Moneyball

I watch my share of movies, but am not a big movie guy. I don't think I have ever been as excited for a movie as I am for Moneyball. The movie is finally out, many years after the book and has actually gotten great reviews. This is the movie about the Oakland Athletics and Billy Beane, my favorite GM in the game. I read the Moneyball book years back and it was definitely a page-turner. I expect this movie to be equally good and hope it doesn't make me cry! I miss those Oakland teams and how good they were with those big 3 - Hudson, Mulder and Zito. They had a small payroll, actually very small. But they also had those pitchers and Eric Chavez, Miguel Tejada and what appeared to be a very sturdy farm system. All of the big 3 and Chavez and Tejada were drafted by the A's and they also had Rich Harden and Joe Blanton coming up. And don't forget closer Houston Street, shortstop Bobby Crosby and outfielder Nick Swisher - all guys homegrown and pretty good. Beane always went out and made some great mid-season trades to rent players for the stretch run. And he would let him walk after the season and accumulate more draft picks for more moneyball picks.

The book explained that strategy among many others. It explained the A's love for walks, OPS and college players. It also explained why they thought high-school prospects are risky, bunts are bad, and defense is over-rated. It all made sense to the A's fans when the book came out because they were witnessing all this in real-time. The team was full of home-grown, young, cheap talent drafted by A's and they were winning big. The book credited all this to A's love for sabermetrics and A's trust in numbers and statistics. It also ridiculed traditional drafting techniques, scouts and old-school GMs and that rubbed a lot of people the wrong way. Fast forwarding to the here and now, many of those people are taking a lot of pleasure from the troubles Beane and the A's are in. Very surprisingly, all of Beane's magic seems to have evaporated. May be it's bad karma! The A's teams since 2007 have been bad, uninteresting and boring. They have really not even showcased any top, young talent to be stolen by the richer clubs. They seem to bring up young players, but none of them seem to really stick out. There was a lot of hope for their pitchers this year after last year's performance, but they seem to have all taken a step back.

The primary problem for Beane is that the entire league is now into sabermetrics and the Moneyball book is a big reason for this. Between the book and the championship success of the Boston Redsox - another moneyball team, the rest of the league seemed to have followed suit. Billy Beane was not the first or the only one to rely on stats back in the day, but the book promoted him as a genius and popularized the concepts. This has led to all the other teams following suit. Many scouts and GMs are upset with Beane because they were all offended by some of the scenes in the book. The primary criticism of Beane is that he never won anything big - the A's have not even been to the World Series under his watch. The other complaint is that the book (or the movie) doesn't give much credit to the top talent they had - the big 3 pitchers especially. Their point is, the top talent they had were all high on most people's draft boards, with or without moneyball and hence Beane can't take much credit for those. Most of the true "moneyball" picks on the other hand, have not done much in the big league. I used to wonder about that myself as the book spent entire chapters on certain players as if they were surefire diamonds in the rough that the A's and A's alone spotted. But I have not heard of those players at all since then. So the critics say the A's were successful because of Hudson, Zito and Mulder and not because of moneyball or Beane's genius.

As always, the truth is somewhere in-between. To be fair to Beane, he did pick most of those star players and they may not have been entirely moneyball picks, but I am sure Beane followed some of his drafting policies on them as well. Secondly, I think the whole point is how he was winning an unfair game and you can't dismiss all that just because he never won the big one. Boston did win big because they backed up the moneyball numbers with the most important numbers that matter - zeros on the paychecks making up that big payroll. Theo Epstein is also a moneyball guy and Beane actually recommended him when Boston was hiring after Beane turned that job down himself. I wonder if it was a bad decision on the part of Beane to have rejected that offer in retrospect. At that time, the theory was, Beane with those resources will be more scrutinized and will look less like a genius and of course, it was also going to be hard to handle that crazy east coast media and the RedSox pressures. But Theo erased the curse of the bambino and brought a championship to Boston. He will never have to pay for a drink again in Boston. If Beane had won that ring - no guarantee he would have, he would be an even bigger star just because of the name recognition. Epstein was just a kid back then and he earned his stripes with that ring. Beane on the other already had the stripes. The stripes would have only gotten brighter, thicker and deeper. Hope he doesn't regret that decision and end up going to Chicago where they are looking to hire a GM to erase their own curse and Beane is on the shortlist of candidates.

Beane does deserve credit for revolutionizing the game to some extent. He was one of the early adopters of sabermetrics and the moneyball idea has definitely "crossed the chasm" now. It's mainstream to the point the A's can't work the system anymore. Beane in some sense shot himself in the foot with the book and also his success in general. Most of his critics are just bitter and they are being sadistic in enjoying his recent struggles. Moneyball definitely had it's share of good ideas and he deserves credit for it. They have to learn to give the devil it's due. Sure, the book does mock the traditional scouts and the baseball hierarchy - sometimes unnecessarily, but thats just the arrogance that personifies the whole jock and sports culture. Beane is just an ex-jock and his critics should cut him some slack. He is now facing an uphill battle. All of his competitive advantage is gone as richer teams are doing what he is doing, but with a lot of cash that the A's don't have. He has also learned to incorporate more traditional techniques these days as he has realized pure moneyball can't do it alone. Plus, I am not even sure what the Oakland A's want these days as a franchise. They are dealing with stadium issues, potential moves etc. Sometimes I wonder if they are self-destructing for a reason - to force a move or a new stadium or something. That would be sinister, but thats all part of the business of sports. Whatever it is, I wish Beane the best of luck, I hope he stays with Oakland and I expect him to be back with a decent product on the field soon. It's time for him to re-invent himself and if anybody can do it, he sure can.

If Beane leaves the A's, there is always the option of hiring Brad Pitt as their next GM!