i don't know much about those minor leaguers that the padres gave up but i fear what Carlos Quentin will be like playing the field in Petco. Should be fun to watch.
I know next to nothing about Baseball.
Just saw Moneyball and really enjoyed it and I have a few questions. I see you guys are in the off season so I hope I'm not derailing by asking!
Got some questions;
1) How close is this to the real life events. (eg, Did Kansas really come back? Did Beane and the team manager really disagree so much and does that kinda thing happen often? Were players really axed in that way? Just generally how much liberty did they take with the truth.)
2) How has this effected baseball since? I imagine it must have been quite significantly. I know the Red Sox won using a similar strategy, has anybody else done the same?
3) How the hell do baseball teams play so frequently!?
its kinda accurate. the movie focuses on the 2002 season but beane hired Paul DePodesta (the person Peter Brand was mostly based off of) in 1999. Oakland's success was not just one season it was really from 2000 to 2006. And although using statisical anaylasis to create an advantage worked, it was really only one peice of the puzzle. The movie makes it look like scouts were useless, but in fact without their scouting and development (which i think was a bigger reason for their success) they would not have had that run. Sabermetrics helped fill in the gaps. You can't win without the others.
Other stuff that was weird was having a meeting for a trade in the indians' office, why not just do it by phone? i get that it moved the plot along but it was kinda strange for Beane to fly all the way to Cleveland to make a proposal for a trade.
And Jeremy Giambi (the player that was caught dancing in the clubhouse) was with the team before the 2002 season, in fact he was involved in a classic play in the playoffs the previous year. He was traded from the Royals to the A's before the 2000 season.
And honestly having to replace Damon and Isringhausen wasn't that big of a deal. Damon was horrible in 2001 and Isringhausen was a good reliever but still a reliever, they don't pitch enough to make it a massive problem. Now Jason Giambi on the other hand, yeah that would be hard to replace. He was the best player in the American League in 2001. Justice and Hattebery did not really come that close to replacing that production though, but still had good seasons.
And yeah i don't think Beane was in jeopardy of losing his job that year and they needed a antagonist so that is probably why the manager was a asshole. I don't think it was like that in real life.
And i think those trades midseason was a three team trade if i recall, not seperate trades.
Anyway, the A's success in 2002 was mainly due to players they drafted/signed and developed. The trio of pitchers Hudson, Zito and Mulder, the Shortstop Miguel Tejada and the 3rd Baseman Eric Chavez. They used statistical analaysis to fill in the holes though by finding the inefficiencies in the market.
And yeah as the end of the movie indicates, other teams began to use advanced statistics along with scouting and development to get the best players. All teams do that these days, and since the A's have such a low payroll they are back to square one. They don't have an advantage over other teams. And a baseball team plays 162 games per season. The season starts in April, ends in early October, late September. Teams usually have a day off every week or so.
Anyway the movie gets the general point across and is a great film imo. Just don't go in to it expecting a documentary (ahem keith law)
