Billy Beane is no genius

[Conner]

The defensive stats on ESPN are just worthless, by the way...

on average, from 2000-2003, Chavez had a +16 UZR, with about 5 third basemen ahead of him. Tejada had a +1 UZR, with 20+ shortstops ahead of him.

[Steve Eckstut]

My point is, he let Giambi and Tejada get away because he wanted to keep the Big 3. Personally, I would have kept either of the other two. Zito's problems were apparent last year when they still had all three. Bad decision on Beane's part. It had nothing to with the market size. He gambled and lost. Chavez, the other signing during that period isn't helping any either.

Moneyball = Owners taking home money at the end of the season.
Baseball = Playing the game to win the World Series ring.

Moneyball is happening in Oakland - Congratulations to the new owners.

Beane did what he believed was most +EV for his ballclub. In his experience there, he has been right a lot of the time. There is no way to 100% accurately predict who is going to do well in upcoming years, but Moneyball is a book about eliminating some of the market innefficiencies in baseball. Billy Beane has succeeded in this.

[9er Fan]

keep in mind, they are not trying to win anything this year, and only maybe next year.

Mission accomplished.

LOL

[d18Mike]

All fielding stats are about as valuable as the paper they are written on. I think even the most diehard Sabarmatricians concede this. It is largely because official scorers are stunningly inconsistent in their judgement on what constitues and error or basehit.

The UZR ratings have over the years pointed to Royce Clayon as the best fielding shortstop in baseball. And if memory serves me right, they have cited Jeter as the worst.

Think about that a minute. Then decide how much stock you put in those numbers.

[Steve Eckstut]

All fielding stats are about as valuable as the paper they are written on. I think even the most diehard Sabarmatricians concede this. It is largely because official scorers are stunningly inconsistent in their judgement on what constitues and error or basehit.

The UZR ratings have over the years pointed to Royce Clayon as the best fielding shortstop in baseball. And if memory serves me right, they have cited Jeter as the worst.

Think about that a minute. Then decide how much stock you put in those numbers.

I'm not sure what they are, but fielding stats are not useless. If you are saving runs with good defensive play, then it's just as good as creating them.

[Yoda]

Billy Beane is not the owner - Do you think he gets to keep the remaining money?? This thread is about him, not the Oakland management.
What the experiment would prove is that as a GM it's near impossible to compete with teams with bigger budgets and that it's absurd to make statements about him being a bad GM.

Staying with the topic, I agree with this. The owners slashed the budget in order to profit from the baseball operations. Theya re not putting any money back into the team. Even if they got a new stadium, their payroll will not be as high.

Beane is an excellent GM. His method works well in a 162 game season or in the long run. In a short playoff series, it's a slightly different game and those who have bigger players will win.

As far as Tejada/Chavez debate goes... Tejada plays a much tougher position. Even though he is average defensively, his bat makes up for it in double, triple. Chavez is an excellent player and will ahve a long, successful career. However, if I had to choose one, regardless of salary, I would go with Tejada as his bat is as potent but you fill a much demanding position.

[looptid]

i will give him some cradit for getting haren for mudler but trading hudson a year before his contract expired for meyer? wouldnt that be a nice bargaining chip for a contender this midseason

It is better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late. - Branch Ricky

Why? To land a huge windfall like the Royals got for Beltran at the deadline last season? If everyone knows that the Athletics are not going to resign Hudson next season, the closer the trade dealine becomes, the more of a buyer's market there is for Hudson. In trading him before the season starts, the Athletics have much more leverage because they are months away from losing him without getting anything in return, instead of days or weeks.

As you may recall, when the A's allowed Jason Giambi to walk away, it was so they could sign the big 3 or Tejada. WELL

Did their market get smaller after that year. Ask the twins about small markets. They are still competitive.

Speaking as an avid Twins fan, if they played in the AL West, they wouldn't have made the playoffs in any of the last three seasons. And speaking of the Twins...

Moneyball = Owners taking home money at the end of the season.
Baseball = Playing the game to win the World Series ring.

Moneyball is happening in Oakland - Congratulations to the new owners.

If you want to talk to any of whom I consider the three best general managers in baseball, Schuerholtz, Ryan, or Beane, they will all tell you the exact same thing. No one builds a team for a five or seven game series in October when you have to get through a six month, 162-game marathon first. This keeps getting parroted, but it just displays a lack of understanding. The Athletics have won a ton of games and made the playoffs with regularity over the past few years. If they lose three games in a five game span, it isn't a discredit to their organizational philosophies.

Think Joe Morgan is looking for an intern? Reminds me an awful lot of when he said, after the publishing of Moneyball, that the Athletics subsequent loss in the playoffs was because they didn't manufacture runs. Nevermind that Oakland scored more runs in that series than they had during the regular season, but that the pitching coughed up a bunch of runs. This isn't about anything approaching fact, just an overreaction to a sensationalized book designed to sell copies. Just look at this thread; someone else already made a sinde remark about on-base percentage. The point that could be gleaned from Lewis' overhyped account of the Athletics' organizational strategy is that you look for abilities the market is undervaluing in both trades and free agent signings, and sometimes even in the draft where you can get an undervalued player to agree to a lessor contract and signing bonus.

Beane said in an interview on XM this season during spring training that the rest of baseball has already caught up to on-base percentage and that it is a slightly overvalued commodity, and teams are not likely to find any bargains there. He even mentioned defense being underpaid this offseason in reference to the Kotsay aquisition.

Beane didn't discover that on-base percentage was a better metric than batting average. There were writers from the Sporting News arguing that same thing before the 1900s rolled around, but the Joe Morganish crowd has always tended to yell louder.

I think Beane does an excellent job. Who cares what kind of market Oakland is if the owners never capitalize or filter any extra budget money to Beane? He cannot spend more than he is given.

And heaven forbid after making the playoffs four out of the last five seasons and never finishing worse than second in an awfully competative division, that the Athletics take a year or so to retool. Beane added a whole slew of arms on the cheap for one all-star and one decent to good pitcher. My hat is off to him.

[Conner]

As far as Tejada/Chavez debate goes... Tejada plays a much tougher position. Even though he is average defensively, his bat makes up for it in double, triple.

The hitting isn't nearly that different...Last year:

Chavez: 29 homers, .396 OBP, .501 SLG%, .898 OPS

Tejada: 34 homers, .358 OBP, ,534 SLG%, .893 OPS

[RAmst23]

I'm not going to jump into the Chavez/Tejada debate simply because I think a team would be ecstatic to have either one of these guys. I don't fault Oakland for choosing one over the other, because the facts are they could only keep one and I don't think a team could make a wrong choice by picking up one of these guys.

What I will argue is that Beane didn't handle his Big 3 correctly. Out of the 3 he could have kept, why Zito?? Hudson had almost no question marks, why not keep the best out of the 3?? The "he couldn't get as much out of Zito as Hudson" line doesn't work for me. Mulder wasn't at the top of his game either and Beane got some talent for him.

Anyone know why Beane wanted Zito over Hudson? I think this might be the big glaring mark against Beane.. that and this year his team hates running across homeplate.

[Steve Eckstut]

Great post looptid. I especially like how you added the whole thing about Beane's focus not on any one tool, but on Beane's focus on exploiting an inefficient market.