comment #1

kingofnails says ...

Who the hell is Carson Reeves and what the hell is ScriptShadow?

comment #2

Floyd Thursby says ...

Pitching is more important than on-base percentage or any aspect of offense. Maybe that's why Oakland's been in the postseason only one of the past six seasons.

comment #3

crazynine says ...

Thank goodness. Here's hoping someone else comes along to do this very nifty book justice.

Hmmm. . . does anyone think David Fincher has it in him to do a light comedy with no CGI? I ask because he's awesome with Piit, he's good at juggling large casts and disjointed stories, and he's VERY good at implying obsessiveness, which works well to convey the stat-junkie spirit of folks like Beane, Bill James, etc.

comment #4

JapAdapters says ...

I thought this book was un-filmable until reading the fantastic script posted here a few days ago, but this piece reveals a silver lining to that decision: Not having to read people who have no idea what they're talking about commenting on MONEYBALL, baseball, the As, or Billy Beane.

The As are not currently successful (last place) and really haven't been relevant for over 5 years; OBP is no longer a "secret" stat, it's an overexposed one (partly because Beane's ego allowed someone to WRITE A BOOK about his "secret"); and the whole deal was generally overstated at the time.

Really, the idea of MONEYBALL was to show Beane's philosophy of exploiting neglected statistics in order to make up for the competitive disadvantage his small payroll created. By 2004 Beane was (internally, at least) focusing on defensive statistics because the book had created a situation where OBP had become overvalued. The truth is, once the cat Bill James, Whitey Herzog, and Earl Weaver had long ago recognized was out of the bag, Beane's davantage was gone, because the reality is plenty of smart (or even smarter: Theo Epstein, anyone?) people could compete with beane on that playing field.

Billy Beane's a talented guy, but history has shown that the success his team had in the early aughts had more to do with what has made teams' successful traditionally: The luck that comes with having several young players pan out during the same period. He hasn't been able to recreate that magic, partly due to his payroll, and partly due to the fact that that's the way it goes. All his disadvantages are real but he, himself, hurried the demise of his advantages and doesn;t have the cash to cover them up.

comment #5

crazynine says ...

"Pitching is more important than on-base percentage or any aspect of offense. Maybe that's why Oakland's been in the postseason only one of the past six seasons."

In 2009, Oakland is 12th in ERA (5th best in the AL) but 29th in OBP this year (only the Giants are worse).

Between 2004-2009, Oakland has averaged 15th in OBP but 7th in ERA.

By your logic, Oakland is a playoff powerhouse. It's right there in the stats!

So yes, Tim McCarver, you're absolutely right-- pitching is more important than offense. Except, of course, when it isn't.

Reminds me of lousy NFL announcers: "Yes Pat, the keys to the game are good offense and crushing defense, but we can't forget the intangibles in special teams play. I think it's clear that the winner of today's game is going to be the team that finds itself in the end zone more times than their competitor. Of course, on any given Sunday, any team can win!"

comment #6

YRG says ...

would of?
When's the Soderbergh draft getting leaked?

comment #7

Alex says ...

Please guys... unless you really know something about baseball, leave the stats to the pros.

The reality is that baseball fans love to analyze statistics. Nevertheless, it comes down to the human factor that makes a team successful. Strong and smart management, team chemistry, and health are more important than statistics.

comment #8

p.Vice says ...

Soderbergh fucking a good idea in the ass until it bleeds? Never coulda seen that one coming!

comment #9

Phatang! says ...

Amy Pascal axed production because the new draft undervalued OBP? Hmmm.

I don't buy the "new draft" excuse at all, really. If they wanted to make the movie, why not tell Soderberg that he has to go back to the earlier take? This seems more like an excuse to pull the plug on a project that never made (financial) sense. I mean, $50 mill on a movie that doesn't have a love interest?

And dbldn11, "Team Chemistry" has to be the least important factor to winning in baseball. Or, more to the point, it's often a result of winning, never a cause.

comment #10

Alex says ...

Phatang! Are you Joe Torre? If not, then I think you have no clue what you're talking about. Valuing something as "least" or "best" would require you to be an expert... which we both know you aren't. My point is that stats do not determine success... people do.

comment #11

Breedlove says ...

dbldn11, you can have the team with the best chemistry in the league, and i'll take the one with the best OPS. i like my chances.

comment #12

JapAdapters says ...

Chemistry = the best players. The best players = OPS.

comment #13

The Playlist says ...

@Phatang!

I really thought that at first too, but after talking to a few ppl and reading the soderbergh draft...

comment #14

Circumvrent says ...

Hey Rodrigo/Playlist... can you confirm the crazy bugshit thing I heard the other day - that the Soderbergh draft has an ANIMATED character in it?

comment #15

zumpano says ...

[url]http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2009/05/06/exclusive-steven-soderbergh-to-use-animated-bill-james-character-in-moneyball/[/url]

Here's the news item on the crazy bugshit animated Bill James

comment #16

Michael says ...

Chemistry = the best players. The best players = OPS.

The first part is patently false. The entire point of that book is that there is a lot of value in lower payroll players who eat up pitches and take walks (showing patience at the plate). I'm simplifying, but that's pretty much it.

Now, most of the best position players have very high OPS...but collecting them all in one place doesn't equate to success. Ask the Yankees.

comment #17

JapAdapters says ...

It's only half (the offensive side of the game) the equation, but since it's the half that MONEYBALL deals with I oversimplified.

Pitching (obviously) wins, but the Yankees have had a devastating offense the last few years, which is why they still win (even if it's not the WS). That's due to OPS, not "chemistry." When they were winning the WS every year it was because they had an offense that wore pitchers down AND excellent pitching. So tell me how anything I said is "patently false." "Chemistry" is overrated, and OBP WAS underrated. You know, like it says in the book.

The point of MONEYBALL is that in order to compete, Beane had to exploit areas of the game that the market undervalued. AT THE TIME that was OBP, but that changed quickly because of ... well, the book.

comment #18

Scriptshadow says ...

I'm an average baseball fan, and by no means a stats nerd. Obviously, I know that on-base percentage isn't a secret inside baseball, but I was trying to simplify it. I guessed that at least 85% of my readers weren't baseball fans, and as you know, trying to explain baseball to non-baseball fans is like trying to explain what an In and Out burger tastes like to someone who's never had one. It's a losing proposition.

Anyway, doing a little more research, I found that what Sony really liked about the project was the idea of a man getting a second chance (Billy was a failed major league player). That was nixed by Soderbergh when he ditched the flashbacks, so I'm guessing that was one of the things that got Pascal worked up. To me, the most compelling part of that initial draft was these guys finding a "secret" (extremely relative use of the term) stat that nobody else had found, exploiting it, and becoming successful doing so. Obviously, I have no idea what Pascal thought of that point. My guess for why she disliked it is probably because the thing is so damn unfocused. It just rambles. Kind of like I'm doing now. So I'll leave you with that.

comment #19

JapAdapters says ...

I think the script really works (I found it focused rather than rambling) and in 2002 OBP may not have been a secret, but it was an undervalued statistic by the media, casual fans, and many (many) baseball men.

comment #20

The Playlist says ...

Although yes, Soderbergh did say there would be animated version of Bill James in his script, there is none. Bill James doesn't even exist in his draft. He's maybe mentioned briefly in passing. Whatever ideas he had in that interview -- prolly conducted in April and published in early May -- never made it to his version for whatever reason.

comment #21

YRG says ...

It would have been nice to see a Jiminy Cricket style Bill James... I don't remember animation being featured in a mainstream film since An Inconvenient Truth or Kill Bill.