I will be the first to admit that I might be one of the few die-hard baseball fans that haven't seen the movie "Moneyball". On that front, I will not judge the movie, it's accuracy, and how real it is. I want to discuss the "moneyball" theory in general. The Oakland A's and their front office (not just Billy Beane) had decided to use advanced saber metrics to evaluate players during scouting and project their prospects they already had, all of which would replace signing high-priced, proven, veteran free-agent talent for big dollars (that being the "moneyball" strategy). They even traded big-time veteran talent for future draft picks. The A's pinnacle came in 2002 winning 103 games, including a 20-0 run, even after trading Jason Giambi, Jason Isringhausen, and Johnny Damon, but was ended early in the playoffs by the Minnesota Twins. There are other teams that have patterned the "moneyball" strategy, including the, most notably the Tampa Bay Rays, and even for a time our St. Louis Cardinals.
In 2007, after winning a World Series, the Cardinals front office had an organizational shift, where farm director Jeff Luhnow and upstart assistant to the GM John Mozeliak pushed the "moneyball" strategy to the point that Walt Jocketty was fired. The era had began in St. Louis, with players like Colby Rasmus, Tyler Greene, and Brett Wallace were drafted and given the "stars of the future badge", much to the dismay of disgruntled veteran players and fans. Edmonds and Rolen were traded, leaving Albert unprotected in the Cards lineup. The numbers didn't lie, and the Cards missed the playoffs in back to back seasons for the first time in years. Tampa Bay had made it to the World Series, but didn't win it, but Boston and New York had already won championships relying on home grown talent mixed with high-priced free agent talent. In July 2009, the Cardinals made the move that so many other successful franchises had, and traded good young reliver Chris Perez to Cleveland for Mark DeRosa, and then shocked Cardinal nation by trading "Pujols replacing" super prospect Brett Wallace in a package for Matt Holliday. The Cards made it back to postseason that season for the first time since 2006. After a disappointing 2010, the Cards traded another "moneyball" prospect, the over-hyped Colby Rasmus, for bullpen and rotation help, and it won them a World Series.
Here we are, the start of the 2012 season, and The A's are the most troubled franchise in the game. The Rays are consistently pesky in the AL East, and make the playoffs regularly, but don't win when they get there. The Kansas City Royals have great young talent, but are still a few veteran moves away from being a contender. The Washington Nationals could have a nice year, mixing some great young organizational talent with big free agent signings, only if they could get a good free agent contract that don't turn into a bust. The Texas Rangers are successful with great veterans and good young home grown talent. The Yankees, Red Sox, and even your St. Louis Cardinals mix the best of both home grown talent and good veteran free agents. See the pattern? MONEYBALL doesn't work alone, PERIOD! You have to have both to be successful, and the numbers say it all. So the "Moneyball" movie might be good, but to me is in the same baseball fiction category as "Field of Dreams" and The Natural". Both are great movies, and I am sure "Moneyball" is worth a watch, but the "moneyball" strategy did not change the game of baseball forever as some say. The key to a winning baseball is mixing great, young, cheap, talent from your farm with veteran, proven talent, and winning player-type free agent signings. I am sure there are 50 arguments against this idea, but I just look back at about the last 15 World Series winners. Thanks for reading-Joe.
No comments:
Post a Comment