web
counter
 

Moneyball: Boom or Bust? Examining the Legacy of Billy Beane and How It Will Translate Into Film

By Dan Saipher | Posted Under Think Pieces | Comments (16)



moneyball-boom.jpg

The trailers are starting to make the rounds for the digested, regurgitated and over-incubated adaptation of Michael Lewis’ best-selling baseball novel, Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game. Brad Pitt pushed for a film version of the novel, which highlights the change in direction of the Oakland Athletics under General Manager Billy Beane. The San Francisco Bay Area franchise was one of the highest spending clubs in the early parts of the 90s, but after owner Walter Haas died in 1995, the new ownership group slashed payroll and cut operating costs (apparently this sort of behavior isn’t limited to the New York Knights or Charlie Sheen’s Cleveland Indians).

Beane’s strategies expanded upon statistical analysis with objective studies and regressions analysis and all sorts of mathematical approaches, embracing the field of “Sabermetrics”. By developing a different idea about how baseball games were won, and a different idea about which players best projected to major league talent, the A’s went through a half-decade run of regular season success while spending a fraction of their wealthy rivals.

It’s impossible to glean how the movie will examine the character of Billy Beane, a 6’4 idol of number-crunchers and bane of old-world baseball traditionalists. The A’s were certainly successful under Beane, but lately they’ve been a cellar-dwelling, no-drawing cornucopia of over-hyped prospects that couldn’t hit sand in a desert. Moneyball was both boom and bust, and over time it’s become easier to examine these facets as the A’s fortunes wane.



Boom: It’s a big part of the new small-market approach.

The sabermetrics disciples have walked the pilgrim roads to baseball’s cathedrals, knocking on management’s doors with a near-indecipherable book of spreadsheets known as Bill James Baseball Abstract. Ivy League economics graduates can now be found in every organization, greatly widening a team’s understanding of the game. While Beane wasn’t even the first (his predecessor Sandy Alderson began the A’s move towards sabermetrics) or the most successful, his visibility and solid run of winning years opened the door for small market teams to rethink investments and scouting. The reinvigoration of Red Sox Nation, the upstart paupers in Tampa Bay, and others were highly influenced by Moneyball.

Bust: The fabled 2002 Draft.

Beane’s dissection and approach to the 2002 MLB Amateur Draft was akin to Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel frescoes. Except only one or two were fairly nice and the rest were finger paintings. Drafting Nick Swisher in the first round was very good (he’s easily in the top 10 of first-round draftees that year), and drafting Mark Teahan was solid with the 39th overall pick.

Yet more time was spent convincing his scouts that Jeremy Brown was the best catching prospect of the year. How did turn out? 11 major league at-bats. For his career. Beane goes on to present a list of prospects that would be his ideal team, and even those results would have been disastrous. His sought-after triumvirate of Joe Blanton/Jeff Francis/Jeremy Guthrie is at best the back end of a mediocre rotation, and only the aforementioned Swisher and Teahan made major league impacts. The guys he passed up in the first 4 rounds? Matt Cain, Zach Greinke, Cole Hamels, Prince Fielder, James Loney, Denard Span, Brian McCann, Joey Votto, Jon Lester, Jonathon Broxton, and Curtis Granderson.

Boom: Billy Beane did find some real gems.

My Red Sox hatred cannot mask an appreciation for Kevin Youkilis, a guy who can absolutely rake. But in college, Youk was seen as a non-prospect because of his lack of a “good body.” What Beane promoted was looking beyond a guy’s physical attributes.

In football and basketball, tons of stock is placed in a guy’s “measurables”: how fast he runs in the 40-yard dash, how long is his wingspan, how many bench press reps before scouts have to change their underwear. But Youkilis and other soft-bodied athletes have ample time in baseball to get themselves into better shape, especially post-college dorm life and under the care of team trainers and nutritional regiments. Beane took a chance on Barry Zito (more on him in a sec) and he won a Cy Young. Beane loved Eric Chavez, and all he did was average 30 home runs with an OPS of .870 and stellar defense from 2000-2004.

Boom: OPS is a worthy standard of evaluation.

Batting average is the simplest standard of evaluation, the first stat on a player’s profile on ESPN, but its grip in professional circuits has been eroded by OPS, a measure of On-Base Percentage (OBP) plus Slugging Percentage (SLG). Players with a high OPS combine batting average with factors such as plate discipline and power. While the stat still favors home-run hitters, it incorporates speed through extra-base hits and elements of OBP such as legging out a grounder, or beating the throw to first on a double play.

Mini-bust: Beane’s draft strategy focused on high-OPS college players. Of the top 10 OPS leaders in either the AL or NL, 50 percent took the college route, 50 percent were high school picks or of the Latino world.

Bust: Walks don’t work in the postseason.

A walk is as good as hit, but not all the time. Despite making the playoffs for four straight years (2000-2003), the A’s couldn’t get over the hump and win the pennant. A huge problem was their offense; their strategy that relied on increasing a starter’s pitches per appearance didn’t create runs. In the playoffs, the A’s faced guys who were too good to give up walks, and managers let them pitch deeper into games while ignoring pitch counts. Walks might eat up journeymen and the Ollie Perez-es of the world, but guys like Cliff Lee and Chris Carpenter built careers on pitching to contact.

Boom: He wasn’t competing against just the Yankees.

Every time someone describes baseball as a game of the “haves” and the “have-nots,” the Yankees are the epitome the former. However, the A’s didn’t have to contend with just the Yankees, as their division (the American League West) was unusually strong for a few of the years that encompass Moneyball.

In the years 2000, 2002, and 2004, three of four teams in the AL West finished above .500. With only four teams in the division total, this puts a higher premium on game-by-game performance with tougher rivals and a need to not be losing ground.

Bust: What you can’t measure.

Two of baseball’s famed “five tools,” speed and arm strength (others included batting average, batting power, and fielding) went largely ignored by Beane. Together, these tools are equivalent to the compositional elements of painting in standardized test result format. Guys who were sculpted Greek statues before graduating high school had all of the tools, and baseball scouts hounded the countryside in rented cars for fenceless fields trying to find “five-tool players”. Beane hated these guys; he hated trying to project an 18 year-old kid who owned backwater counties or California high school ball as a 25 year-old major leaguer.

While some of those famed tools go wasted, they are silent factors that managers keep in their back pocket for big moments, or worse yet, feared elements. Speed can fluster a pitcher and a defense, move a guy into scoring position where a sacrifice will do instead of a hit. Or vice versa; that right fielder with a Howitzer for an arm can prevent a run through reputation alone, or a pituitary human anomaly that makes a bat look like a toothpick might intimidate a green pitcher. The best teams are diverse, not just on the major league roster but through developmental farm systems.

Boom: Pitching > Everything.

Once in a generation, a team magically hits the jackpot with a string of starting pitchers that dramatically alter the franchise’s fate. The Braves had Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz. The Dodgers had Koufax and Drysdale. The Orioles had Palmer, Cuellar, Dobson, and McNally.

Billy Beane hit on that same tangent. In drafting Barry Zito, Mark Mulder, and Tim Hudson, he had 3 Cy Young candidates that averaged a record of 66-33 from 2001 to 2004.

How does that affect the rest of the team? Consider that those averages leave 63 games left to be started by other pitchers. And for any given year in baseball, 90 wins puts you in contention for a wild card spot. That means, in order to get to that magic 90 win total, the other pitchers had to have at least a combined record of 24 wins and 39 losses. That’s a win percentage (38%) worse than all but one team in the majors this year. Give him credit for finding those pitchers, but don’t forget how easy it is when they play to potential, and play injury free.

Minor-Bust: Barry Zito has turned himself into the worst free agent signing in baseball history. How has he dropped off despite leaving tougher AL lineups in the DH-free National League? Sabremetrics has an idea . Zito won 62% of his games from 2001-2006, with an ERA of 3.61. But consider the expanded stats FIP/xFIP. These take into account advantages and disadvantages of ballparks, and Oakland’s home park is exceptionally resistant to the longball. So Zito, who featured an 88-mph fastball that lived high in the strike zone, used the spacious dimensions. His ERA jumps up a run and a half under the parameters of xFIP to a poor 4.69 in his Oakland days.

Boom: Billy Beane has serious mental issues.

I’ve labeled this as a “Boom” factor purely for the movie’s sake. After Steven Soderbergh’s version of the film was put on hold in June of 2009, Aaron Sorkin was given re-write privileges. The hope, looking past the Jerry McGuire-like elements of the trailer, is that he can expose the darker side of Beane, illustrating his imperfections much like those of Marky Mark and the Zuckerbunch.

It would be easy to label the book as a love story in favor of the genius of Billy Beane, but Michael Lewis was expository in regards to Beane’s flaws. The players that he sought out, college players who didn’t have all the tools, or didn’t look good in a pair of jeans but got on base, were the exact opposite of Beane himself. He was a stud prospect, California local legend, a possible number one overall pick destined to play left field for the Mets opposite Lenny Dykstra and Daryl Strawberry.

But boy, did Billy have issues. His inability to deal with failures, on even the smallest of battlefields, manifested in violent outbursts. He broke bats against clubhouse walls, contemplated quitting the game multiple times, and his family pissed away his first big signing bonus on a bad real estate investment. In the trailer scene that depicts Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill in direct contrast to the opinions of a smoky room of leather-faced scouts, there’s a light-hearted Ocean’s Eleven mood. But the book describes how Beane “exploded” a chair after hurling it into a wall, despondent that his scouts couldn’t share his obtuse vision. Baseball’s champion of the nerdy, well-educated outsider was in fact, an insider who couldn’t cut it. He bounced around for 6 seasons, a .219 lifetime hitter who never played more than 80 games in a given year, who would have been little more than a footnote in baseball history in that group of young men who “should have been one of the greats.” Freshly divorced, begging for a job in a department that no one in baseball took seriously, Beane worked his way up and turned himself into something he never achieved as a player: Relevancy.

Dan Saipher is a strong advocate of the Twitter stylings of Old Ross Hadbourn .









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



No Little Boxes Here: Why "Weeds" is Worth Watching | Hurry Up, Winter! Yehudi Mercado's Game of Thrones Muppet Posters









Comments

The simple problem is that this story doesn't have a storybook Hollywood ending. The A's never won the American League, never played in a World Series and have won no titles using Beane's Sabermetrics plan.

It's like making The Social Network only in that Facebook doesn't become such a social force and instead is just a minor website that people occasionally visit to be snarky.

Posted by: Fredo at June 23, 2011 2:42 PM

This is a nice reflection on Beane and the pros and cons of his strategies, as well as a reminder that the analysis of statistics of baseball with all its possibilities and intricacies can be a gateway into the unending spiral of madness that is second-guessing.

For a guy like me that spends a lot of energy decrying the Yankees and their high-spending ilk, this at least gives a little hope of the capability of finding quality with less dollars, even if the A's did not get over the hump, and - as you point out - those pitchers played a lopsided role in that good run of theirs.

I enjoyed the column and look forward to seeing the film.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at June 23, 2011 2:51 PM

Fredo >> I haven't read the book or the script, but from a storytelling perspective, I think what you do to make it a compelling film is make it about the obsession of stat-tracking and turn it into a character study. Play up Beane's mental issues that Dan mentions. Zodiac didn't have a tidy ending, but it sure did create a vivid portrait of what it's like to become absorbed by an unsolved murder. Having watched the trailer, it doesn't necessarily look like that is the angle they'll be playing up, but it does look like they're going to make his character more important than the result.

Anyway, storybook Hollywood endings if done for their own sake generally suck.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at June 23, 2011 3:00 PM

Outstanding analysis, Dan. As fine an explanation of Sabremetrics and how it has succeeded and sometimes failed the GM's who embrace it.
Beane was the prophet but disciples like Theo Epstein in Boston and Jon Daniels in Texas have surpassed Billy. Granted, both of these teams have bigger bankrolls but if you look at the way Jon Daniels built a World Series team out of what had been a sad sack franchise since 1972, it's plain to see that Sabremetrics can succeed.
I loved the book but will likely pass on the movie.

Posted by: Spender at June 23, 2011 3:01 PM

Sabermetrics is everywhere now, and Billy refuses to adjust his system within the confines of it. I'll use Theo Epstein as a vague comparison. He started his career using the straightforward method you described above, not really valuing speed, and the Red Sox got only so far. Then he tweaked his formula, got a couple of speed and defensive specialists at the expense of crowd favorite players, and he hasn't looked back. Obviously, Beane has a much more restrictive payroll, but guys like Theo are owning him in the draft, and their farm systems are FAR superior (a testament to the power of evaluation BEFORE payroll comes into play).

Advanced metrics are great tools, but only if you understand how to apply them with an ever-evolving league.

Posted by: Kballs at June 23, 2011 3:10 PM

The aura of genius surrounding Billy Beane is a direct of result of Lewis's hagiography. And we can be sure that Sorkin, who never met a fact he couldn't ignore, will burnish that reputation.

Beane's A's have yet to appear in a WS game, and they've been a so-so club for a while now. Many other teams have applied similar methods in scouting players, even before there was a name for it. Baseball history is replete with references to seemingly unimpressive ballplayers who "couldn't do anything but beat you."

In fact, the great Oakland teams of the '70s boasted line-ups with low-average, high on-base guys like Tenace and Bando and Reggie. (Of course, they popped a few HRs as well.) The movie climax is sure to be the 20-game winning streak the A's put together during that time, which is as convincing a validation of "Moneyball" as Cher's winning an Oscar is proof of Sonny Bono's eye for acting talent.

Posted by: Abner Doubletalk at June 23, 2011 3:14 PM

Fredo, now why does that sound awfully familiar?

Posted by: Oroboros at June 23, 2011 3:32 PM

That would be a funny and shameless postscript for the movie:

"Beane's methods went on to inspire other Major League teams to employ similar tactics, which helped the Boston Red Sox win two world championships. Go Sox!"

Posted by: DarthCorleone at June 23, 2011 3:33 PM

Brad Pitt is looking a little Robert Redford-y in that header pic. Just me?

Posted by: Jeni at June 23, 2011 3:46 PM

Sabermetrics is now infecting the NBA. Long incurious about statistics, the NBA is now adopting many complex statistics like PER, EFG, win shares, defensive ratings, plus/minus, etc., etc. The upside to them is that we can see the limits of basic stats (getting inflated numbers on a weak team, effective lineups and so forth) but at the same time, using them in arguments actually weakens your case cuz most of them depend on only one side of the floor. 

Sabermetrics is actually helping the NBA get out of the dark age but at the same time they're introducing a new generation of myopic stat heads who stop watching the game and go by their numbers instead. 

The eyeball test remains far away the best tool in the scout's box & the only way to see intangibles such as body language, leadership, communication on defensive rotations, etc. 

Posted by: Oroboros at June 23, 2011 4:00 PM

I agree with Abner.

Remember when Miggy hit that walk off to keep the streak alive? Game 18 or 19 or something?

*tear* Ahhhh...the good ol' days...

Posted by: =DocDoom1= at June 23, 2011 5:12 PM

DarthCorleone, it could work that way, but the problem is that people tend to associate sports movies with on-the-field triumphs. I'm trying to think what was the last sports movie that didn't deal with the sports aspect in some way. (Fever Pitch? The Blind Side?)

At some point, Beane's mania has to be justified. That justification is the A's successes, which don't exist in the manner that would make for a successful film.

Think of A Beautiful Mind. Does that movie work if John Nash doesn't win the Nobel Prize?

Posted by: Fredo at June 23, 2011 5:40 PM

I'm just happy (and confused) to be reading about baseball on Pajiba. Talk about your weird boners

Posted by: Uncle Mikey at June 24, 2011 10:19 AM

The 2002 draft was a very successful draft by any reasonable standard. Citing it as a bust in part because one specific player didn't have any real ML career shows a completely unrealistic view of what you can expect from the draft. Swisher and Teahen alone make it ridiculous to call it a "bust".

Posted by: S.K. at June 24, 2011 10:35 AM

"Money Ball" is bullshit.

In Toronto, we had Beane disciple J.P. Ricciardi, an idiot who looked only at stats, as if players were nothing but abstractions to be micromanaged.

Only a complete fucking idiot would trade a good defensive infielder (Cesar Izturis) & a very reliable reliever (Paul Quantrill) for a bag of used baseballs - again, based on statistics he claimed "proved" these were players way past their usefulness as major leaguers.
What happened after that was that for years, 2B/SS was a revolving door of forgettable "talent".

Ricciardi also gave up on future Cy Young winner Chris Carpenter & on Carlos Delgado while awarding glorified bench player Eric Hinske a huge contract... same story with Vernon Wells.
The managers he brought in were nothing but yes-men who would've been hard pressed to run a T-ball team (Tosca, Gibbons).
It was NEVER about getting the best man for the job, only the most obedient & controllable.

No wonder Roy Halladay wanted to be traded! management kept saying "next year, next year..."
Jays were supposed to contend by 2005 according to Ricciardi's plan...

As Bugs Bunny would say, "What a maroon!"

Ricciardi is what Billy Beane really would've been without the accidental blessing of Zito/Mulder/Hudson.


But then again, this IS Toronto we're talking about: a city of cursed sports teams (Maple Laffs, Craptors, TFC Soccer team) full of idiot fans who only cheer for fourth-liners & bench-warmers, because they possess "Blue-Collar" cred.


Posted by: harold ballard's ghost at June 24, 2011 12:55 PM

swarm on mate

Posted by: go4sc2 starcraft bets at August 5, 2011 8:50 AM