18
2011
A Very Amusing Little Bottle Of Wine
An article by 
Unless your internet was down yesterday, it was nearly impossible for you to miss this post by Patrick Flood that was referenced on every saber-friendly Mets site or SNY Blog east of the Pacific Ocean yesterday.
Flood examined 46 multi-year contracts that were dished out to starting pitchers over the last ten years and concluded, “Don’t ever sign a free agent pitcher for more than one year.”
It was a well researched list complete with contract details, years, dollars, ten worst, ten best, all the ones in between, and even that oddly familiar statistic called WAR (What is it good for?).
But while the end-all was what many of us have known all along – that long term deals to starting pitchers are a very bad idea and rarely work out – I was puzzled by some other calculations he had in his post.
Somehow, he determined that some of these bad contracts cost the team more than the actual salary paid to the pitcher. I’m not sure if it’s new or if it’s been around since the Hoover years, but as an example here is what I’m referring to:
- Orlando Hernandez, Mets, two years, $12 million; 2.1 WAR, $5.71 per win
In that example he deduced that El Duque was worth $5.7MM per win.
- Oliver Perez, Mets, three years, $36 million; -2.9 WAR, -($12.41) per win
In this one Perez was worth negative $12.4MM per win.
I was stumped. How could Oliver Perez or any pitcher end up costing a team more than what the team paid for them? Doesn’t that fly against the law of physics, mathematics and even logic?
As if this whole Wins Above Replacement theory wasn’t confusing enough at least I think I kind of understand what the gist of it is. But this cost per win statistic seems pretty hard to wrap one’s brain around.
I noticed the first few comments on his thread went into it a little and Flood tried to explain, but…
Ben – I’m just a bit lost on your cost per win numbers. I can see what “X per win” means, but what does a negative “X per win” mean? It’s not like the pitcher paid the team for the win…
Patrick Flood – It’s really nonsense when it’s negative X per wins. It doesn’t mean anything. The idea is that, if a player is worth -1 WAR and the team paid him $48 million, he actually cost the team more than $48 million. He actually cost them $48 million plus whatever they might have made with one more win from a replacement level pitcher.
Ethan - Yeah, it should be titled something like cost per additional win above replacement. or cost per additional WAR. Furthermore, shouldn’t he be factoring in the cost of the replacement level player’s salary if he really wanted that to be accurate?
What?
Now I’m even more confused. Can anybody here explain this to me in 100,000 words or less?
About the Author: Joe DeCaro
I'm a lifelong Mets fan who loves writing and talking about the Amazins' 24/7. From the Miracle in 1969 to the magic of 1986, and even the near misses in '73 and '00, I've experienced it all - the highs and the lows. I started Mets Merized Online in 2005 to feed my addiction. Follow me on Twitter @metsmerized.
68 Comments + Add Comment
NL East Standings
| Team | W | L | Pct. | GB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braves | 25 | 18 | .581 | - |
| Nationals | 23 | 21 | .523 | 2.5 |
| Phillies | 21 | 23 | .477 | 4.5 |
| Mets | 17 | 24 | .415 | 7.0 |
| Marlins | 12 | 32 | .273 | 13.5 |
Last updated: 05/19/2013
Recent Comments
- Fonzie13: on Our Savior Has Arrived!: Don't forget Jeff Readon, Doobs. Reardon wasn't...
- Jay: on Valdespin Would Have Fit Right In With The 1986 Mets: thank you for you displaying your mathematical...
- Alex68: on Juan Lagares Belts First MLB Homer In Mets 4-3 Comeback Win: Huh, good to see we won.... Ok...
- DrDooby: on Juan Lagares Belts First MLB Homer In Mets 4-3 Comeback Win: If Gee keeps running out of gas...
- DrDooby: on Our Savior Has Arrived!: But wasn´t Izzy exactly one of those...
MMO Mets Chat
Need Tickets To The Mets Game?
Check Out These Great MLB Links!
Photographs From Gordon Donovan
5361 Fans Follow Us On Twitter!
1269 Fans Like Us On Facebook!
2341 Fans Read Our Feed!
1702 Fans Subscribe via Daily Email!
I’ll try. I think where he made his mistake is in his terminology. “$12 million; 2.1 WAR, $5.71 per win” should read “$12 million; 2.1 WAR, $5.71 per EXTRA win.”
My guess is if a player cost a team wins (and let’s be honest, we all know Perez did), then whatever was paid for the pitcher is entirely negative. I think.
Even though Perez won some games here, and maybe even pitched some decent ones, his overall body of work cost the Mets more wins than if a AAAA pitcher made those starts. The idea is that a AAAA player has a 0 WAR. So if Perez had a -3 WAR, then a fringe pitcher would have won 3 more games than Perez did in his span.
Hit enter too soon.
So if Perez had a -3 WAR, then a fringe pitcher would have won 3 more games than Perez did in his span, and if the Mets paid Perez $36 mil, the extra wins were worth negative $12 million.
Let me also say that this is a whole lot of baloney. I’m just trying to decipher this guy’s code. I get what he’s driving at, but he’s driving on the wrong side of road.
The example makes more sense in Duque’s case because of his positive WAR. I think we can all understand the premise that the Mets spent $5.71 mil per extra win they got from him over a fringe pitcher, not $5.71 mil per total win. But when it gets into negatives, his same formula or premise doesn’t work.
I think.
Yes, I can understand the point of the El Duque example, but what lost me was when it delved into the negative integers in the Perez example. I don’t believe you can quantify anything less than zero in baseball. Whether you go 0 for 10 or 0 for 100 you are still batting .000 and never less than that.
Well, if you really are an awful player, you are taking up a roster spot for a guy who is slightly bellow average.
but if anyone could produce a negative value, Perez could…..
What about the idea of using pitcher wins? Does that make sense sabermetrically?
That doesn’t even make sense to me. If you pitch 8 scoreless and lose 1-0 because the pen gave up runs that’s going to affect what the author is comparing.
Sabermetric guys use peripherals in their analysis of pitchers effectiveness and in any analysis park effects and defense should be factored in.
I’m curious how Lowe was pretty good with LA and has sucked with Atlanta. Is it Atlanta’s notoriously bad defense? He is a GB pitcher. Wouldn’t a GB pitcher suffer more from bad D than a flyball pitcher might?
Wouldn’t a flyball pitcher like Oliver Perez actually be worse than he appears pitching in Citi Field half his games? How about CC and Lee pitching in tiny band boxes?
Mostly I’m curious how the Cubs got two guys to pitch better in Wrigley than they had before.
I think I understand what you’re trying to say, but it seems to me that stat makes too many assumptions and isn’t really grounded in any solid mathematical foundation.
In this never-ending attempt to try and quantify everything in baseball, I think a lot of it becomes muddled and doesn’t achieve anything more than complicating the obvious.
Getting back to the actual stat, I thought he was trying to say that Oliver Perez was so bad, he had to be replaced and that replacement cost the Mets more money. But how did he determine that value of the replacement?
But I guess I was barking up the wrong tree.
I think with some of these stats you can find problems with how some of the results read.
But I read it the same way.
If a fringe player is worth an inherited 0 wins and Ollie P was worth -2.9. Then a fringe player could have won the Mets 3 more games.
AKA Ollie P’s contract was real bad
short answer? there are 2 costs.
1 is the actual $$ paid. 2nd is essentially recognizing the damage done (negative value) addedto that. In WAR terms, these means he was worth less than some random dude plucked out of AAA (kind of)
As he notes, the terminology is not really accurate for the negatives, but the concept is there.
Perhaps that was confusing. Maybe I should stop making spreadsheets while drunk and in black and white. Here’s the deal:
The Mets gave Oliver Perez $36 million dollars for three years. He gave the Mets a 3-9 record and a 6.81 ERA in 112.2 innings. It was a disaster, right? No one is arguing that. (Right? Right!?!)
Baseball-Reference says that Perez’s performance cost the Mets 2.9 wins — so between 2-3 wins — compared to what a replacement level player (think a Tim Redding type, who would pitch to a 5.20 ERA, that random guy every team has stashed in Triple-A) would have done in the same innings. They say he was -2.9 wins above (or, in this case, below) a replacement player.
So the idea is that, if the Mets had set the $36 million dollars on fire in the parking lot and used Tim Redding (or another replacement level pitcher who would play for the minimum salary) instead of Oliver Perez, they would have been better off. Because Oliver Perez didn’t just cost the Mets $36 million dollars. He was so bad that he cost them games that another bad-but-not-unspeakably-bad pitcher probably wins. And not winnings games, and having a worse record, costs a team money. Fewer people go to the games, buy fewer hot dogs, don’t pay for parking, etc. So Ollie actually cost the Mets more than $36 million.
Now forget about that for a second. We’ll come back, but forget about it for a second. The Mets paid Ollie $36 million, and he cost them 2.9 games. If you divide 36 million by negative 2.9, you get negative 12.41. That’s where the “negative $12.41 per win” comes from. The math works.
But as I said in the comments, and I think you guys are saying here, that’s nonsense. Dollars per win doesn’t make sense for negative numbers. If you see a negative number for dollars per win, it’s the same as zero. Perhaps I should have just put a zero for clarity instead.
Anyway, the contracts weren’t ranked by dollars per win anyways, so the dollars per win doesn’t affect the rankings. It was just a little extra bit of info for the people who wanted it.
Thanks for adding some clarity. I completely thought you were trying to quantify what it cost the Mets to replace Perez and couldn’t understand how you came up with that number.
I think without that info, it would have been more wide-reaching article and it would have been easier to understand your central point.
Sometimes information overload can work against ones ability to communicate a point which should always be made in the most efficient and simplest way possible especially if you want a broader reach.
Again thanks for explaining how you derived those figures, and I appreciate your taking the time to do so.
I’ve heard both actually. Some people liked the extra info, some people didn’t find it as useful. I agree with your point though. Sometimes it’s better to sacrifice accuracy for the sake of simplicity.
And how would you have responded if the Mets inked Tim Redding to a small deal and let Perez walk at the time? Don’t leap ahead now and second guess the move because i’m asking how you would have felt at that particular time.
“Oh well, Ollie was asking for too much” which is what I was saying when it looked like the Mets were going to let him walk.
I liked the Ollie signing at the time. And I was clearly wrong. I’ve learned a lot since then, and now I see how it was a bad idea.
“Chewbacca is a wookie from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor.”
Watch it, mister. This is a Simpsons reference board.
So you did like the Ollie signing after all, and I liked the Ollie signing at the time too and clearly i was wrong as well.
And what’s with the Chewbacca line? Is that supposed to be funny? Did you decide to spend extra time to include that like the extra time you took to figure out how much wins the Ollie signing could have cost the Mets? Or whatever useless point you were trying to make? How about using that time to see what kind of roster the Mets could build to contend this off season. I mean i know you saber guys like to come out with all kinds of allegedly witty and sarcastic references to go off topic when your findings are questioned.
At least all that inside humor will keep you guys laughing on the outside if your front office blows it and the Mets next few seasons are a disaster cuz lord knows you won’t be laughing on the inside. Let’s just have a better off season this time and spare me your Chewbacca references
It’s a South Park Reference. It about Johnny Cochran winning trials by confusing the issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense
In other words, what you’re talking about has nothing to with the topic at hand.
Huh? This is a message board…not your own private telephone conversation.
If you want to have a private conversation, send him an email or talk to him like a grown man.
You’re on a public message board. You want to have a private discussion, email him.
As for the rest of that stuff, go to a therapist. Everyday you just unravel a little bit more.
If this isn’t a clear cut violation of posting rules here making you a candidate for a permanent banning, I don’t know what would be.
Joe made it pretty clear that he doesn’t actually care.
I can’t imagine what a week without the Core would be like. I imagine something similar to the Corona commercials…
We’d sit around drinking lousy beer?
Dropping lines about rape is probably something we should shy away from. Entirely. Let’s talk about the Beach Boys or something. This whole conversation line is leading us all down a trail we should not be traveling on.
The guy is nice enough to respond to you but as usual you become a dumb ox. His post wasn’t about building the roster it was about the futility of giving long term contracts to starting pitchers. That’s all.
Patrick I see what you were trying to do, how much more you paid per win over a replacement!
It not a bad concept to look at But it assumes a relplacement makes 0 which is why the confusion of negative.
It might have been better to calculate the average pitcher gets paid to find the zero point of the replacement before you just calculated how much they cost by simply multiplying what they got with their WAR!
Then subtract the averag from each pitcher’s salary to come up with a more reasonable number of what you paid EXTRA for every win!
Personally I would rather just divide Salary BY wins and get a price per win number to judge than having to go through all the WAR related phantom player work.
But thats just me!
You could assume the AAAA pitcher stashed in the minors like Redding or Millwood makes 500K or so. Probably most make a little more, but call-ups make less. It would be a fair assumption, and what’s a couple hundred thou in business where marginal players make millions? Three years of Ollie for $36 mil is $34.5 mil more than they would have paid a player to win three more games for them. Fair?
only if you can prove that guy would actually win them no?
It’s nice to say some unamed player would win the same games but is there any basis for that assumption?
Especially when your talking Minor Leagues.
Who have no data under MLB conditions to prove they would win ANY games.
Would Wheeler if he was brought up be guaranteed to win as many as the average MLB pitcher?
Not saying he couldn’t but your making an assumption that ANY replacement will be average. Without establishing if he really is average or not.
The Zero in War is supposed to be describing the average MLB player not the any guy who wears a baseball uniform is it not?
“It’s nice to say some unamed player would win the same games but is there any basis for that assumption?”
A base line production expected of each pitcher?
“Especially when your talking Minor Leagues.
Who have no data under MLB conditions to prove they would win ANY games.”
Actually, the concept of replacement player is typically a journey man who bounces from team to team or is on the AAA shuttle. Basically, they find the mean production level in the league and go with about 80% of that.
“Would Wheeler if he was brought up be guaranteed to win as many as the average MLB pitcher?”
Wheeler’s in A-Ball.
“Not saying he couldn’t but your making an assumption that ANY replacement will be average. Without establishing if he really is average or not.”
You establish a league mean and work from there.
“he Zero in War is supposed to be describing the average MLB player not the any guy who wears a baseball uniform is it not?”
League mean – 20%.
All though, full disclosure, I don’t really buy into WAR or VORP too deeply.
Expectations? Of what pitcher? an <LB pitcher or some kid you just drafted and is sitting in the minors…
Do you think if we just threw Wheeler in there he would win before he has been developed?
YOUR ASSuming your going to get what is EXPECTED!
And you EXPECT it to be AVERAGE for an MLB pitcher not some Minor leaguer!
“Expectations? Of what pitcher? an <LB pitcher or some kid you just drafted and is sitting in the minors…"
What?
"Do you think if we just threw Wheeler in there he would win before he has been developed?"
No, mainly because Wheeler is in A-ball.
"YOUR ASSuming your going to get what is EXPECTED!
And you EXPECT it to be AVERAGE for an MLB pitcher not some Minor leaguer!"
You really aren't getting this. I really have no idea how Wheeler or a recent draftee fits in here.
Replacement level is referring to journeymen players. Guys who are just barely good enough to stay out of AAA. Not rookie pitchers who have never been above AAA.
Basically, how good a guy has to be to stay in the majors. That was determined to be 80% of the league median.
An average player in a full season would be around 2.5 WAR. Replacement level isn’t average, it’s below average.
Because wins are a lousy way to judge a pitcher. We’ve seen plenty of good pitchers have bad W-L records because of some combination of bad hitting, defense or bullpen. And there are plenty of pitchers who have good W-L records because their team bailed them out.
So, what you need to figure out is how well did a pitcher put his team in a position to win each of his games.
Yet your judging him by WINS compared to a REPLACEMENT!
I’m not doing anything different regarding what to judge them by…
All I’m doing is using the same WIN and putting an actual value on it as opposed to some phantom player invented based on average without ever knowing if that replacement IS average, above or below!
No, we’re judging by his production vs the league median-20%
You’re judging him by flat out wins, which is dependent on several factors completely out of his control.
League median of WINS dummy!
WINS IS STILL BEING USED!
No, wins are not used when establishing a pitcher’s WAR.
Yeah they just use the word WINS as a marketing device!
Phantom Wins,Phantom Players PHANTOM RESULTS if you ask me!
Is this the same WAR that considers a RBOE to be a better accomplishment of a batter than an actual hit?
WAR has nothing to do with Win/Loss record. We’re talking about hypothetical pieces of wins.
HYPOTHETICAL?
ASSumed by a theory of thinking
Logic (of a proposition) highly conjectural; not well supported by available evidence.
You shouldn’t use big words because it doesn’t make you look that smart when you use them on people who know what they actually mean!
Hypothetical Wins is no better at saying who is a good pitcher than ACTUAL ones!
Because the conditions that good pitchers has that did not win are no different than some mythical win you think he will get under your ASSumed Hypothesis!
Your guessing, Using wins isn’t guessing it’s just not properly judging the Pitcher himself because other factors come into play!
Bad Pitchers win too!
Good Pitchers lose!
But at least your comparing them based on REAL data not ASSUMED data!
Not measuring pitcher wins. at all.
The Wins in Wins Above Replacement refers to team wins. ie How many more games would a team win with this player instead of a replacement level player.
What? No, pitching wins have nothing to do with fWAR, bWAR, or WARP.
Nothing, at all.
“Phantom Wins,Phantom Players PHANTOM RESULTS if you ask me!”
No one is asking you because you clearly have no clue what we are talking about.
Here is how the main sources determine it
Fangraphs “- Pitchers – Where offensive WAR used wRAA and UZR, pitching WAR uses FIP. Based on how many innings a pitcher threw, FIP is turned into runs form, converted to represent value above replacement level, and is then converted from runs to wins.”
Baseball Reference “Pitcher WAR considers how many runs a pitcher allowed and then compares that to the number a replacement pitcher would allow.
To compute the amount from the replacement pitcher, we begin with the average runs allowed by pitchers facing the same set of teams for the same number of innings as the pitcher in question. We then adjust that number by the defense’s runs saved for our pitcher (using Total Zone) per ball in play and our pitcher’s team’s park factor.
So now we have runs allowed by an average pitcher with our pitcher’s opponents, defense, and park. We then multiply this by 1.22 or 1.18 (for the AL and NL respectively) to get replacement level for the AL and NL. This gives us Replacement runs, RR.
The replacement level for starters and relievers is different so we then decrease RR by 12.5% times the percent of relief innings thrown. The replacement level reliever has a much lower ERA than the replacement level starter.
We now get the pitcher’s runs above replacement (RAR) as actual runs allowed – adjusted RR.
Next, we adjust for leverage and bullpen chaining by multiplying the RAR by (average leverage + 1)/2.
Finally, we adjust this into wins above replacement by dividing by a context-adjusted runs/win value (which is typically around 10).”
OK, that was a little more in depth than Fangraphs.
Baseball Prospectus “VORP = ((Repl. Level – RAvg)/9)*Innings Pitched”
So, as you can see, wins play no role in determining a pitcher’s value.
Incredible…you post facts from Fangraphs and you get 3 thumbs down from these morons.
Unbelievable, yet not at all surprising.
Right.
I would gladly take King Felix 2011 over Derek Holland 2011.
I find it completely ridiculous that people look at a team stat like Wins and Losses to decide which pitchers are better at PITCHING. The better pitchers are the guys who are going to have the lowest ERAs, the lower FIPs, more strikeouts, less walks, less home runs given up.
Wins and Losses are predicated chiefly on environment and the strength of the team’s offense, not by any sort of skill in winning.
Obviously Patrick Flood’s post shows the tremendous value in developing starting pitchers through your own system much like the 1969 and 1986 Mets did.
Signing any pitcher to a multi-year deal is a complete crap shoot and the evidence that it translates to failure most of the time is clear and convincing.
When was the last time the Mets had an ace that came up though the minors? (No Bayonne, Mike Pelfrey was not and never was an ace.) It’s been too long.
Regardless of how you feel about pitching wins or dollars per win above replacement, the fact remains it only served to support the case that was being made. It didn’t skew the facts.
Oh,
You mean baseball organizations never valued developing their own starting pitchers before?
Wow you guys just made baseball history.
Crap shoots are a part of life mah man. You want to win? Then you’re going to HAVE TO TAKE RISKS!
And i know you don’t believe that I think Mike Pelfrey was the last ace the Mets developed.
You guys don’t like wins (and boy IT SHOWS!) But I like wins and I like pitchers who have a habit of winning.
I cannot believe i have to talk this way. You guys want NO RISKS, take NO CHANCES, everything CLOSE TO THE VEST, and SPEND LITTLE, and spend hours upon hours using advanced…i mean backwards techniques to evaluate middle of the road talent in order to try and get an advantage ON THE CHEAP.
That all adds up to a lot of LOSING and mediocre baseball.
You aren’t going to be a success in anything, let alone baseball, with that type of thinking.
I never said anything about not taking risks, please do not put words into my mouth, especially your words.
I’m simply saying that in the case of our team, you know, the one from Flushing, it would behoove them to start developing starting pitchers for now before immersing themselves in another huge contract like John Santana. Yes I read these boards an know about your affection for CJ Wilson. That would be a big mistake.
If you are as smart as only you think you are, why wouldn’t you first wait and see how Familia, Wheeler and Harvey come along before breaking the bank on a deal that stands a good chance at suffocating the organization? Again.
Because you don’t wait with the lineup the Mets put out on the field.
In my opinion the Mets can contend in 2012 by moving a numbers padder/choke artist like David Wright for major league ready young starting pitching, sign Reyes to team with Tejada, Ike at 1B, go with Murphy/Turner platoon at 3B or just Murphy depending on how healthy he is because I believe that tandem will provide more timely hitting leading to WINS than Wright’s power ever would.
I’m not gonna sit back and “wait”. You don’t do that because there’s no guarantee any of those guys are gonna be good at the major league level.
You want to sit back and just wait and see if they’re good?
The team has enough money and talent to fight in 2012. This is the business of competition for God’s sake…and the competition starts at the top.
So you want to keep chasing shadows like Omar Minaya did only to keep finding the team another day late and another dollar short? That’s the problem with dinosaurs like you, they learn nothing from history and continuously make the same mistakes. While most people grow wiser with age, you still hold tight to all of your prepubescent notions.
and it doesn’t HAVE to be CJ Wilson but it can be any good starting pitcher that is available either through free agency or via trade.
Listen, you somehow splashed some of your primordial soup on me so I have to cut this short and take ten showers.
So instead of an intelligent reply all you can respond with is a typically saber induced snarky, sarcastic response.
Another guy who wouldn’t know when to pull an infield in or halfway or if you hold a runner on 1s with runners on 1st & 2nd or anything else about the intricasies of baseball but certainly can give you a WAR.
Take a hike and go back to the upper deck where you belong.
LOL at trying to use vague baseball situations to discredit someone else.
Those “vague” …to you at least….baseball references have to do with winning games.
WAR is relevant to NOTHING.
and anyone who knows baseball knows those aren’t vague references.
They couldn’t be more vague. Hold a runner on first with first and second……that’s all the info you have?
yeah that’s all i have
Then you got nothing.
so he believes what i say, what a friggin IDIOT
XtreemIcon says:
September 27, 2011 at 7:25 pm
When did I get saddled with this clutch doesn’t exist thing? I thought you outgrew making up lies. Guess not.
XtreemIcon says: May 16, 2011 at 5:50 pm In the interest of full disclosure, I don’t agree with it, either. I think clutch is immeasurable and doesn’t exist.
Remember what happened when you printed the entire quote in context? You got owned. That’s why you don’t do it. I’m embarrassed for you. Changing the subject because you know if we started talking strategy it’s like you bringing a knife to a gun fight.
What a dishonest liar.
I go off topic? I asked you to provide more information so that I may continue, and you got scared, and brought up one sentence you showed way out of context I said weeks ago. I go off topic?
Show the rest of the quote that clearly states clutch the way you fools think of it and measure it, as a talent, doesn’t exist. Big spots and important at-bats are measured as high leverage, and those stats are readily available.
But you didn’t show that, did you? Nope. Lied and twisted. And still won’t get back on the topic of strategy. You know, the one YOU started.
You also say I know how to calculate WAR. I don’t know why you’d think that. Maybe more lies, since I’ve clearly stated many times I don’t like or use WAR and never have? Probably it. More lies.
You just continue to dig yourself into a bigger hole, Bayonne.
Your credibility is dropping by the second.
And if you’re feeling strong, try me. You think I don’t know about baseball between the lines because I know who Voros McCracken is or because I can run down the wOBA leaderboard? You paint everything with a broad brush, which is a problem with you I’ve said all along.
I dare you.
Yeah this WAR is the one where RBOE is a better act than a hit for a batter right?
i don’t need a justification of my credibility from someone like you.
I don’t lie. You make the choices on who to believe or not and the rest can tell from that. I’m just concerned with honest, smart people who know better and not a person like you