2.23.2008

The New Market Inefficiency: Chubby Chicks

One of the consequences of being married (other than the non-stop humping -- dry and otherwise) is that you occasionally have to watch shows that your inherent heterosexuality wouldn't otherwise allow. Take, for instance, The Biggest Loser, NBC's weight-loss challenge show. The missus and I have watched this for the last couple seasons -- a bunch of large people doing aerobics and getting yelled at by trainers. Brilliant.

There is an advantage to having to watch this schlock. Occasionally, you spot a girl/woman who, maybe, with the right combination of diet and exercise, could emerge as a hot chick. I call this "hot chick upside."

Case in point: Brittany from the current season (the girl in the accompanying picture). Her age and raw tools are unprecedented on TBL. In a word: She's got projectability.

Old-time scouts would say she has "the good face," and I'd have to agree. As far as tools go, her personality already grades out as plus-plus (not uncommon among girls of her body type), and she has shown the heart and grittiness necessary to reach her potential. That attests to her makeup. One can only imagine that, after a life spent on the hefty side, she's got a chip on her shoulder and something to prove. You can't teach those intangibles.

She projects as a smokin' girl-next-door-type who would get you in trouble for leering too long at her as she soaks some sun in her backyard.

Now, those more focused on what a girl has already achieved (ie, her stats -- height, weight, 40-yard dash time, etc.) won't give this girl another look. That's a failure of imagination. A diamond in the rough like Brittany is what scouting is all about.

1 comment:

sir said...

I guess the question I have about this new market inefficiency is "Do they allow Draft-and-Follow?" If so, this may be a draft strategy to try, similar in execution to the "Intellectual Whores" strategy employed by many women. If we cannot Draft-and-Follow, I'm not sure I would try to exploit this inefficiency.

Scouting is a fairly inexact science as it is and, sure, you may find a Jackie Cust out there once in a while. How many Brien Taylor's and Todd Van Poppel's are you going to have to weed though, especially given the expense in development time? After you factor in the high emotional injury rate for young chubby chicks, it's just not worth it in my opinion. TINSTAACCP.

Now if you can develop a scouting department who can monitor the prospects' development for you, then you might be on to something. However, I don't see many girls clamoring to be signed to Minor League contracts so that might be problematic.

I still think that the best method of acquiring talent is through the free-agent pool or blue chip prospects, and in some cases, tampering.