re: Moneyball

solid thread going here guys.

wanted to throw out the point that a big reason the A's haven't had ultimate success (or even sustained success really - postseason in 2000-2004, 2006 under Beane) is because the "moneyball" strategy puts very little value on managers. a terrible idea because i'm of the opinion that managers are very vital to having a successful ball club.

Art Howe, then Ken Macha, then Bob Gerren.. i mean it's pretty obvious Beane puts zero emphasis on having a solid manager and paying him well. Bob Melvin got a 3-year contract extension this week. the team is 16 games under .500.

Look at Epstein in Boston; he gave Francona pennies when he first hired him.

Its comical that people think somehow Dirk is better now that his team has won or that the think Lebron is a lesser player because his team has not or that a year ago, people were qustioning whether Rodgers was an elite QB because his team lost a playoff game 51-45 the year before, as if he didn't play well enough or something.

I also find it ironic that Brady has not "won a SB" since 2004 even though he has clearly gotten much better as a QB over the years. When they won, especially the first title, it was not because of his QB play as much as the D.

ETA: and to your last second shot comparision, look at Brady the end of Super Bowl 36 and Kelly at the end of SB 25

A few things, and sorry for the long post...

The term “moneyball” has always bothered me because it doesn’t really mean anything. The real revolution wasn’t the book, it was Bill James’ Baseball Abstracts and sabermetrics. Simply put, there is not a successful front office in baseball that does not adhere to basic sabermetric principles (though some more than others).

It’s really just the art of objective analysis to baseball, so it never made sense why there was so much resistance to the idea. In fact, James’ work was first adopted by player agents to get their clients better contracts. The courts agreed with James’ work, as he demonstrated player value on a systematic basis. Once clubs were getting their arse kicked in arbitration against James, they should’ve picked up his books right then and there.

And, it’s made us better fans, despite the whining of Jason Whitlock. James didn’t provide answers, he asked questions and tried to give us tools to answer them. We’ll never unlock the secrets of the game, but he basically helped us cut through 90% of the BS.

I do think the A’s crashed into the cliffs because Beane got obsessed with exploiting the market inefficiency of defense. So did the Mariners, another SABR friendly team. And both teams got crushed by the Rangers, who fielded a better defensive team without giving up offense. Sabermetrics clearly do not have the toolkit to evaluate defense – just look at the massive difference between b-ref’s WAR and fangraph’s WAR, almost entirely from incompatible defensive evaluation.

WAR, of course, brings me to the biggest problem with sabermetrics today. While the concept of the One True Number to rate player value is fine, it’s A) not practical and B) fails to tell us anything meaningful. You mean Jose Bautista is good? Thanks. But it doesn’t tell us why. Trying to boil things down to one number, by design, means sabermetricians aren’t looking at the full picture of the player. How does this player bring value? It’s a question James disciples are largely failing out (except fangraphs, particularly with cool stuff like Leverage Index).

What made James’ writing so great is not the numbers, it’s the fact he was asking questions and trying to find answers without preconceived notions. I think people are losing sight that the true value was in asking the question in the first place. Relying on WAR and stopping there is just lazy analysis, and just as bad as the crap James railed against when he first started writing.

The reason I like the “slash stats” so much is that it gives me a well-rounded picture of a player in numbers that even casual fans understand. EqA requires explanation, and you have to trust someone else’s inputs. AVG/OBP/SLG tells you about 90% of what you need to know about a hitter in a way that requires no explanation to the casual fan.

For example: 220/330/500. Can you picture that player in your head? I can. He’s a hulking slugger who strikes out a ton, but also can crush the ball so he ends up walking a lot due to pitchers working around him. He’s Adam Dunn or Mark Reynolds. 300/330/380. Got him? A speedy slap hitter, probably from the Caribbean, who internalized the old mantra “you don’t walk off the island”. Now, do it for WAR. 4.7. What the hell does that tell me?

Always enjoy your posts.

I agree 100 percent that Billy jumped the gun on defense, and it's hurting him now offensively. Hell, even the best defenders out there are only taking away 18 runs more than the average defender (which translates to 162/19, basically a run saved ever 8 or 9 games).

Though as you say, defensive stats are flawed.

please...the A's major failing is that, in the end, the competition can carry a much higher total salary. A-Rod makes almost 3/4 the total A's payroll.

(no message)

All hail OBP!

If I were to criticize Beane for any decision he made it would be to select Eric Chavez as the guy he committed money to among the A's regulars. Of course, he had already lost Giambi and Tejada to free agency, both of whom got larger contracts than Chavez so his options were limited.

quote:

---

If I were to criticize Beane for any decision he made it would be to select Eric Chavez as the guy he committed money to among the A's regulars. Of course, he had already lost Giambi and Tejada to free agency, both of whom got larger contracts than Chavez so his options were limited.

---

let's not forget he gave Ben Sheets $10 mil