Notes from the Diamond #1: Always Something New to Learn

Money managers operate in a field that appears isolated from sports, yet the underlying mechanics of excellence in baseball reveal patterns that investment professionals might be missing. Both fields have undergone quiet revolutions in how they measure success and train their practitioners, and both are experiencing the same pressure as data transparency accelerates. The question isn't whether baseball strategy matters to investing, but what investment professionals are overlooking by not paying attention to it.

• The sabermetrics revolution proved something counterintuitive: doing less is often more valuable than doing something. A walk is as good as a hit under certain conditions, and effective investors spend most of their time doing nothing while monitoring whether action is truly necessary. This principle contradicts the instinct that drives much of professional money management.

• Both baseball and investing are experiencing the same technological disruption simultaneously. Statcast systems generate terabytes of data per game, forcing transparency that previously protected competitive edges. Investment management faces an identical pressure as fiduciaries gain tools to evaluate managers with unprecedented precision and speed.

• The professionals who thrive in this environment are adapting continuously rather than perfecting static processes. Johnny Bench switched from pitcher to catcher mid-career because the data revealed where his skills would have maximum impact. Most investment managers assume their approach should remain stable and repeatable.

• Transparency is eroding the incomes of practitioners whose edges were built on their clients' ignorance of true performance. As data becomes cheap and accessible, the advantage shifts away from those who simply knew more than their patrons toward those who can think differently about what the data reveals.

• The practitioners with staying power in both fields share something unexpected: a genuine love for the work itself rather than primarily chasing compensation. If that motivation matters in baseball's competitive environment, why do investment professionals assume it doesn't matter equally in theirs?