Skip to comments.Billy Beane’s Ascendant A’s Are Playing a Brand-New Brand of Moneyball
Posted on 06/28/2014 1:57:24 PM PDT by nickcarrawayEdited on 06/28/2014 2:12:48 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The funniest thing about the legacy of Moneyball, the 2003 Michael Lewis book and the 2011 Brad Pitt movie, is that it quickly became an ongoing leadership seminar about losers.
Back in 2003, before disrupt became a buzzword in every Silicon Valley start-up, Billy Beane and the Oakland A’s truly disrupted the baseball world. It was never just about discovering on-base percentage, which scouts hadn’t noticed before, or learning to love players who didn’t look good in jeans. It was about a small business maximizing every resource available in order to compete with more established, wealthier brands. The book and movie were such a hit because, as confusing as some of their plot points might be—why exactly is Jeremy Giambi being traded? Oh, and who is Jeremy Giambi again?—the fundamental narrative was universally relatable: Little guy takes on big guy and wins. How do you routinely trump competitors that have twice the budget you do? Billy Beane can show you how, trumpeted a website that booked Beane’s speaking engagements.
(Excerpt) Read more at nymag.com ...
The Cubs have given up on the season? Say it isn’t so!
What the money ball movie ignored is what REALLY wins in baseball; pitching. The money ball A’s had some pretty good pitching.
They certainly aren’t getting much resistance from my Marlins this weekend.
They’re playing up the 1984 WS anniversary celebration in Detroit on the 30th.
I disagree, sort of. The key to winning baseball games is to score more runs than your opponent. Using SABRmetrics has been the key to Billyball’s success. Bill James revolutionized the baseball industry with his Baseball Abstracts which created new measures which used past performance to predict future success. Billy Bean, I believe, was the first to apply them.
Solid pitching, great defense and a running game will get you championships. No need to have.a 50 homer player who hits .250. Look at the Cardinals of the 80’s.
The formula changes, era to era. From 1993-2008 or so, any team with three decent starters would dominate because EVERYBODY hit. And SBs didn't matter much. Now, thankfully, we are back to the game I grew up on and the old values of defense and little ball matter again.
The Royals are still contenders in late June. Go KC!
A lot of people thought the Tigers were nuts for trading Fielder. Sure he could hit home runs but that was all he could do and he forced Cabrera to play an uncomfortable 3rd base. (Plus Fielder is out for the season now)
Kinsler can hit more singles and is a better all around player and Cabrera is back at 1st base where he belongs.
Will this version of moneyball actually win a title? So far moneyball’s rep far outstrips its accomplishments.
You’re exactly right. The Moneyball concept was BS. They had Tim Hudson, Barry Zito, and Mark Mulder in their pitching prime.
The Cubs are still playing?
In the movie and book, the three names that never were mentioned, Hudson, Mulder, and Zito. It would ruin a great premise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.