PDA

View Full Version : Will you see Moneyball?


thomas35forever
09-22-2011, 11:52 PM
I might. I'm in no rush to get a ticket though.

DSpivack
09-22-2011, 11:56 PM
I put maybe because while I am interested to see it, I'm not so excited as to see in theaters (also, it's not the kind of movie that really has to be seen on the big screen, anyway). Once it is released on DVD I'll get it from Netflix (wait, I mean Quickster), however.

chisoxjtrain
09-23-2011, 07:31 AM
Unless my girlfriend really wants to see it I'll pass. My big problem with Moneyball is how do they end the movie? They make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round? Plus, look at the A's now. They haven't had a winning season since 2006. Like someone else said in another thread, the A's success was on the shoulders of Zito, Hudson, and Mulder.

Madvora
09-23-2011, 07:59 AM
Unless my girlfriend really wants to see it I'll pass. My big problem with Moneyball is how do they end the movie? They make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round? Plus, look at the A's now. They haven't had a winning season since 2006. Like someone else said in another thread, the A's success was on the shoulders of Zito, Hudson, and Mulder.

That's what I was thinking too. This isn't a typical sports movie, but the trailers are playing off like that to people who are unfamiliar with the subject. It's not like the finale is going to be "the big game" against their hated rival. I think some idiots are going to go into this expecting to see The Natural or something.

jdm2662
09-23-2011, 08:11 AM
I haven't reallly been paying attention. Isn't this based on the 2002 season? Will the movie include that they won the division in 2000 and won over 100 games in 2001? Will it also mention that Zito, Hudson, and Mulder along with the likes of Steroid Freaks Tejada and Giambi were all around before Billy Beane showed up?

The answer to the question, no I won't see it. I don't have an interest in it. It's outdated anyway. The A's haven't been any good since 2006. That season was carried by Frank having a monster second half, not because some computer told Billy Beane this scrub can play RF or something.

soxfanatlanta
09-23-2011, 08:26 AM
I will read the book when it's available at the public library; I liked most of M. Lewis's work in the past.

If the movie shows up on HBO next year - I'll watch it.

johnny bench
09-23-2011, 08:29 AM
Uhh, it's about baseball, right? So, yeah, I'll watch it. It'll be at RedBox soon enough.

WhiffleBall
09-23-2011, 08:36 AM
The Trib gave it 4 stars. It sounds like a fun baseball movie. That said I'll wait until it is available for rental.

Railsplitter
09-23-2011, 09:17 AM
I'm not interested.

Rocky Soprano
09-23-2011, 09:25 AM
No chance I watch it.
The previews make Beane come off as some type of genius yet he hasn't won crap.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 09:40 AM
Getting insanely great reviews across the board. 95% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.

I was honestly meh about it at first, but I will certainly see it sometime next week now. Some critics have said it is better than Field of Dreams and The Natural.

kaufsox
09-23-2011, 09:47 AM
My wife demands it. Thinks this Brad Pitt fellow is good-looking or something. I just don't see it.

Noneck
09-23-2011, 10:26 AM
I think this movie will be a bust. I cant see real baseball fans going to see it. There are not enough A's fans out there looking at their attendance figures. So the only viewers will be women wanting to see Pitt and the poor guys that are dragged with them on a leash.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 10:27 AM
I think this movie will be a bust. I cant see real baseball fans going to see it. There are not enough A's fans out there looking at their attendance figures. So the only viewers will be women wanting to see Pitt and the poor guys that are dragged with them on a leash.

Could you explain why?

I don't really want to defend a movie without having seen it, but I think this movie appeals to both hardcore baseball fans given the popularity of the book, as well as casual fans (given how it is being marketed).

Bobby Thigpen
09-23-2011, 10:30 AM
Getting insanely great reviews across the board. 95% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.
Don't most Brad Pitt movies despite how bad they may be?

I'll probably watch it on video. No way I'm paying theater prices to see it.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 10:35 AM
Don't most Brad Pitt movies despite how bad they may be?

Well, he has been in a lot of good movies!

Bobby Thigpen
09-23-2011, 10:37 AM
Well, he has been in a lot of good movies!
He's been in some pretty terrible ones too that always seem to get good reviews.

Noneck
09-23-2011, 10:43 AM
Could you explain why?

I don't really want to defend a movie without having seen it, but I think this movie appeals to both hardcore baseball fans given the popularity of the book, as well as casual fans (given how it is being marketed).


Well, I like others here realize the Beane stuff was all being at the right place at the right time. It sounds as though the movie wont show how things have digressed since 06. I dont know maybe I am missing something here that you can enlighten me on.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 10:49 AM
Well, I like others here realize the Beane stuff was all being at the right place at the right time. It sounds as though the movie wont show how things have digressed since 06. I dont know maybe I am missing something here that you can enlighten me on.

I'm just asking why you think it will be a flop.

The book was published in 2003, so there shouldn't be any expectation that anything beyond the book's subject and timeline would be covered.

There is a certain hardcore section of baseball fans who, maybe deservedly so, do not care for Beane, the attention and credit he gets, and/or the whole sabermetrics model. They won't see the movie (and might be proud of the fact that they won't see the movie). But much like WSI is only a small section of Sox fans, those are only a small section of baseball fans and an even smaller section of the movie-going, sports-loving public. The movie is about baseball, is getting great reviews and hype, and has been well-marketed in commercials to come off as a feel-good, last-place-to-champion-type movie where the underdog wins (whether that is really what the story is or not is beside the point for now). And it has the Brad Pitt the kids seem to like so much. I think it is well set-up to be a financial success.

Plus, I would never forgive myself if I missed a movie where someone is playing Mike "Cy" Magnante.

Noneck
09-23-2011, 10:55 AM
I'm just asking why you think it will be a flop.

The book was published in 2003, so there shouldn't be any expectation that anything beyond the book's subject and timeline would be covered.

There is a certain hardcore section of baseball fans who, maybe deservedly so, do not care for Beane, the attention and credit he gets, and/or the whole sabermetrics model. They won't see the movie (and might be proud of the fact that they won't see the movie). But much like WSI is only a small section of Sox fans, those are only a small section of baseball fans and an even smaller section of the movie-going, sports-loving public. The movie is about baseball, is getting great reviews and hype, and has been well-marketed in commercials to come off as a feel-good, last-place-to-champion-type movie where the underdog wins (whether that is really what the story is or not is beside the point for now). And it has the Brad Pitt the kids seem to like so much. I think it is well set-up to be a financial success.

Plus, I would never forgive myself if I missed a movie where someone is playing Mike "Cy" Magnante.


Maybe you are right, I have been wrong before, I remember hearing about Star Wars before it came out and said another Flash Gordon.

gobears1987
09-23-2011, 11:11 AM
The movie is getting great Oscar buzz. Royce Clayton is sure to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor because he actually fields ground balls as Miguel Tejada.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 11:20 AM
The movie is getting great Oscar buzz. Royce Clayton is sure to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor because he actually fields ground balls as Miguel Tejada.

Shouldn't he win a People's CHOICE award? :redneck

DumpJerry
09-23-2011, 11:32 AM
The book was published in 2003, so there shouldn't be any expectation that anything beyond the book's subject and timeline would be covered.
Why? Many movies which are based on books are not very faithful to the book. The movie could very easily cover the seven or eight years after the book was published, it's still the same topic.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 11:38 AM
Why? Many movies which are based on books are not very faithful to the book. The movie could very easily cover the seven or eight years after the book was published, it's still the same topic.

Well, then in the end, maybe the A's will win the World Series!

DumpJerry
09-23-2011, 11:39 AM
Well, then in the end, maybe the A's will win the World Series!
This is a non-fiction movie. There is only so much creative license the screen writers can use.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 11:42 AM
This is a non-fiction movie. There is only so much creative license the screen writers can use.

If they allow Royce Clayton to get a hit during a game, I think my suspension of disbelief will end.

DumpJerry
09-23-2011, 11:45 AM
If they allow Royce Clayton to get a hit during a game, I think my suspension of disbelief will end.
Good point.

I wonder how many of the reviewers who have raved about the movie are very knowledgeable about baseball. It is one thing to watch a movie and think it is well written, directed and acted, but another to know it ignores reality. It's like those of us who love the Godfather movies, but have never been in The Outfit-how do we know it is a true reflection of reality?

downstairs
09-23-2011, 11:51 AM
Yeah, reluctantly. We have an awesome theater that just opened in New Orleans... full bar, great food (highly recommended if you visit New Orleans... its in the French Quarter).

However, theres rarely movies me and the wife actually want to see. So if something even half interesting comes along, we go. And I'd classify this as "half interesting".

And its got Brad Pitt, who is one of my favorite actors.

downstairs
09-23-2011, 11:53 AM
Good point.

I wonder how many of the reviewers who have raved about the movie are very knowledgeable about baseball. It is one thing to watch a movie and think it is well written, directed and acted, but another to know it ignores reality. It's like those of us who love the Godfather movies, but have never been in The Outfit-how do we know it is a true reflection of reality?

How does it ignore reality? I haven't seen it- and not asking for spoilers... but do they win the World Series in the end or something?

The reality is Billy's theory all along was that the measure of success is getting to the playoffs. And beyond that its a crap shoot. You can agree or disagree with that, but that was his goal and he accomplished it for many years on a minimal budget.

gobears1987
09-23-2011, 11:55 AM
Shouldn't he win a People's CHOICE award? :redneck

Only if Jerry Manuel presents the award.

downstairs
09-23-2011, 11:56 AM
If they allow Royce Clayton to get a hit during a game, I think my suspension of disbelief will end.

Well he plays Miquel Tejada, so I'm sure he will. The thing is... can you imagine how many takes it took for the minor scene "Tejada gets a single to drive in the winning run"

"Ok, take 250... dammit Royce! Another miss. Ok, take 251..."

kittle42
09-23-2011, 11:57 AM
ty is Billy's theory all along was that the measure of success is getting to the playoffs. And beyond that its a crap shoot.

I've heard that at WSI ad nauseum.

downstairs
09-23-2011, 11:57 AM
The movie is getting great Oscar buzz. Royce Clayton is sure to win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor because he actually fields ground balls as Miguel Tejada.

Or best use of special effects awards. I'm sure it took Cameron-esque CGI to make those scenes.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 11:57 AM
The thing is... can you imagine how many takes it took for the minor scene "Tejada gets a single to drive in the winning run"

"Ok, take 250... dammit Royce! Another miss. Ok, take 251..."

Ha!

34 Inch Stick
09-23-2011, 01:14 PM
I rarely get to see movies and I won't be able to get someone to go to this one with me. I usually reserve the single ticket purchases for horror movies as no one will go with me to those either.

GoGoCrede
09-23-2011, 01:16 PM
Yes, even though Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill bug me. I like baseball.

GoGoCrede
09-23-2011, 01:16 PM
I rarely get to see movies and I won't be able to get someone to go to this one with me. I usually reserve the single ticket purchases for horror movies as no one will go with me to those either.

Going to movies alone is fun, though. I can sit where I damn well please and I don't have to share my snacks or the armrest.

Tannerfan
09-23-2011, 01:25 PM
FWIW I have friends who worked on the movie, and they say it is really very good. It's was a difficult project but they are proud of it. I can't wait to see it.

FarmerAndy
09-23-2011, 01:52 PM
Everybody always brings up the fact that the A's never won it all, and that somehow makes Moneyball a bunch of B.S. These folks are missing the point completely. The real story is that Beane's tactics, like 'em or not, had a huge influence on how clubs look at player evaluation and putting together a team. It was a revolutionary change in how things had been done for years.

No, it didn't turn every G.M. into Bill James. But every organization uses more advance stats to some degree now. I don't like the way Moneyball completely pissed on scouts and such...... I think there needs to be a healthy balance of traditional scouting and advanced statistical analysis. And I think that's what happens with most clubs nowadays.

The reason the A's haven't been that good lately probably has a lot to do with the fact that Beane's approach isn't unique anymore. A decade ago he was able to compete with big spenders with his methods. But now the big spenders can combine his approach with the big dollars.

Billy Beane might be an unlikable guy, but the bottom line is that he changed the game. And that's why Moneyball is a story worth being told.

kittle42
09-23-2011, 01:54 PM
Everybody always brings up the fact that the A's never won it all, and that somehow makes Moneyball a bunch of B.S. These folks are missing the point completely. The real story is that Beane's tactics, like 'em or not, had a huge influence on how clubs look at player evaluation and putting together a team. It was a revolutionary change in how things had been done for years.

No, it didn't turn every G.M. into Bill James. But every organization uses more advance stats to some degree now. I don't like the way Moneyball completely pissed on scouts and such...... I think there needs to be a healthy balance of traditional scouting and advanced statistical analysis. And I think that's what happens with most clubs nowadays.

The reason the A's haven't been that good lately probably has a lot to do with the fact that Beane's approach isn't unique anymore. A decade ago he was able to compete with big spenders with his methods. But now the big spenders can combine his approach with the big dollars.

Billy Beane might be an unlikable guy, but the bottom line is that he changed the game. And that's why Moneyball is a story worth being told.

Come on, propellerhead.

asindc
09-23-2011, 04:26 PM
Everybody always brings up the fact that the A's never won it all, and that somehow makes Moneyball a bunch of B.S. These folks are missing the point completely. The real story is that Beane's tactics, like 'em or not, had a huge influence on how clubs look at player evaluation and putting together a team. It was a revolutionary change in how things had been done for years.

No, it didn't turn every G.M. into Bill James. But every organization uses more advance stats to some degree now. I don't like the way Moneyball completely pissed on scouts and such...... I think there needs to be a healthy balance of traditional scouting and advanced statistical analysis. And I think that's what happens with most clubs nowadays.

The reason the A's haven't been that good lately probably has a lot to do with the fact that Beane's approach isn't unique anymore. A decade ago he was able to compete with big spenders with his methods. But now the big spenders can combine his approach with the big dollars.

Billy Beane might be an unlikable guy, but the bottom line is that he changed the game. And that's why Moneyball is a story worth being told.

My problem with Beane is that the players who have provided Oakland with the most success during his tenure were players that could have been identified as plus players without sabermetrics (Zito, Mulder, Hudson, Giambi, Tejada, Frank). I do think his methodology is worthy of discussion, but I don't think the term "genius" applies to him. A genius would have recognized that Andre Ethier, for instance, was a far better player than Milton Bradley, and much easier to deal with at any rate.

Unless my girlfriend really wants to see it I'll pass. My big problem with Moneyball is how do they end the movie? They make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round? Plus, look at the A's now. They haven't had a winning season since 2006. Like someone else said in another thread, the A's success was on the shoulders of Zito, Hudson, and Mulder.

As for whether I'll watch the movie, maybe at a discount matinee, and only to see if Brad Pitt utters the line, "My **** doesn't work in the playoffs."

gobears1987
09-23-2011, 04:54 PM
If any team of that period should have a movie made about them, it is the 2003 Marlins. Unlike Beane's A's, they actually won something. Billy Beane is the most overrated GM in sports. He could be the A's GM for the next 100 years and he still will never with a World Series.

eriqjaffe
09-23-2011, 04:56 PM
If any team of that period should have a movie made about them, it is the 2003 Marlins. Unlike Beane's A's, they actually won something. Billy Beane is the most overrated GM in sports. He could be the A's GM for the next 100 years and he still will never with a World Series.2003 will not be remembered as the year the Marlins won, but as the year the Cubs lost.

DSpivack
09-23-2011, 05:07 PM
2003 will not be remembered as the year the Marlins won, but as the year the Cubs lost.

Which is unfortunate.

roylestillman
09-23-2011, 05:54 PM
OK I went all old and retired guy and caught the 12:50 at the Orlando Marcus.

It is a good movie, but I wouldn't go four stars on it. Like the book, it glorifies Beane both professionally and personally. I wish it had gotten into the players' stories a little more (Hatteberg in particular, who is played by Andy from Parks and Recreation.)

Given that everyone knows the story and ending there really isn't any plot to deal with. I also can't believe that on non-baseball fan would sit through it.

That said, try not to think of Tom Ricketts seeing this movie and going all out to get Beane for the celebrity of it.

Fenway
09-23-2011, 06:37 PM
People forget that horrible baserunning cost the A's the 2003 ALDS against Boston.

90zoQ7gsc1I

S-SideTrifecta
09-24-2011, 01:26 AM
I saw it tonight and it was very good, much better than I thought it was going to be. It was also a very funny movie, lots of great one liners.

tebman
09-24-2011, 04:49 PM
I saw it last night and agree that it's a very good movie. Fact-based films are never 100% accurate and I'm okay with that. I understand the need to tighten the narrative so the movie doesn't get too complicated to follow. The broad arc of what happened that year as shown in the movie was true, though.

I don't understand the wide distaste for Beane; he had a problem to solve and he tried something that seemed to work. There's no doubt he got lucky with Zito, Mulder and Hudson those years, but there still had to be a team behind them and Beane put it together.

The movie really is done well though. I'd recommend it.

Fenway
09-25-2011, 12:32 AM
The A's beat writer separates fact from fiction

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/24/SPT71L7Q0V.DTL

WhiteSox5187
09-25-2011, 01:38 AM
Everybody always brings up the fact that the A's never won it all, and that somehow makes Moneyball a bunch of B.S. These folks are missing the point completely. The real story is that Beane's tactics, like 'em or not, had a huge influence on how clubs look at player evaluation and putting together a team. It was a revolutionary change in how things had been done for years.

No, it didn't turn every G.M. into Bill James. But every organization uses more advance stats to some degree now. I don't like the way Moneyball completely pissed on scouts and such...... I think there needs to be a healthy balance of traditional scouting and advanced statistical analysis. And I think that's what happens with most clubs nowadays.

The reason the A's haven't been that good lately probably has a lot to do with the fact that Beane's approach isn't unique anymore. A decade ago he was able to compete with big spenders with his methods. But now the big spenders can combine his approach with the big dollars.

Billy Beane might be an unlikable guy, but the bottom line is that he changed the game. And that's why Moneyball is a story worth being told.

This actually isn't true. Paul Richards was using stats like OPS and OBP (all be it his form of OPS was more primitive) back in the 1950s. I remember reading an article from SI's the Vault in the 1970s where they were talking about a guy's On Base Average. The GM of the Tigers even said that all of the stats that Beane used have been used by lots of GMs for awhile. What Beane did was get a book published about him and accepted any and all praise calling him a genius.

soxinem1
09-25-2011, 04:15 PM
I put maybe because while I am interested to see it, I'm not so excited as to see in theaters (also, it's not the kind of movie that really has to be seen on the big screen, anyway). Once it is released on DVD I'll get it from Netflix (wait, I mean Quickster), however.

I'll watch it on Starz! or HBO in four or five months.

MUsoxfan
09-27-2011, 01:05 AM
I liked it and like the idea of Beane and DePodesta more after seeing it, but the movie was sloooooooowwwww to develop. The girlfriend and I were checking our watches waiting for the end

sullythered
09-27-2011, 01:10 AM
David Fincher makes good movies. I'll see it.

doublem23
09-27-2011, 01:18 AM
I'll probably see it when it comes to the $5 cheapy theaters like the Davis or the Patio. I don't mind Moneyball, the book, from an entertainment perspective (I mean, again, we all are in agreement that Billy Beane is not a competent GM, right?) but I expect this movie to be every bit as disappointing as The Blind Side, which was just completely terrible compared to the book.

DSpivack
09-27-2011, 01:34 AM
I'll probably see it when it comes to the $5 cheapy theaters like the Davis or the Patio. I don't mind Moneyball, the book, from an entertainment perspective (I mean, again, we all are in agreement that Billy Beane is not a competent GM, right?) but I expect this movie to be every bit as disappointing as The Blind Side, which was just completely terrible compared to the book.

I loathe that movie. Haven't read the book, however.

rdwj
09-27-2011, 09:25 AM
I'll watch it when it makes it to Netflix, but I'm not rushing out to the theater to see it.

CWSpalehoseCWS
09-27-2011, 02:53 PM
Unless my girlfriend really wants to see it I'll pass. My big problem with Moneyball is how do they end the movie? They make the playoffs and get bounced in the first round? Plus, look at the A's now. They haven't had a winning season since 2006. Like someone else said in another thread, the A's success was on the shoulders of Zito, Hudson, and Mulder.

They address that very well IMO. Very good movie, despite what you want to call fact/fiction. I think of it similar to the JFK movie a while back. Great movie, but some liberties taken.

CLUBHOUSE KID
09-27-2011, 03:11 PM
Yes because it is a baseball movie. I don't care that the A's suck after the fact.

FreeBuck12
09-27-2011, 05:55 PM
Alright.. I havent read the entire thread but after seeing Moneyball 3 times in the last 4 days (and once by myself... *ahem*) I just would love to throw in my 2 cents about the movie.

I was really looking forward to this movie-- I know that everyone has their opininos about Beane and saber metrics and the entire 2002 season but its been a LONG TIME since a good baseball movie has come out, and so I was kinda counting down the last two weeks to see it, haha.

I literally bawled my eyes out the first time I saw it, and looked around me thinking I was a huge idiot and noticed that grown men also were wiping away tears during some parts-- it was actually THAT moving. For anyone who's seen it and questions how the movie could be "feel good" based on the concept of the book will most likely agree that the "metaphor" at the end (regardless of if you believe that the concept was IN REALITY a "home run" for Beane) shared by peter brand to billy beane was spot on.

It made me happy because I wanted so badly to enjoy it, and I wasnt expecting it to actually move me and make me leave thinking "Thats why I love this game"... a friend and I were actually kidding around saying we were going to get "How can you not be romantic about baseball" tattooed on ourselves because that line really sums up the entire feel behind the movie.

I was insanely afraid that having brad pitt playing the part of Beane would mess the entire thing up but everyone played their roles in stunning fashion... jonah and pitt were hilarious together, and I'll seriously recommend it to anyone.

also, at the risk of sounding like a nerd, the guy who plays chavez is coming into town in two weeks and wants me to go see the movie again with him, so that is going to be pretty cool :)

alright... moneyball promo over... im officially a loser, and need an intervention with this entire movie... haha! :)

gobears1987
09-28-2011, 04:21 AM
They address that very well IMO. Very good movie, despite what you want to call fact/fiction. I think of it similar to the JFK movie a while back. Great movie, but some liberties taken.

To say the JFK movie took liberties would be a gross understatement. That nearly entirely fictional movie made up or changed just about every fact that has been proven to be true.

white sox bill
09-28-2011, 03:22 PM
Yes then again I have this fascination with the A's especially the Charley Findley era. Am reading a book on them right now on them

DSpivack
09-28-2011, 03:50 PM
Yes then again I have this fascination with the A's especially the Charley Findley era. Am reading a book on them right now on them

What book?

white sox bill
09-28-2011, 03:58 PM
What book?
http://www.amazon.com/Baseballs-Last-Dynasty-Charlie-Finleys/dp/1570281882/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317243272&sr=8-1

Its about the 1970's teams. Almost too detailed, if Vida Blue as much as coughed wrong you read about it

DSpivack
09-28-2011, 04:02 PM
http://www.amazon.com/Baseballs-Last-Dynasty-Charlie-Finleys/dp/1570281882/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317243272&sr=8-1

Its about the 1970's teams. Almost too detailed, if Vida Blue as much as coughed wrong you read about it

Sounds like an interesting read. I'll add it to my wish list. :cool:

white sox bill
09-28-2011, 04:29 PM
Sounds like an interesting read. I'll add it to my wish list. :cool:
I've been in Illinois for almost all this year and use the library inter-library loan service to check this book out and I think you could do same. It would save a few dollar$. (If I dont finish this book and can't renew because its on hold for someone I'll know its you!:tongue:)

DSpivack
09-28-2011, 04:31 PM
I've been in Illinois for almost all this year and use the library inter-library loan service to check this book out and I think you could do same. It would save a few dollar$. (If I dont finish this book and can't renew because its on hold for someone I'll know its you!:tongue:)

Oh, I'll definitely do that. But I have a pile of about 20 books I've bought at used bookstores/library sales recently that are waiting for me first.

#1swisher
10-02-2011, 01:39 PM
The A's beat writer separates fact from fiction

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/24/SPT71L7Q0V.DTL


Fen,
Did Henry really offer Beane $12.5 million?

EDIT: Beane was offered $12.5 min over 5 years, in the article on Epstein from 11.2.05
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=2209889

ChiSoxGirl
10-03-2011, 08:48 PM
I saw it yesterday and LOVED it. I'd definitely see it again. I also learned a lot about the whole "moneyball" concept and about the inner-workings of an organization and its off-season. This is definitely a must-see flick if you're any kind of baseball fan!

CLUBHOUSE KID
10-04-2011, 11:05 PM
I saw it yesterday and LOVED it. I'd definitely see it again. I also learned a lot about the whole "moneyball" concept and about the inner-workings of an organization and its off-season. This is definitely a must-see flick if you're any kind of baseball fan!

Agreed. Saw it, loved it.

Johnny Mostil
10-05-2011, 09:27 PM
This script I know: http://www.jest.com/video/46873/too-much-moneyball

Nellie_Fox
10-06-2011, 03:17 PM
A great line on XM MLB Network today: "The great thing about the Moneyball movie is that it's all ready for a sequel if Oakland ever actually wins anything."

SBSoxFan
10-06-2011, 11:10 PM
This script I know: http://www.jest.com/video/46873/too-much-moneyball

Now that, I would see again!

GoGoCrede
10-11-2011, 10:12 PM
I just saw it. Overall I enjoyed seeing how an organization works (the trade deadline calls were funny), but I thought the pacing was awful. Very slow, so much so that I didn't enjoy it as much as I wanted to. Half the time I was thinking, "Say your line already!"