Moneyball Update
by mattwelch on Jun 20, 2010 12:02 AM PDT
Email
PrintWas just checking out team stats and noticed that the Oakland A's offense is:
* 1st in the AL in sacrifice bunts
* 5th in stolen bases
* 3rd to last in walks, and
* 2nd to last in home runs
I loved Moneyball as much as the next guy, but seeing as how the franchise keeps winning 75 games a year, while building an offense that's basically the opposite of the whole "Beane count" hullaballoo, maybe it's time for, I dunno, a new postscript or something.
This Fan-Post is authored by an independent fan. Tell us what you think and how you feel.
45 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
More convoluted than the book
will be the endless rationalizations as to why everyone who mocks it doesn’t understand it and long yammerings about salary as part of the equation (in between strokagae of Theo, ignoring his budget) and then a final pretending that Billy Beane was never really that popular among the Neyerians.
by Rev Halofan on Jun 20, 2010 12:01 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Being smarter than everyone else only works when,
you know, you’re actually smarter than everyone else.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 20, 2010 4:11 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs
Not to rain on everyones A's hating--hey I like to do it too--but....
regardless of what Joe Morgan may think “moneyball” doesn’t equate to “no-small ball.” It was all about finding players who were a bargain. When “moneyball” was written, the work the walk, get on base and don’t waist an out until one of the few payers on your team that can hit came up came on the cheap. Now with the success that the high OBP players have had over the past 15 plus years, those type of players are no longer cheap. The A’s, because they suck in general and couldn’t get more than 10k fans to come out and watch a game against their so called divisional rivals, still have to operate on the cheap. The problem is that Beane hasn’t found another model for success now that his old one is no longer a bargain. (by the way, the old one only worked well in the regular season as demonstrated by the A’s post season lack of success.)
Someone needs to write an new book called Sciosciaball describing the “play the style of game that gets the most out of the players you have” and “one game at a time” and “its not about you—do your job or hit the road” style of management. Has anyone noticed that Scioscia’s old coaches that are now managing teams lead their respective leagues in winning precentage. Scioscia is becoming the Bill Walsh of baseball.
I am a fair weather fan so the Angels better win!
by Halo84653 on Jun 20, 2010 7:11 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I'm talking here specifically about the book, which *was* homers+walks-bunts&steals=truth
Rob Neyer’s “Beane count” did not exactly include sacrifice hits. The epic 2002 draft, which was supposed to illustrate truisms about college players being better draft choices and pudgy non-athlete types being just as valuable as projectables, instead illustrated how a team can derive basically zero value from 4 of the top 40 picks.
Beane hasn’t found a method of success that didn’t involve enjoying the bounty he inherited. That doesn’t mean he won’t, of course, but I believe it less with each passing mediocre year. Overcoming small crowds & discovering legitimate market efficiencies was supposed to be his whole value-added here, right?
So, in the the 3 years he was a scout and the 4 as Assistant GM
he did nothing to help build the team he “inherited” in 1998?
Halo84653 is exactly right: everybody uses some sort of statistical analysis now so the A’s can no longer leverage their information to their advantage. Billy Beane knew how great Youkillis was going to be. He didn’t get him because someone else also knew. The beginning of the end, as it were.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 20, 2010 9:19 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Hey, I'm right 46.2% of the time. Just look at this weeks pick results:)
I am a fair weather fan so the Angels better win!
Look, I think Billy Beane's awesome
But knowing how great someone else is gonna be is setting the bar a bit low.
Fair enough
but my problem with the point I think your making and most criticisms Moneyball/Beane/A’s/Lewis/Sabrmetrics/whatever is the you all set the bar way to high. The Moneyball Method isn’t some magic bullet that will enable a horrible GM to win 95+ games every year. It’s unfair to criticize Beane, the Book, the team, etc. for not being the Holy Grail. Beane got blood from stones for a couple of years. Bully for him.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 21, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Beane had plenty of opportunity to nab Youkilis. The guy was a 240-something pick.
Beane placed a value on Youkilis and was thwarted when somebody else placed a higher value on him, drafting him at a higher round than Beane was willing to go. Since Youklis has greatly outperformed the round wherein he was actually drafted, he clearly outperformed the value that Beane placed on him. How it is that Beane continues to get credit as a byproduct of Youkilis’ career success is beyond me.
"Wastin away again in Minor-Leaguer-Ville..."
But Epstein was doing the exact same thing that Beane was doing!!
Valuing guys who got on base by any means necessary. Also, Youkilis has gone on to even greater things than he probably would have in Oakland because he had a complete team around him and he knows there’s a good chance that he’ll be playing in one place for a lot longer then if he had played for the A’s.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 21, 2010 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions
That does not change the reality that Beane undervalued Youk in the market.
The market moved Youk before Beane wanted to nab him. Therefore, Beane missed the actual market value for Youk.
Next, Beane was not the only person who realized that Youk had a high upside. Youk’s biography reveals that others felt the same way. Beane gets no credit for special insight.
Third, granting that Epstein was using the same market principals as Beane in evaulating talent, and granting that Epstein had more cash resources at his disposal to obtain Youk higher than Beane was willing, Beane gets no credit for mis-judging his market competition and his actual market position.
Finally, whose fault is it that Youk would not have had a complete team surrounding him in Oakland?
"Wastin away again in Minor-Leaguer-Ville..."
"Finally, whose fault is it that Youk would not have had a complete team surrounding him in Oakland?"
That’s kinda the whole point, isn’t it? Beane can’t afford a complete team. He pulled it of for a few years but then other teams started to get smarter and someone wrote a bestseller detailing his methods and now he is no longer exceptional.
Why do we insist on revising history to say that he never pulled off anything remarkable in the first place?
Captain, there are doubt's...
All 3 were drafted under Beane as GM, so, yeah he had nothing to do with that.
And, later on, monkeys are going to fly out of my butt.
Captain, there are doubt's...
Good question.
You known full well that Beane was fielding complete teams that could surround Youk at the time of his draft. You just admitted that you know that those teams, at that time, were playoff teams. So when you write “Youkilis has gone on to even greater things than he probably would have in Oakland because he had a complete team around him…”, which one of us just revised history?
The bottom line is that, in the case of Youk, Beane valued Youk as a very late round pick, which was (in the end) undervaluing his market. Beane didn’t see him as an 8th rounder. Epstein, and hence the market, did.
But speaking of revising history, your hero does a glorious job of just that while nearly breaking his arm patting himself on the back. From Moneyball (my copy, anyway):
“Remember Zito? Everyone said we were nuts to take Zito with the ninth pick of the draft. And we knew everyone was going to say that. One fucking month later it’s clear we kicked everybody’s ass.”
Really? REALLY? Zito was a guy who was already drafted twice, most recently as high as 83rd in the 3rd round the year before as an undergrad. He was All-State, All-Conference, first-team All-American numerous times. Pac-10 Pitcher Of The Year. No-brainer first round pick. Yeah, Billy, you really took a flyer there on Barry Zito. Real genius.
"Wastin away again in Minor-Leaguer-Ville..."
The baseball draft is a weird monster
Sometimes, yes, when you draft a particular player is meaningful. A lot of the time, it’s only meaningful to people who want to argue about when someone was drafted. Case in point: Barry Zito who was apparently drafted 3 times.
Youkilis, in Oakland, would have played on the team that Beane could afford which is a VERY different team than the one Epstein can afford. Beane valued Youkilis lower because he had to not because he was wrong.
Captain, there are doubt's...
Didn't Beane
draft Mark Teahen ahead of Youk in that draft? And Jeremy Brown?
Youkilis was drafted in 2001 by Boston
Teahen and Brown were drafted in 2002.
But draft position, as I’ve said, is of minimal relevance. Youkilis is an solid MVP candidate and he was drafted in the 8TH ROUND! Even Boston didn’t know what they were drafting. Isn’t it a bit harsh to say Beane doesn’t know what he is doing because he was, what, wronger?
Captain, there are doubt's...
That would be harsh. But that is not what I am stating.
You wrote: “Billy Beane knew how great Youkillis was going to be. He didn’t get him because someone else also knew.”
I have read that Beane/Youkilis meme a lot, and I disagree based on my memory of Moneyball. So I reacted. Because the truth is not in your first declaration, it is in your latest:
“Even Boston didn’t know what they were drafting. Isn’t it a bit harsh to say Beane doesn’t know what he is doing because he was, what, wronger?”
You can’t have it both ways. Either Beane knew, or he didn’t know. Either Beane and Boston knew, or they didn’t know. I say they didn’t know. And I say that there is enough reference material to back that up.
But my point is not necessarily about Youk himself. It is about Youk’s actual market value versus some mystical insight that is ascribed to Beane for defining market value for players with previously undervalued skills. There are ample examples of Beane finding that market value, but the Youkilis draft decision is not among them.
"Wastin away again in Minor-Leaguer-Ville..."
I don't want it both ways.
Beane was wrong in thinking Youkilis would be still be available after Boston made their 8th round pick. Epstein and Beane were both right because they knew that Youkilis would contribute to their respective teams.
Ultimately, the Youkilis example is a side argument that is in many ways illustrative of my larger point: Beane was responsible for building those ‘overachieving’ teams of the late 90s/early 00s. The last 3 years of 75 win baseball is not evidence that the strategies and decisions he employed during those years were irrelevant and that the team only won because of players drafted solely by Sandy Alderson and 3 pitches who magically appeared on the roster. Nor is it evidence that certain statistical measures are less accurate than more traditional measures, or that certain baseball skills contribute less to the game than certain GMs seem to believe.
In fact, if you look at the statistics that Mr. Welch cited in the original post and then consider that A’s haven’t been as successful winning games your conclusion should be that Billy Beane’s “Moneyball Method” as described in the book was 100% correct and since he can no longer employ these techniques as effectively as he did in the past, the A’s no longer win as many games.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 22, 2010 11:22 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't buy it one bit
“Beane was wrong in thinking Youkilis would be still be available after Boston made their 8th round pick. Epstein and Beane were both right because they knew that Youkilis would contribute to their respective teams.”
Without even looking, I’m 100% sure that both of these teams picked a bunch of players in rounds 2-7 that never even sniffed the majors. So if they “knew” that Youkilis was going to be a productive player in the big leagues, he would have been taken earlier.
At best, we can say they though Youkilis had a shot, and liked him more than other teams that might have put him 10th-25th on their draft boards.
Doesn’t really have anything to do with Epstein anyway, Dan Duquette was the GM when Youkilis was drafted. Epstein was either an assistant or still with the Padres.
"That boy is our last hope" - Obi Wan Scioscia, as Francisco Rodriguez left for the Mets. "No, there is another" - Yoda Reagins.
by RallyMonkey5 on Jun 23, 2010 7:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Got it
It’s been quite a few years since I read that book. Though I suppose I could have just looked it up myself.
Either way, an 8th round pick becoming an elite player says a lot more about the player than it does about the GM/scouting director that picked him or passed him up, doesn’t it?
But the point is that
the A’s didn’t and don’t have the ability to draft players that they know will be good in higher rounds. Since the market has become much more efficient and statistical measures have become much more sophisticated, there are fewer opportunities to find these diamonds in the rough before someone else does.
Captain, there are doubt's...
by Match Day 5 on Jun 22, 2010 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions
Whatever dude
I don’t know or care what you two are arguing about. Generally when a guy who is drafted after the first few rounds goes on to be very successful, the team generally got lucky to find a player with the motivation and talent to achieve that success. Kudos to the scout that convinced them to pick said player I suppose, but teams are wrong on these guys far more often than they’re right.
Yes
Every time you see a team get lucky with a low round pick that makes it, that same exact team picked a bunch of guys ahead of him that never pan out. Nobody knows how the draft will turn out.
The best you can do is gather as much information as possible, do your best to evaluate the talent and the personality of the player, and hope you can stack the odds a little bit in your favor.
"That boy is our last hope" - Obi Wan Scioscia, as Francisco Rodriguez left for the Mets. "No, there is another" - Yoda Reagins.
by RallyMonkey5 on Jun 23, 2010 7:46 AM PDT up reply actions
so are you saying that all GMs are irrelevant?
Or that Beane knows what he;s doing?
Captain, there are doubt's...
I've been thinking that the past couple of years about the Sosh coaching tree.
They have em all over the NFL with Walsh and Dungy and Holmgren. But Sosh seems like the only one in baseball so far. Bud Black with the Padres and Madden with the Rays prove that.
Broken Wood...
by angelskid2210 on Jun 20, 2010 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions
Maddon was with the Angels long before Scioscia was, though.
Not sure how that factors in when thinking about a “Scioscia Coaching Tree”.
I’m really happy that Bud Black is doing better in SD this year though. It was looking bleak last year.
This isn't actually true
“Now with the success that the high OBP players have had over the past 15 plus years, those type of players are no longer cheap.”
Jack Cust was extremely cheap. He is the sabermetric offspring of the late 90’s A’s teams that had cheap, bad defensive, sluggers like Matt Stairs and John Jaha. Cust resigned cheap with the A’s, got sent to the minors this spring despite being the best hitter on the team, and nobody even bothered to claim him.
It’s not about one class of players becoming too expensive and Beane finding inefficiencies elsewhere. He quite simply has chosen to have guys like Coco Crisp and Rajai Davis on his roster instead of better hitters who can’t field or run as well and cost the same price.
Case in point: Crisp and Davis cost more than Cust and Jonny Gomes, another good hitting, bad fielding player anyone could have signed before the season.
"That boy is our last hope" - Obi Wan Scioscia, as Francisco Rodriguez left for the Mets. "No, there is another" - Yoda Reagins.
by RallyMonkey5 on Jun 20, 2010 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions
My dad read a book by Billy bean
it tuned out to be from the gay one.
"Fundamentals are a crutch for the talentless" - Kenny Powers
by DAD OF VLAD on Jun 20, 2010 8:39 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Why are we still talking about "Moneyball"?
Is this the A’s baseball blog? Who the hell cares?
Rory Markas. Alex Chilton. 2010, you suck!
after years f having the alleged superiority of the A's shoved down ou throats
it is time to gloat!!!
by Rev Halofan on Jun 20, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
Not time for me
Seattle has the know it alls who are reinventing the way defense is played. Yet they suck. Oakland fanboys have been humbled recently (Seattle this offseason was like Oakland 2001), and their team sucks. Texas has never had the annoying know it alls jumping on their badwagon, but they are in first place right now.
When we pass Texas, it will be time to gloat. I will not gloat if we only finish second. We fly flags here.
"That boy is our last hope" - Obi Wan Scioscia, as Francisco Rodriguez left for the Mets. "No, there is another" - Yoda Reagins.
by RallyMonkey5 on Jun 20, 2010 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'd rather not
Scioscia knows things that we don’t. That the rest of the baseball world doesn’t know. I’d prefer to keep it that way and Scioscia just keep winning instead of making a blueprint for other teams to follow.
Let’s face it. Our bullpen sucks. Our defense sucks. Our rotation has been inconsistent, as has our offense. Team speed is not really there anymore. We’ve been assaulted by injuries yet again.
But what’s the record? 39 wins, 33 losses. Sosh knows what he’s doing.
"That boy is our last hope" - Obi Wan Scioscia, as Francisco Rodriguez left for the Mets. "No, there is another" - Yoda Reagins.
by RallyMonkey5 on Jun 20, 2010 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
You're not the only one psychoanalysing Billy Beane these days.
SI.com published this article by Joe Posnanski last Wednesday.
At least this article adds some clarity to the sacrifice bunt situation.
The comments following the article also add some interesting information.
Thanks for the link to the article
I just read it and the info on Daric Barton and the sacrifice bunt thing was very interesting.
Moneyball should have been called Steroidball
I do not buy into any of the hype surrounding the A’s. They benefited immensely by having some of the most prolific steroid users of this generation, including MVPs Giambi and Tejada. The postscript on Billy Beane’s alleged genius was long ago written. See, e.g., http://www.slate.com/id/2180070 (“Rereading Moneyball the day of the Mitchell report”).
Interesting read. Thanks for the link.
by snowhor on Jun 23, 2010 3:28 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Whats even scarier about the moneyball book is.......
They decided to make it a movie with Brad Pitt playing Billy Beane and Jonah Hill as Paul De Podesta lord help me!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
