Highly recommend Moneyball

[Laura PourMeADrink]

Great movie about the Oakland A's and the scientific method
for building a baseball team

Loved it.

[trumad]

1. Saber-metrics worked well for a season...

and certainly has merit...but... in 2011, the Oakland A's were 74-88.

terrific movie though.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

2. Only based on offense, right? Guess the assumption is

you can train defense. Stuck me though you would have to factor
age in too.

[trumad]

3. The whole key is On base percentage.

I get the concept and it certainly has merit.... but if you look at the A's season records since, I'd have to conclude it isn't as successful as the movie implies it to be.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

4. right....I see it as successful in a perfect world where

nothing changes. No one's OBP ever starts a permanent decline. No new pitchers join the mix.
No one gets hurt. Factors that cause mutation. And, you can't keep restaffing every day -
there's a natural need to put in the hours/games a a team. You are always going to have
days when your players are having those down times when they aren't achieving
their avg OBP. If the majority doesn't, you lose.

All that said, I love baseball and thought the whole idea was very thought provoking.

[hughee99]

11. And not just that, but even under ideal circumstances

it just means that the A's would get more "bang for the buck" than other teams, it doesn't necessarily mean they would get enough to win it all. The guys with the highest OBP's last year were guys that had good everything (Cabrera, Batista, Votto, Fielder, Berkman, Adrian Gonzalez, Matt Kemp, Ortiz and Braun) and were priced out of the A's market. The A's are still relegated to looking at just the stats of the best players they can afford.

The system allows for the A's to be more competitive than other teams looking at similar players, but doesn't necessarily translate into an overriding advantage over big market teams, especially teams that can financially "afford to be wrong" on player evaluation.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

14. right... The best OBP the A's can put together is probably much lower than the big money

OBP average. Good point

Good luck this weekend (not really :&gt

What's the spread?

[hughee99]

15. Unbelievably, Pats giving 3

The Pats have played 2 quality opponents in the last 2 months while the Giants have had to play some very tough opponents to get here. I was very surprised to see the Pats favored at all.

I hope you enjoy the game, even if you don't like the final score

[Laura PourMeADrink]

16. Well, you can only keep beating good teams every time for so long

before the spell breaks. Hope my team has one more in them.

I grew up half way between NYC and Boston. So you had
to love one and hate the other. Our family went the
Yankees/Giants route. But half the town went the other
way - Red Sox/Patriots.

[Auggie]

5. A's are in the same boat as Cleveland

Small markets with owners of limited financial means. It's hard to put it all together when you have to recycle the roster every few years.

[JonLP24]

7. The advantage the A's found

was simply finding players that were undervalued by other teams. Once teams took notice they started offering players with higher OBP w/ bigger salaries. It is the natural order of things, next time someone finds an inside advantage in any sport, it will quickly disappear.

[HuckleB]

12. Exactly! -eom-

[PVnRT]

29. Other teams started using it to snatch up good players

The Oakland A's succeeded for a while because they found good players for rock-bottom prices. With everyone throwing money at sabremetric-approved players now, you can't be cheap and win. That's Oakland's problem.

[hughee99]

6. As more MLB teams get wise to this method of evaluating talent

It becomes harder and harder for the A's to find these "hidden gems" that allow them to compete. Other teams are now looking at OBP and OPS and putting less stock batting average and certainly in stolen bases. The A's were able to take advantage because they were ahead of the curve in looking at some of these stats, but as other teams begin to use them, they end up tied to the same payroll disadvantage they had before. Teams still overvalue saves which is why the A's continue to build up closers and then get rid of them when there's market demand.

I didn't see the movie yet, but loved the book.

[JonLP24]

8. I don't always agree

but I feel that me and you are often on the same page.

[hughee99]

10. I feel the same about you. n/t

[joeybee12]

9. I assume it's on video now? nt

[Laura PourMeADrink]

17. not sure...saw it On Demand on cable. nt

[joeybee12]

18. Took me 4 months to get Bridesmaids from the library...

I will put Moneyball on hold and come July tell you what I thought of it!!!

[Laura PourMeADrink]

19. Ok ! Bridesmaids was unexpectedly very funny to me nt

[joeybee12]

20. I have to say it was a letdown...entertaining and funny...

But I guess I was expecting gut-wrenching funny from what I had heard about it.

[trumad]

21. Horrible movie...

[joeybee12]

22. It was not...

Not great or what I thought it would be, but definitely not horrible...especially not horrible like anything Meryl Streep is in.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

23. Really? Not even Melissa McCarthy? nt

[joeybee12]

24. She made that movie...nt

[trumad]

25. They were simply trying to one up the Hang over movie...

One funny part--- the shitting scene and that was it.

The main character was the most self-absorbed me me me character I've seen in a while.

[joeybee12]

26. I agree partly...more brisdesmaids, less Kristin Wiig...

She was very unappealing.

As for Habgover...God, now THAT was an awful movie.

[trumad]

27. You think Bridesmaids was better than the Hangover...?

Don't make me call you a Douche.

[joeybee12]

28. Staring at the lint in my navel is better than Hangover...

God-awful movie.

[trumad]

30. Alright---you asked for it.

Douche

[joeybee12]

31. Slacker!

It doesn't have the same effect without the "bag"!!!!

[joeybee12]

32. See 31...responded to the wrong post! nt

[El Supremo]

13. Everyone is missing the point.

It's a really good baseball movie.

[Auggie]

33. Great film, though Art Howe isn't such a jerk

Just saw it. Howe, apparently, is quite irate in how he was portrayed by Philip Seymore Hoffman. I believe he bought into Beane's approach 100%

Another aspect of the book, not mentioned in the movie, was how small clubs targeted Latin American players early on, often signing 10 to 15 prospects for the price of one U.S. college prospect. Ciubs like Cleveland also directed more money in developmental and cultural training and better hygienic practices of these signees, including medical care.