Neal Huntington And Moneyball: Let's Not Start This Debate
by Charlie Wilmoth on Jul 21, 2011 3:54 AM EDT
Email
Print
Joe Starkey writes about Neal Huntington and the upcoming movie Moneyball, and unsurprisingly finds that Huntington and others in the Pirates organization want little to do with it. The fact is that, around baseball, that war has largely already been fought, and the terms of its treaty have already basically been decided.
Nearly every team has embraced statistical analysis to some degree. Teams know that on-base percentage is important. Most are doing something to try to quantify players' defensive value. They know that pitchers who strike batters out are important. They understand the concept of replacement level. To declare a team to be a Moneyball team is to use an incredibly outdated frame of reference. Baseball has taken most of the good stuff from Beane's philosophy and moved on.
At the same time, all organizations still recognize the value of scouts. Billy Beane's draft tactics - or at least his draft tactics as they were depicted in the book - have not caught on, and for good reason. The way Jeremy Brown is romanticized in the book is ridiculous, for example, and relying on college performance rather than projection when drafting is just an awful idea. Bold, yes. Creative, yes. But awful. Any GM who drafts like that today will be destroying himself.
(By the way, this is one reason I flinched a little bit at some of the arguments about Gerrit Cole not being the best pitcher on his team at UCLA. That doesn't matter. What matters is what he can be three or four years from now, and the chances he'll reach his ceiling. Those things might show up in the stats, and they might not.)
I don't think there's a GM in the game today who's a "Beane disciple." If one existed, he'd be as far behind the curve now as guys like Cam Bonifay and Chuck Lamar were behind Beane a decade ago.
This is, no doubt, still a fun topic for fans. And I'm excited about the movie. I think Beane is an important figure who probably deserves a place in the Hall of Fame. But I'm a little concerned that this movie is going to lead us into all kinds of culs-de-sac. Baseball, the industry, has already generally reached a consensus on Beane's methods, and Huntington's relationship to them should not be controversial at this stage.
88 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It's a movie because.....
….Brad Pitt wanted to do it, and he has enough juice to get a movie made. Look on the bright side…it could just as easily been a remake of “Charles in Charge”.
What are we at the park for except to win? I'd trip my mother. I'd help her up, brush her off, tell her I'm sorry. But mother don't make it to third. ~Leo Durocher
"Charles in Charge"
Okay, now that’s just fucked up there.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 8:00 AM EDT up reply actions
tell that to Seth McFarlane
he makes a Charles in Charge reference on Family Guy every week it seems
That's okay
…but on the big screen?
Gah.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions
I love Charles in Charge...
Nicole Eggert, mmmmmmm…
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
by Slick1 on Jul 21, 2011 10:20 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
its a movie because...
the movie industry is obsessed with 2 things. turning video games into movies..and..turning books into movies. Its an interesting time to come out though, because the draft and player development are being taken very seriously the last few years. Sabermetrics and all that seems to be a hot topic for fans. I really, really hope they dont butcher the movie though.
Ya
seriously.
Da'Sean Butler - A Mountaineer Legend
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jul 21, 2011 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Nearly every team has embraced statistical analysis to some degree. Teams know that on-base percentage is important. Most are doing something to try to quantify players’ defensive value. They know that pitchers who strike batters out are important. They understand the concept of replacement level. To declare a team to be a Moneyball team is to use an incredibly outdated frame of reference.
I don’t think that’s really what “a Moneyball team” means, though. Moneyball is about exploiting market inefficiencies and maximizing expected value. At the time it was written, OBP and defense were undervalued. It is quite possible that Juan Pierres, Scott Podsednik, Jason Marquises, or Paul Maholms would become undervalued by the market. A Moneyball team would go after those guys.
Moneyball is about making positive EV plays and making as many of them as you can. I don’t think the A’s have struggled because everybody caught on to what sabermetrics has to say, but because Beane hasn’t found the next Great Market Inefficiency.
+1
Moneyball is about exploiting market inefficiencies and maximizing expected value.
When I read Charlie’s original post, I came to the comments to write nearly the exact same thing. It has nothing to do with the specific baseball skills that Beane wound up acquiring, but rather that those skills were undervalued by the market and he could pick them up for relatively nothing at a time when other teams were paying premiums for skillsets that Beane felt were not as useful in constructing a winning team.
It is not specifically about exploiting market inefficiencies. As you stated the specific baseball skills matter.
when other teams were paying premiums for skillsets that Beane felt were not as useful in constructing a winning team.
Put on your dancin' shoes.
You misunderstand my point.
In the “story” of Moneyball, what was exploited was a near-industry wide failure to identify that the ability to get on base by whatever means necessary(represented by OBP) was far more valuable than the historically-accepted metric of measuring the number of hits a player accumulated relative to the number of at-bats said player had (represented by BA).
The specific baseball skillset is unimportant in searching for a market inefficiency to exploit.
If one-eyed, bowlegged ambidextrous pitchers that throw 90% knuckleballs are in lower demand than pitchers that throw 95% cut fastballs, even though statistical analysis shows that one-eyed, bowlegged ambidextrous pitchers that throw 90% knuckleballs have a much better success rate than pitchers that throw 95% cut fastballs, then stockpiling the one-eyed, bowlegged ambidextrous pitchers that throw 90% knuckleballs at below market value is exploiting a market inefficiency if other teams are overpaying for pitchers that throw 95% cut fastballs because they feel those pitchers perform better, even though statistically they are shown not to.
I feel that most GMs
are anti- one-eyed, bowlegged ambidextrous pitchers that throw 90% knuckleballs in general, and that’s a damn shame.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 9:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Further
Even if, for example, the cut fastballers are still better than the knuckleballers, it’s possible to overvalue the thing that is better. That seems to be the hardest thing about Moneyball to understand.
Say you have 5 knuckleballers who will provide a total of $10 million in value at a cost of $8 million. And over there you have 5 cut fastballers who will provide $15 million in value, but will cost you $17 million. The knuckleballers are generally going to be the smarter play.
I’m not at all interested in the movie now that they cut animated Bill James out of it.
by Vlad on Jul 21, 2011 8:29 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
They did what?
Really, is that a joke or did they animate Bill James?
This is back from when Soderbergh was attached as the director. Apparently, during some scenes depicting game action, an animated Bill James would pop up and describe the proper percentage play for the situation (pinch hit with a lefty or a righty, bunt or don’t bunt, etc.).
It would have been awesome.
say what you "critics" will about this Moneyball movie
but I plan on watching it opening night.
Oh yeah.
Taking a page from the Harry Potter fans, I’m buying an Athletics jersey and hat for opening night.
So onto my love rocket, climb, Inside tank of fuel is not fuel, but love.
by IAPiratesFan on Jul 21, 2011 8:49 AM EDT up reply actions
You're not
camping out on line at the theater?
Pfft.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 9:12 AM EDT up reply actions
In keeping with the principles of Moneyball, I will attend a weekday matinee using a coupon in order to derive the best possible seat for the lowest possible price.
by Aphthakid on Jul 21, 2011 8:57 AM EDT up reply actions 8 recs
But what if...
…he has to take time off from work, thus missing the chance to generate revenue for himself?
If he saves $5 off the regular price of the ticket but has to take 4 hours off from work and thusly reduces his income by 4x his hourly rate, has he truly made a good deal?
Nah
Paid day off that I was already taking for other reasons. Here, let me pull up some spreadsheets so I can walk you through this…
As long as you have done your due diligence...
…I trust that you have made the best decision for your situation.
That photo up there?
That’s not Beane. I’ve seen Beane and he looks a lot like Brad Pitt. A LOT.
by bucdaddy on Jul 21, 2011 9:48 AM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Beane is overated
Has anyone really noticed what a crappy GM Beane has been since his initial success. And his success seems to be tied to finidng or developing solid starting pitchers that carry the team.
I’d bet that if you scrutinized all of his moves, like we have been doing here with Huntington, you would expose his terrible record. When was the last time the A’s were relevent, and how long should he be allowed to live off of his short window of success?
Hard to separate his success
from the fact/coincidence/luck that he came up with three ace pitchers at the same time. Any team with those three guys would have done pretty well. Doesn’t alter the fact Beane changed a lot of people’s thinking about the game.
But, yeah, Beane’s sh*t doesn’t work in the playoffs, and now it doesn’t work in the regular season, either. He wouldn’t be the first “genius” to come up with one great idea and nothing else forever after.
This is what I've always said
No denying that he made some good/smart moves that derived primarily from his use of advanced stats when no one else was. But if Pulsipher, Wilson, and Isringhausen had stayed healthy, we’d all be talking about the genius of Joe McIlvane.
My God.
You just mentioned the Holy Trinity of Sh*t for me. I had all three of those guys off their rookie season in a Rotisserie League, and I had them cheap and I had them for a couple years. I thought I was going to conquer the world.
The next year I realized I didn’t know nothing, and quit Rotisserie ball for good.
I agree Beane is overrated to some extent, but...
….in his defense, the Coliseum and the A’s facilities are broken down shitholes that most top tier free agents (or indeed free agents with any other options) don’t want to come near. Plus with an ownership that limits his spending, he’s pretty much forced to draft & develop good young pitching to carry the team and try to moneyball his way to hidden gems in free agency.
Basically, he’s done about as well as anyone can do in his situation.
Kamerion Wimbley is the truth
The rest of the league caught up to the inefficiencies detailed in Moneyball, and Beane has had to move on to others. The problem is that he now seems to think that drafting high-schoolers in the amateur draft is the new inefficiency. Given the nature and timeframe of developing high school draftees, it’s going to be a while before we find out if he’s right about that.
Credit where credit's due
Beane deserves credit for what he accomplished. But people do tend to act like he’s some sort of superhero, which does get annoying. He couldn’t build a team that could win in the playoffs and his teams have been quite mediocre for the last few years. Personally, I’ve always wondered why he’s considered so great while no one even knows who Larry Beinfest, the guy who turned the Marlins into World Series champs, is.
Personally, I’ve always wondered why he’s considered so great while no one even knows who Larry Beinfest, the guy who turned the Marlins into World Series champs, is.
I think that part of it is that Beane’s currently a GM while Beinfest isn’t. Beinfest’s certainly an important official within the Marlins’s structure, but president is inherently a lower-profile position, at least as far as most casual observers are concerned.
True
But my point is that he did an amazing job yet is largely unknown by general baseball fans.
Trading Carlos Gonzalez..
is the move that stands out the most as a huge blunder. Just saying.
for every carlos gonzalez
there are 10 mark teahens. when you trade prospects, you take that risk. he did get matt holliday in that deal after all.
Well yeah...
But then several months later, he traded Holliday for Shane Peterson, Clayton Mortensen and Brett Wallace. Mortensen was traded to the Rockies for Ethan Hollingsworth and Brett Wallace was traded to the Blue Jays for Michael Taylor.
So for Carlos Gonzalez and Huston Street, the Athletics got Shane Peterson, Michael Taylor and Ethan Hollingsworth. Not a very good return for Carlos Gonzalez so far.
So onto my love rocket, climb, Inside tank of fuel is not fuel, but love.
by IAPiratesFan on Jul 21, 2011 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Danny Murtaugh deserves the Hall of Fame, Billy Beane
no. As much as Beane should be credited for the new approach in building a team, I just can’t get past the way those 2002-current A’s teams were annihilated in the postseason, they’ve reached only one ALCS, and were swept away quickly that year. The lack of sustainability is an issue, because instead of his clubs getting better, they’ve regressed, meaning once other teams adopted some of his techniques, Beane has failed to come up with a Plan B.
And while the 2002 A’s were a turnaround club, they didn’t even have the lowest payroll in MLB that season, only the third lowest. The movie trailer implies a “Bad News Bears” type of situation, and that’s false, especially playing in the AL West.
“MoneyBall” may have some entertaining scenes, and witty dialogue, but I don’t see a major hit with the general public. Non-fictional sports movies always must have a riveting
conclusion or achievement, whether it’s “Rudy”, or “Marshall”. Finishing ahead of teams like the Mariners, Angels, and Rangers, while exiting in the first round of the playoffs isn’t compelling enough.
The 2008 Rays, Jackie Robinson, 1960 World Series and Roberto Clemente, would all make better movie material than Moneyball, because those teams/players actually achieved something memorable. Innovative approaches like MoneyBall would have been better off as an ESPN documentary.
I believe there's a book out about the Rays front office...
…that built that 2008 team. If Moneyball is a financial success, that could find its way as a movie.
But yes, a 30 for 30 ESPN special probably could’ve gone more in depth into the Moneyball approach since it wouldn’t have to tell a story and develop characters.
Kamerion Wimbley is the truth
Moneyball has a modest budget when
compared with action/superhero movies, so it has a chance at breaking even or making a small profit. All three of the other topics I listed have had books written about them, so the material is ready.
by SteelStealth on Jul 21, 2011 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
I have long thought there's a good movie to be made
about the battle between Cumberland Posey and Gus Greenlee for black baseball talent in the 1930s and the fierce rivalry between two teams 10 miles apart, during an era when Pittsburgh was a cultural center for black America. The two men seem to have been polar-opposite personalities, one gregarious and flamboyant, the other businesslike and cool, and Hollywood just loves that kind of juxtaposition. You’d have amazing characters like Josh Gibson and Satchel Paige as supporting roles.
For years I’ve tried pestering a few actual writers I know to take up a joint biography of the two men, without any luck, and unfortunately the door is fast closing for a writer to interview people who would have known the two men personally.
by bucdaddy on Jul 21, 2011 10:57 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Put it this way:
If the Crawfords and Grays had been in Queens and the Bronx, this movie would have been made and remadetwice already.
by bucdaddy on Jul 21, 2011 10:58 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bingo Long Traveling All-Stars and Motor Kings is pretty good
by TheLizardKing on Jul 21, 2011 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions
although they were fictional…. the catcher and pitcher in the book (and the movie, although the characters’ names were reversed in the latter) are obviously based off Paige and Gibson
by TheLizardKing on Jul 21, 2011 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions
I had in mind
something along those lines. That movie is positively primordial ooze by H’wood standards, so I don’t think the potential similarities would be a problem.
The Negro League Era has definitely been overlooked
for some strange reason in terms of movie potential, I recall enjoying the fictional “Bingo Long” movie on TV. I think it was made around 1975, Richard Pryor was in it, but it wasn’t just a comedic role.
Getting back to Spike Lee, I remember him saying back in the late 80s, he wanted to do a Jackie Robinson movie, but financing was a problem, since he was a young filmmaker. Since Lee is now an established filmmaker, I don’t know why it would be impossible for him to raise the money or gain the support to get this done. If someone like Denzel Washington(as an older Robinson) were attached to this project, it would seem to be doable. What about Tom Hanks as Branch Rickey?
by SteelStealth on Jul 21, 2011 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Anybody else amused that they cast their DePodesta proxy as a stereotypical fat, sweaty nerd? DePo was a three-year letterman on his college football team…
And a very attractive man. I’m really excited about this movie, but that makes me furious. He was a friggen two sport athlete that looks like this:
by thecheeseisblue on Jul 21, 2011 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions
I dunno I think he looks just like Hill....
So onto my love rocket, climb, Inside tank of fuel is not fuel, but love.
by IAPiratesFan on Jul 21, 2011 1:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Jesus fuck -
is this guy in every movie made?
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought that Demetri Martin was a good casting choice for him
Great comedy guy as well, I don’t know why he wasn’t chosen in the end.
Maybe because Hill looks a lot more like DePodesta.
So onto my love rocket, climb, Inside tank of fuel is not fuel, but love.
by IAPiratesFan on Jul 21, 2011 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
The fact that Starkey was surprised...
that no one in the org wanted to be associated with being labeled a moneyballer just goes to show how far behind the times maintstream media is. They are now just beginning to understand and come to terms with things like OPS and BABIP (very basic SABR stats). Moneyball was basically the beginning of the SABR revolution and the field has completely evolved and is still evolving. It’s totally organic, everyday advancements are being made. As Charlie states the field, and baseball as an industry, through trial and error has pretty much weeded out a lot of tennets that don’t work and unfortunately the more entertaining parts of Moneyball were about how the A’s drafted. The only conflct in the story was Beane vs scouting/old school belief system. It’s not surprising no one wants anything to do with that. I really like Huntington’s stance that you need a balance of statistical evaluation and good ole fashion scouting. Just like the industry has taken the best parts of Moneyball and expanded on it, it has also taken the best parts of the old school belief system like scouting and five tool players. So yeah, calling today’s GM a Moneyball disciple is like calling today’s surgeons a blood letting disciple.
#AllTheBuntsAreBad!
“They are now just beginning to understand and come to terms with things like OPS and BABIP (very basic SABR stats).”
It’s not just the media. Fans, players and coaches are still behind the times. We just saw it in the All-Star voting, where McCutchen was overlooked because of his HR and RBI totals and Correia got support because of his wins.
Beane helped to bring the statistical revolution to light,
but he did not start it. Still, he should be given credit for the great contributions he provided to the A’s and MLB.
We’ve advanced well beyond OBP now, at least for those that follow SABR. The main stream media and many fans still are back in the equivalent of the baseball stone age.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
Actually,
the Rangers were at the forefront of bringing SABR principles to baseball (or at least trying to) when they hired Craig Wright.
Never said he was the first.
Just said he helped to bring them to light.
Should the Pirates keep Neal Huntington?
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2011/5/16/2174135/poll-should-huntington-be-retained
No problem.
Just giving a little credit where I thought it was due.
You shut up.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Reading this post is the closest I’ve come to reading the moneyball book, so I maybe my question sounds obvious. I don’t get why Beane decided to broadcast his methods. If his secret was exploiting a specific player market, why let everyone else know?
by Danatural08 on Jul 21, 2011 11:11 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
I'm going to take a guess
and say that he must have figured if what he was doing worked, everyone in baseball would a) laugh at and decry it and b) almost immediately adopt it.
or
by the time the book came out, most organizations would have already caught on. then again, minaya and DL still had jobs until recently.
The number of employees in an organization’s FO and scouting department are abundant… and as has always been, those employees are constantly moving from one organization to the other, in order to relocate, accept a higher level position, etc. The Beane “disciples” so to speak, that traveled all the way down the ladder from DePodesta on, undoubtedly played a large role in the “Moneyball” techniques’ proliferation throughout the league.
by TheLizardKing on Jul 21, 2011 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Time passed
I think the book was written after it was obvious to other GM’s what he was trying to do. I think the window had closed. The book was an interesting read, but what I remember most are some of the little side stories that gave insight to certain players and Front Office people. That was more entertaining that the whole “moneyball” theme.
by ballparkfranks on Jul 21, 2011 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Beane got Iwamura at the tail end of last year and LaRoche for a while this year.
I say we treat him to a two-month’s dose of Overbay to finish off the ’11 campaign.
パトリック
We don’t even need any players back. No, seriously, consider him our gift to you to celebrate the opening of “Moneyball.” No, no need to thank us.
by Aphthakid on Jul 21, 2011 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
This
should be greened. And soon.
Free your ass and your mind will follow.
by cocktailsfor2 on Jul 21, 2011 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
