Anyone Read Moneyball Yet?

[derekn]

I finally read MoneyBall. I was fascinated at how Billy Beane reshaped the Oakland A's on a budget. Even more fascinating was that Billy Beane accepted the Red Sox GM for a day and then changed his mind. The book included what Billy Beane was going to do to change the Sox. The book also talked about Theo being a Billy Beane disciple.

I wonder if the Sox don't come close this year, what the shape of 2005 team will look like?

[Zenny]

Billy Beane's first move would've been to trade Jason Varitek. I love Billy Beane. :D

[derekn]

Interesting thing too about this book is that the A's scouted Youkilis (sp).
A lot of MLB GMs are salivating over his skillset.

[trot4mvp]

Maybe Billy Beane and his disciples can take a cue from the Florida Marlins and Anaheim Angels and learn that "small ball" does have a place in Major League Baseball. For the most part I agreed with everything in the book, but I can't help but think how much more successful his OBP philosophy could be if his team engaged in bunting, hit and runs, stealing, etc. Sure, one of his primary doctrines is to "avoid outs," but in the long run, aren't runs more important than outs (especially in the playoffs)???

[derekn]

trot4mvp,

The way I understood "avoid outs" theory was you have more chances of staying in the game when you have more outs to work with. Runs are indeed important but you can't score when you have made 3 outs.

For me the theme of the book, was finding value in players without breaking your budget. And interestingly enough, after letting Tejado go to free agency, Damon and earlier Giambi, the A's signed Chavez to a long term deal this year.

To the Red Sox fans, how about how the A's reinvented Hatteberg as a 1st baseman? He's a solid baseball player and was undervalued as a catcher to the Red Sox organization.

If anything, the points raised in Moneyball is to re-examine how your team spends its $$$. I keep thinking if Manny only made $8 million a year what the Sox could do with the other $10 million......

[elsrbueno]

The "Moneyball" theory is an interesting one, valued by Beane, and the Red Sox. Francona always talks about "not giving up outs."

For me, I think the OBP stuff has its place, but also I think sacrifices also have their place in close games. You can't ALWAYS look for the big inning, because more times than not, it aint gunna happen. Especially against good pitchers in the playoffs.

Ask the Atlanta Braves.

[trot4mvp]

...or ask the Oakland A's, who have lost 4 straight playoff series, which could possibly be attributed to a lack of small ball (barring Ramon Hernandez's bases loaded bunt in Game 1 of the ALDS last year...which was a fluke)...

derekn, I understand the thought behind the "no outs" idea as well, and theoretically it should work. Players should continue getting hits and walking and, in turn, score runs by avoiding "out inducing plays" like sac bunts, etc. Theo Epstein has built a team around this philosophy and his players have some of the highest OBPs in baseball. My issue with the "no outs" idea is that what happens when players get on base and don't score runs w/o small ball? The Red Sox have been one of the worst teams in baseball in terms of leaving men on base in scoring position, even though the majority of their starters (Ramirez, Varitek, Damon, Bellhorn, Ortiz, Nixon, Youk) have OBPs higher than .350. This is merely speculation, but perhaps a sac bunt or a hit and run or any of the other baseball plays characterized as "small ball" could benefit this club that clearly gets on base quite frequently but cannot score runs. Last year, it wasn't a problem, but it is clearly an issue this year.

By the way, can anyone recommend a good baseball stats site? I'm sick of going to espn.com...I know they're out there, but I'm just too lazy to look. Thanks.

[yeszir]

Sorry for the short post, but I'm typing from a laptop on a dial-up connection in the boonies. Anyway, I despise moneyball. It just seems to me that everyone who reads it turns into some OBP zombie who is unable to formulate his or her own opinion about anything regarding baseball.

Congratulations to you if you read the book and take some of it with a grain of salt. I think that the moneyball theory is partially to blame for the Red Sox current slumpish performance.

[derekn]

yeszir,

Good points about OBP zombies, however...

I don't think the Red Sox are in the MoneyBall mode yet. There are still some leftovers from the Duquette era that Theo had nothing to do with signing or trading for. Theo has only had the reins for only 2 seasons.

The biggest blunder of Duquette's administration was signing Manny to that ridiculous contract. That contract has allowed very little wiggle room for Theo to be completely creative and apply the Moneyball theories. Still I am amazed at Theo's free agent signings, Ortiz, Walker, Reese, Belhorn and obviously Schilling.

I would say the Red Sox now are a half Moneyball/half Duquette team.
In 2 more years the team will be completely in the mold of Epstein, then we can blame the Moneyball theory.