, etc. However all the data is going through Zillow and Redfin. They can build comps as strong as anyone. For sale by owner and for sale by Redfin will morph into the same thing. Right now it's i guess ..."scary" to buy direct from owner, but that's because the process seems complicated. There will be easier processes created that take the pain points out, especially when Redfin is representing both sides but only taking 2-3%. Redfin will play a volume game. You'll lose some of the niceties of the process, but it's not as efficient as it can be. That's my guess at least.

in regards to mortgage rate. im saying the underwriting process is a complete joke. i was pre approved for a number, let's just say in that $700k-1mm range. I bought a house in the $275-315k range. I'm paying the same mortgage rate as friends who i very well know are in debt, have zero dollars to their name. the system is a sham. The risk on me defaulting against my friends are off the spectrum. But it doesn't really matter - these mortgage shops just want to get you in the door & then package your loan into a bundle with others to a bank, who then offload to the Fed. In regards to Redfin, look at Carvana. I'm saying that millennials will not care about an agent. they just wont. good agent vs. bad? meh. there's truth in there, but at same time I did 100% of the legwork on my own - i found the houses & then had my agent line up the showings. You can say the buyer doesn't pay ... but as you said it's baked in there via the seller. Also i'm not saying only virtually. i do think you can see most of it via a walk through via video, but then also coordinate showing in person via key in a lock box. Hell, you can have a narrated showing virtually. what I'm saying is there will be a changing of the guard. Going to open houses from 11am-2pm after church on Sundays is the past. There's certainly value to an agent, but 5% -- so let's call it $20k? hardly. my point is real estate is due for disruption from technology and millennials embrace technology. millennials are also finally getting to the age where assets are switching hands to them. Right now, real estate lobby's the government more than pharmaceuticals. they have outdated legislature in place because they're lining the pockets. it's the only thing keeping this thing from turning over. I also disagree with Redfin not being a lender. it's not that hard to get into that business. and the banks don't care at all. they just want to get them & bundle to sell off as well. these mortgage shops are sweatshops of underwriting. mortgages are a number to them on a warehouse line that needs to be sold off to pay down the warehouse line so they can open up room on that lending line. its a numbers game to them.

it doesn't take too much to see where RDFN will control the whole process from lending to making the whole process "by owner" but taking a smaller cut. RDFN and Zillow are the markets themselves. They're very close to being able to be the broker. I understand they're getting in the broker game too. But how far away are we from RDFN coordinating lock box keys, having RDFN provide video walk throughs, from RDFN creating safety measures to show the house without a broker, etc. RDFN has the infrastructure, the data, etc. No need to give 5% to an agent. Control the whole process from beginning to end. My take at least. Also i have a gripe with the whole lending process, and now the Fed owns 1/3rd of mortgages. I think it's quite ridiculous the way mortgage rates are calculated. its so boilerplate. the fact that my rate to buy a $200k house, $500k house, or a $800k house would be the same when the risk on each is completely different is asinine.

That actually may be a good topic since the finance thread has been pretty dry. Stocks. It's pretty damn frothy out there, but if people have any tips or insights, or recommendations and want to go into detail on their thesis... I have a hard time recommending many at this moment with confidence, but as long as Fed keeps rates at zero you're going to see stocks do well. RDFN - Redfin - when you think about Millennial's they're all entering the phase of owning homes, upgrading homes, etc. The real estate market is ripe for efficiency. Seems very outdated to have to show up in person, sign 1,000 documents, pay a real estate agent to show a home, etc. Back in the day a good real estate agent was very helpful because they set the market, they had the know of the houses going up, they had access to pictures, MLS, etc. etc. The network they built was key to the whole process. They held the data. Now think about it -- first thing we do is go search Zillow and Redfin to look at photos. they, like google, amazon, etc. gather all the info, the comps, etc. The agent will continue to die out, just like when i bought my home- what did my agent do? unlock the door? Paperwork was prepared by them, but via computers & desk jobs, and docusign you can complete the whole process and save clients money. I see this as a nice long term play. I bought at like $28 or something, but i can see this thing hitting $100+. We're not going backwards, so its really just a question of if RDFN can continue to hold market share. BIGC - I'll say i don't know nearly enough about this stock. But I will say that Chamath Palihapitya gave his blessing on it. I will keep my eye on it and want to learn more. it took a jump from like $70 to $120 and back to $100 in the last few days. Need to research before jumping in. USCR - this is another one of my favorites. It's staring me right in the face and think it's going to explode post-election. Both sides will want to get people back to work. Infrastructure has and will continue to be a very friendly topic via both party lines. USCR continues to be profitable now and I think the uptick of work via government stimulus will be enormous as they try and get people back to work. Sitting at $27 now, very easily can be a $75 stock in 2-4 years AMZN - no need to say anything here. A few years ago i bought this to serve as my bank balance instead of holding in banks. AMZN isn't going anywhere anytime soon. They're the Sears of the last generation. Have a decade+ of run-up ahead. SQ - this was my number one holding pre-pandemic, and then i sold off 70% of my shares .... at $70. It's now at $160. yikes. I'm not sure I can recommend at $160, but i really do think long term that Jack Dorsey gets it. He's doing fractional share purchasing, hes enabling bitcoin purchases, he's doing lending to small businesses, he's got his product in how many small businesses (which is what led me to sell during pandemic). The product is slick - great user interface. simple. the younger generation prefers it to venmo, paypal, etc. the boosts are great ... i use it every week. 10% off groceries when the bill is $75 or more .... just for using the cash app card as my debit card. it's free $7.50 each time. Simply put I love Square and kick myself for letting the pandemic get in the way of my long term goals/outlook. I ultimately think Jack will look to enable friction less bitcoin purchasing once the price goes up and then stabilizes. they have all the tools, the wallet, the ability, the small business, it's just flipping the switch to where they handle the backroom stuff. this company has the ability to be the "new bank" .... it may sound crazy. but this is my most bullish stock over the next 10 years. CDE - Coeur mining -- gold/silver miner. poorly run out of chicago. they have 4-5 good mines and just one stinker up in Canada that has ravaged their balance sheet and cash flow statement. but if you believe in gold and silver long term, these guys are ripe for the picking. their idled mine will take about 1.5 years to get going, once that thing is running, and if it coincides with $3,000 gold and $50 silver? watch out. this is the type of stock that can go 5X. However that being said, they've been circling the drain for better half of last 5 years. MOS - Mosaic - safe stock. fertilizer for crops. its not going anywhere. trading low because of a poor last year, this year will be good. if youre looking for a safe return. i like them. SIX - SixFlags - simply put they have a nice balance sheet and can continue to ride out the pandemic. As long as you believe that things will go back to normal soon enough then they should be a nice buy. they have a good cash balance to ride out 2020 and 2021. CCL - it follows the same logic. Carnival prints money via their system of paying foreigners like $5 a day for work, dumping waste into the ocean, etc. i personally hate cruises, but people love them and they print money. i personally chose carnival because they're the Walmart version of cruises. something like a Royal Caribbean or Virgin focus on higher price points and that's awesome too, think they'll perform well, but their clientele in my opinion are more likely to be slower to return to cruises. I think the walmart crowd may jump right back in for a cheap vacation and buffets. BYD/MGM - both are casino stocks - Boyd Gaming and MGM. Sports gambling and casinos aren't going anywhere. States are strapped for money and casinos provide that. Both have cleaner balance sheets than some of the over leveraged casino stocks PENN - which leads me to PENN, super overvalued right now, or is it? Same concept, but they have a leverage balance sheet and are trading super well because of Dave Portnoy. I shared my thesis with a co-worker a while back and he bought at $4 during the downturn ... sold at $14. it's not $56..... yikes. I bought in mid-20's a while ago and just keep holding. Say what you will on barstool, but it's inevitable that it'll continue to grow. you look at the athletes that are 18, 20, 22 years old. They grew up with barstool. what once was a hard interview to get with these personalities, they now get on the daily. it's an increasingly social aspect to sports with social media. barstool owns that like fox, nbc, espn cannot. so same logic as the casino stocks, but i think you tie in barstool and the media aspect to it? podcasts, twitch, etc. they do it, and do it well. i can see a scenario where penn, almost like tesla being a car company now .... fast forward and tesla to me is going to be more than a car company. i think penn has the chance, if executed well to be a media company/entertainment company that really explodes. PINS - pinterest - simply put they are data company. the drive business to companies like wayfair. young people and technology aren't going away. pinterest hasn't done the best job yet at capitalizing and making revenue as much as they should, but if they figure it out, can take off. CRLBF - Cresco Labs - a bit of a dart at the wall. following same logic - weed stocks arent going away. states are broke, and more broke after the pandemic. weed will be legal nationally soon and we'll see what happens. maybe new entrants with pockets wash out these type of guys completely, but i think it's more likely you see consolidation and some of these stocks being acquired at a premium. So i'll ride it and see what happens. this probably has the biggest basket of outcomes. Feel free to critique or add your own thoughts.

Funny how it all works. I briefly thought about it at $400-500 this year, but the PE ratio on it was so hard for my brain to justify. The thing I tried to keep coming back to is that Tesla, although a car company, is not a car company in way at all. It's a battery company. It's an energy company. It's a technology company. I do think this valuation is crazy, but, hey what do i know, my wife bought a share at $450 or something ... she doesn't follow finance or anything to do with stocks ... we just simply rented a tesla once and she liked it so she bought a share. I advised her so far to sell at 800, 1500, 1800, 2000 ... and now what is it? 2200 if you take out the split? I will say I don't get how someone takes this entry point though. I've obviously been wrong as pionted out the sentence before, but with all the underlying fundamental issues in the economy, the fact I think Tesla will continue to do share offerings to raise capital while the going is good, and the risk involved with all their product lines? I can see holding Tesla long term now .... meaning, if or when it dips, buying and holding, but my entry point would be close to $250-300 ($1250-1500 pre split). I actually wouldn't be shocked at all if the price of a share of Tesla is the same in 2023 as it is today. Think there's more value in other stocks

We're all different people, so I won't keep going back and forth on this because i know it's not going to change anything. But i grew up in a family that kind of closely mirrors how you phrase/talk (as much as you can assume on a message board right?). If something is out of your control, just make the best of it that you can. Simply put the bad things always happen to the same people and good things always happen to the same people, when in reality, the same things are happening to everybody. Life is what you make of it.

You would not make a debate team. Are you saying his injury stealing a base is a cause and effect of his entire two year results? I mean ... I'm going with the angle then that he was one year more comfortable in US culture away from Cuba. in 2018 he missed his home cooking, but in 2019 he found out he really enjoyed Applebee's therefore his numbers exploded! Grasping at straws. Like i said i can respect the analytics, XBH, CS vs. stolen base %, etc. etc. But let's not go making assumptions. He's also super young - his progress isn't going to be linear at his age ... blaming 2018 or glorifying 2019 stats based on an event is all conjecture. Analytics won't support stolen bases and/or bunting into the empty side of a shift. I however disagree - not with the math. i get that math and trust it. I think that having that trick in the bag applies pressure that can't be necessarily calculated into the math. Just like pitchers have different comfort out of the stretch or not, i think having a guy that distracts and causes pickoff attempts can disrupt a pitchers rhythm and comfort. I also think having that threat also changes the defensive settings, sometimes taking them out of double play position. Likewise i think if more bunts were executed to a completely empty right side, enough to force an offense to shift back, then you may also have an advantage.

I'm poking holes in your theory. That's all. Your theory was injuries. I think stats, XBH, etc. + math is a better argument than sliding 50 times a year will kill the team.

then i think we should stop tagging up on fly balls. I think the risk reward there is too much if a slide is included.

And i bought season tickets at like 21-9 .... flush that $$ down the drain.

i love the "dont run, injuries" crowd. its so weak. listen i know people get banged up running -- jam fingers, tweak something, etc. ... how is it any different than running out of the box at sprint speed, or tagging up? or running after a fly ball in the gap? Hint, it's not. Now risk/reward? Maybe there's someting to that with the power we have, but at the same time, can you quantify what it does to the pitcher, the defense alignment, etc. if madrigal, tim, robert, etc are hitting the bases hard every time they get on? I'm pro running if you can't tell. Every 5 or so years the league's pendulum swings towards some new metric and they leave the last one in the dust. Me thinks you keep some of what used to work going. No reason to abandon running all together.

Fade a 2 into a 3 into a 5 around the sides, use those angled scissors to clean the fade. Scissors up top. Get the wife to clean up the back/neck. 15 mins every 2-3 weeks. Easy peasy. not to be mean, look at the people doing your hair - they're not brain surgeons.

yah, he should be down for service time. no reason to waste a year of vaughn when really there's no home. this year has been fun, but imagine a real year, 4 years from now when these guys are all in their prime, with fans packing the park every night. only fleeting thought would be something like moncada in RF and vaughn at 3B. but that really is killing your defense and unnecessary.

My buddy's dad was really into Tesla's at the outset - I forget when Tesla's came out, but he had himself on the waiting list for the first model - kind of a fan boy I guess of the concept. He ended up buying $25,000 at $40 a share.... Sold at $80. Has to be a regret.

Have you stopped to think maybe it's the way you phrase things? It's okay to be skeptical and change your mind and go back and forth, etc. etc. as information comes in. I've done that several times changing my mind. But to gripe about a haircut is pretty childish. Buy some scissors, find a mirror, watch a YouTube video and have a day. I've cut my hair my whole life, never been to a barber - it's really not difficult to do.

I'm just going to respond so i can make note of this one. time stamp if you will. Rodon has nasty stuff. He will succeed if health allows.

Seems like a mixed bag of response. Twitter is a dumpster fire of people saying we shoulda made trades. At the end of the day I go back to a few principles.... if we were going to trade for an impact player we were going to give up something of value (unless you acquired Clevinger for free like the Padres haha), so who was this board willing to give up? Kopech at a depressed value? Rodon at almost no value? Dunning who probably has a very nice floor and is controllable? Vaughn? Madrigal? Like who were we trading? I find it hard to say let's give up a piece and acquire Lynn for example. You then do what? go to the ALCS this year? Lose? Win? Go to the World Series? Play in a bubble in Texas or Milwaukee with no fans in a werid world series and lose? hey, you actually won it? You go to the bar -- wait, no scratch taht, you sit at home and watch the game and celebrate a game with no fans in a fake season? You do that and then watch Kopech go throw darts for 4 years on another team while Lance Lynn is gone after next? Like what was the upside here? For Lance Lynn? Come on, he was available for 3 years and 30 million just the offseason before this. these aren't guys who change your franchise... the names out there outside of clevinger are names like quintana who aren't worth the price of your top guys. You don't make that move in 2020, hell I might not even make it in 2021. No reason to peak early -- theres a long game here. Sit back and wait. there's going to be a bunch of cheap owners hurting this offseason looking to unload contracts. this is the type of offseason you can probably add an Arenado type contract to the books for absolutely no talent. You can go sign Bauer. You can go do a lot of things .... let's see a bit more of what we have in guys and THEN you go out and get the big names. in my opinion there was one total guy worth going after this whole trade deadline - and that was clevinger. outside of that, let's see what we have in the offseason.

I don't disagree that maybe that's his best role with the Sox, I also don't think it's going to be his role in the future. He'll be a starter on another team. Hell, I think it's most likely that Rodon is the newest version of Avi Garcia who will go find success elsewhere. Just doesn't seem like it's in the cards for the Sox. Speaking of which, off topic, I really wanted the Sox to explore going after Avi, basically you get him on a 1 yr, $10mm conract for next year. He would've solved the RF hole for a short 1.25 year solution at a reasonable price.(meaning trade for him)

I think Sox fans have jumped the shark a bit ... a) dunning is fine, but its two starts - he's an option in a rotation of many options b) rodon is still filthy. now is he what his potential is? no. but we're all just tired of his injuries and coming down on him too tough c) cease is doing what any young pitcher will do during his first real season - ups and downs. don't forget giolito did that too. the talent is there. d) gio, reynaldo, etc. are all very viable options. Teams like the braves, mets, cubs, hell, almost every team would love to have those as option 6 and 7 e) we still have kopech next year. Option 8. f) plus stiever and crochet. option 9 & 10. Out of 10 options you need to find 2 ACE's, 2 strong guys, and 2 guys who get a job done. Giolito is one Ace. Cease/Kopech are your best options to be the other one. Keuchel, Dunning can be your two strong guys. Leaving Stiever, Crochet, Rodon, + likely new FA next year to be "guy who can get a job done". Just sit back, relax and strap it down. this season does not matter. be happy there are extended playoffs this year and that they get to (kind of) learn from them. Seeing as there are no fans, maybe they won't learn haha, but be happy we're going to the playoffs. i'd put our rotation next to anybody 1-6 and be okay with it No need to go out and acquire people, let your own talent marinade for a year or two. Then focus on the money saved to go out and lock up your own talent. We don't need to be the Cubs who traded away Eloy, Torres, Cease, Soler, etc. yet.