Do yoo think that moneyball is overrated?

Answer 1

First of all, anyone who thinks that Moneyball is all about taking walks and having a high OBP is an idiot.

If you take time to actually read the book and listen to Billy Beane, you'll learn that "moneyball" refers to exploiting any asset in the current baseball market that is undervalued. Several years ago, that asset was OBP, which other teams are now also valuing much more. After OBP, Beane seemed to switch to defense, which he believes had become undervalued. Next year, it could be something else - that's what moneyball is all about. It's about exploitation of the system, not any one item.

As for OBP itself, anyone who underestimates its value knows nothing about baseball. If you actually look at numbers - instead of just making things up - you'll find that teams who score a lot of runs tend to have a high OBP. Going back to last season - the Phillies led the NL in runs, and had the second-highest OBP. The Yankees led the AL in runs, and had by far the highest OBP in the leauge. Or if you want historical context, check out a dynasty like the Big Red Machine, another team that did very well in OBP.

Finally, anyone who criticizes the A's for not having won a World Series needs to learn basic statistics. In a 3-of-5 or 4-of-7 format, luck plays as big a role as does skill, at least on the major league level. There's a lot of variance.

Answer 2

Yes and no. Clearly the A's organization has been very productive with a *very* limited budget. So in that sense, moneyball has worked quite well. Indeed, the A's have made it to post season 5 of the last 7 seasons. Boston has made it 3 of the last 7 seasons with a payroll of well more than twice as much.

But on the other hand, the Twins have been successful without the attention moneyball has received.

BTW, from 2001 to 2006, the A's had the second best record in baseball and their division had the BEST record in baseball -- by far.

Here is a list of divisions on the games over (under) 500 over this span

AL West +264
NL East +111
AL East -12
NL West -23
NL Central -150
AL Central -190

Answer 3

It's mostly misunderstood, and when dotards like Joe Morgan (who hasn't read it, won't read it, and doesn't like to read anything) utterly misrepresent it on national casts, it doesn't help.

Hint: note the title. MONEYball. Not "Statball". MONEYball. The core message is how to find those players who play winning baseball in ways other teams don't understand, respect, or care about, and getting them cheap. Why pay $20M for a juicy Giambi when you can get 90% of his productivity in another player for $4M? Moneyball is finding the 90% guys.

The postseason is a short-series, elimination format against other known good teams. There's no proven method for ensuring success in the postseason, because there's not enough time or games for a small but real advantage to win out consistently.

Answer 4

Absolutely. They can't even win the weakest division, let alone advance in the postseason any time they do make it. It's not that small ball doesn't work, it's that moneyball is based off of sabermetrics, which are mostly bunk. You aren't going to walk every run in, so OBP isn't enough. You need guys who can hit, and guys who can hit for power, to drive in runs. That's why the triple crown is still the best thing a hitter can achieve.

Answer 5

I love money ball. There are some things I agree with a disagree with but overall it makes a lot of sence. I like their theorys on bunting with two on and no outs. If you think about it, if you bunt your giving up an out anyway why not let the guy hit away and move the runners without giving up an out. I like the book an the ideas

Answer 6

Well,
It has not produced a World Series winner in Oakland. In fact, it took till last year for them to even win a playoff series. So it is only part productive.

Answer 7

YES! but not as bad as the hollywierd stars who can get away with anything and all the mindless gameshows on TV. Why do we pay so much money to watch this crap???