Is it better to be the best player on the worst team or the worst player on the best team? How did Angela cope with her extremely impressive freshman dorm mates? And why won’t Shaquille O'Neal let Charles Barkley have an onion ring?
Can we not do that on the air together?
I'm Angela Duckworth.
I'm Mike Mon, and you're listening to.
No stupid questions today on the show.
Would you rather be the worst person on the best team or the best person on the worst team?
What am I?
I am this vanilla kid from Cherry Hill, New Jersey whose greatest accomplishment was being captain of an extremely mediocre cheerleading squad.
Angela, I am super excited for our conversation, because while there are no stupid questions, I think some questions are maybe more intriguing than others.
And I feel like this is one.
I'm all yours.
This comes to us from Lucas.
He wrote in and asked, which has more upside, to be the best person on the worst team or the worst on the best team?
And then he clarified, assume you could be the actual best, or assume you are the literal worst.
I love this question because immediately the mind goes to, why can't I be the best on the best team?
Immediately the mind of a super competitive person goes to that.
I think the question Lucas asks is so good because there are upsides to both.
So let's walk through the possibility of being the best player on the worst team.
This is a very interesting thing, I think, in terms of professional sports.
I also think in the business world, I mean, I'll just give you a quick example on that.
I've got a very good friend who could never quite scale with the businesses he was in, and so he's constantly been looking for a smaller pond.