The Effect of Moneyball

Fantasy Jungle · Post by **Fantasy Jungle** » Wed Feb 18, 2004 6:46 pm

Rey,

I thought Moneyball was a decent book. It definately puts a new spin on how some front office things are being done differently now, than in yesterday's game.

In addition to Beane, Ricardi, DePodesta, Theo Epstein goes by this school of thought and I believe the guy in Cleveland is big on it. There may be others, but right there, that is 1/6 of the league. What will be interesting to see is how effective it is as it gets copied over and over. Eventually the system is going to get f'd up somewhere down the line and there is going to be a bunch of bad teams that are trying to copy it and end up making a mess.

Personally I like it, just as long as they give a consideration to the team chemistry element. One thing about Oakland, those guys realy like each other and hang out together off the field, so the chemistry is there. So far its the best alternative to competing with a big spending team such as Boston and NY, because if you can play station to station baseball and get some good pitching, you have a shot to take these guys out in a series.

Rey · Post by **Rey** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:50 am

Eventually, these "Moneyball" GM's will probably have to revisit their strategies when it comes to evaluating talent. I mean, one of the reasons Beane has been able to succeed has been the fact that he's gone after players that noboody else has wanted, and was able to get then at a good value. With more and more teams going with this sabermetric system, these players are getting much more exposure, and as a result, their prices will undoubtably go up as well. Hence, the Oakland A's of the world will no longer have the luxury of finding these diamonds in the rough at cheap prices.

Fantasy Jungle · Post by **Fantasy Jungle** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:14 am

I agree.

What part of Miami are you in by the way? I saw in another thread that you were from there. When are you heading out to Vegas?

Rey · Post by **Rey** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 10:52 am

I'm in the Kendall area. You familiar with it? What part are you from?

I also have a place in the Keys (Islamorada) so I spend much of my time lounging and reading fantasy baseball articles as I kick back with an umbrella topped drink in my hand.

Fantasy Jungle · Post by **Fantasy Jungle** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 7:51 pm

Originally posted by Rey:

I also have a place in the Keys (Islamorada) so I spend much of my time lounging and reading fantasy baseball articles as I kick back with an umbrella topped drink in my hand.Nice, I'm jealous. Islamorada is a great place to fish isnt it? Do you fish also?

I ve been to Kendall a few times. I am up in Boca, but getting ready to move to North Miami Beach in about a month.

BB of the Leaderboard · Post by **BB of the Leaderboard** » Fri Feb 20, 2004 11:03 pm

Originally posted by Rey:

With more and more teams going with this sabermetric system, these players are getting much more exposure, and as a result, their prices will undoubtably go up as well. Wasn't the Red Sox decision at the beginning of last season to go with the closer-by-committee option also based on "sound sabremetric principles?"

I haven't read the book but have read that since its publication Beane has found trading a lot more difficult. I guess telling the world how stupid your contemporaries can be is not the best PR move, eh?

B(Threw in the "eh" to help Greg attract the international market from north of the border)B

[ February 21, 2004, 05:04 AM: Message edited by: BB of the Leaderboard ]

Rey · Post by **Rey** » Sat Feb 21, 2004 3:44 am

In regards to the Sox and their bad bullpen last year, I have a story to share that I think shows the flaw in popular opinions on bullpens.

At the height of the storm last year, after the pen had blown a couple saves in a row early in the season, Rob Dibble came out on Baseball Tonight and blasted the Sox brain trust for mismanaging the team and having no idea what they were doing. At the time, the Sox owned the 2nd best record in the AL. I wrote to Dibble and pointed out that while he accused the Sox of not knowing what they were doing, they had gotten off to one of their best starts in recent memory. His responce was made up of rants and raves about the importance of the closer and how the Sox "would not be able to survive without a true closer".

I just found it amusing how, amidst all the hoopla about how they didn't have a bullpen, the Sox kept winning throughout. People seemed more fascinated about the fact that their bullpen sucked, and ignored the fact that they won regularly without one.

WOuld they have been a better team with a better bullpen? Of course they would have. But they proved you could win without one.

Oh...and before someone points out the inevitable "Yea, they could win in the regular season without a dominating closer, but you need one in the playoffs to survive!", just remember that the Sox whole bullpen was pratically untouchable in the postseason last year...and they still lost.

[ February 21, 2004, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: Rey ]