PDA

View Full Version : Money Ball...


White Sox Randy
03-08-2005, 04:49 PM
I just read the book "Money Ball" over the weekend. I know it's been out for a while. I had heard that Kenny Williams had taken a beating in this book and I was looking for that. I didn't think it was that bad. I was wondering what other people thought of the treatment of the White Sox in this book ?

I saw 3 main points about KW:

1. He had the opportunity to draft Joe Blanton but chose Royce Ring instead - clearly a bad move.

2. He traded Ray Durham and received "only" Jon Adkins in return. At the time I was upset that was all we got for him.

3. KW traded Chad Bradford, an extremely effective reliever, for a minor league catcher. I was a fan of Bradford's when we had him because he really looked like a guy that would be tough to get a good swing on. But, getting Olivo wasn't such a bad deal was it ? And, we were able to get Garcia because of him.

The only other negative that I read about the Sox was that one number cruncher called the Sox and told them that Frank Thomas hit 70 points higher when playing first base and he said that they didn't seem to care about the information.

I didn't think it was all that bad. Am I missing something ?

kittle42
03-08-2005, 05:11 PM
Oh no!!!! :(:

NUCatsFan
03-08-2005, 05:13 PM
I didn't think it was all that bad. Am I missing something ?

I finished it myself a few days ago. Only thing I didn't like it that it showed Beane as infallible. Like he never got a trade or a draft wrong. It's still too early to know if he really got it right or wrong.

I did like the quote in there about Jason Giambi being one of the best natural hitters ever. :)

Randar68
03-08-2005, 05:24 PM
Oh no!!!! :(:
Or lord, this should be good. Sit back and watch this one...

:pee :fobbgod:

Ol' No. 2
03-08-2005, 05:31 PM
Soooo....maybe later we can see if anyone has any thoughts on Jeremy Reed. :duck:

Tannerfan
03-08-2005, 05:40 PM
I also read Moneyball and was impressed by Beane's overall philosophy. How instead of complaining about not having a big bank to sign players with, he takes up the challenge of being competitve and staying within the very tight budget the owners impose on him. If more of the movers and shakers in MLB used this discipline guys like Scott Boras could not drive the prices up so high. Baseball needs more GM's and owners who JUST SAY NO!

MRKARNO
03-08-2005, 05:45 PM
I was somewhat displeased with the attitude displayed towards Kenny Williams in this book as it has unfairly given him a bad reputation. However, I think it's more that the author made KW to look like a bad guy than Billy Beane thinking so.

samram
03-08-2005, 05:49 PM
Oh great, I have been waiting forever for a chance to discuss Billy Beane's approach versus that of Kenny Williams.

rmusacch
03-08-2005, 07:14 PM
I just read the book "Money Ball" over the weekend. I know it's been out for a while. I had heard that Kenny Williams had taken a beating in this book and I was looking for that. I didn't think it was that bad. I was wondering what other people thought of the treatment of the White Sox in this book ?

I saw 3 main points about KW:

1. He had the opportunity to draft Joe Blanton but chose Royce Ring instead - clearly a bad move.

2. He traded Ray Durham and received "only" Jon Adkins in return. At the time I was upset that was all we got for him.

3. KW traded Chad Bradford, an extremely effective reliever, for a minor league catcher. I was a fan of Bradford's when we had him because he really looked like a guy that would be tough to get a good swing on. But, getting Olivo wasn't such a bad deal was it ? And, we were able to get Garcia because of him.

The only other negative that I read about the Sox was that one number cruncher called the Sox and told them that Frank Thomas hit 70 points higher when playing first base and he said that they didn't seem to care about the information.

I didn't think it was all that bad. Am I missing something ?

I didn' think it was that bad in regards to Williams either.

NonetheLoaiza
03-08-2005, 08:25 PM
The only thing that made Kenny look terrible was the media reviews of the book. If you actually read the book, it's obviously made to make Beane look like a god, but it wasn't "bashing" KW like articles and reviews of the book made it seem to me...

CWSGuy406
03-08-2005, 09:01 PM
The only thing that made Kenny look terrible was the media reviews of the book. If you actually read the book, it's obviously made to make Beane look like a god, but it wasn't "bashing" KW like articles and reviews of the book made it seem to me...

Good point.

It just comes off as Billy being absolutely shocked and stunned that Williams picks Blanton -- what then seemed like an obvious choice -- over Ring.

Frank the Tank
03-08-2005, 09:15 PM
Who is Joe Blanton??? I guess we will see with him as a #4 starter.


I think Mr. Moneyball is just about out of luck. I am really interested to see what will happen in Oakland now without Mulder and Hudson.

Daver
03-08-2005, 09:36 PM
Who is Joe Blanton??? I guess we will see with him as a #4 starter.


I think Mr. Moneyball is just about out of luck. I am really interested to see what will happen in Oakland now without Mulder and Hudson.

Billy Beane did not draft Zito, Mulder, or Hudson, he inherited them from the previous GM.

NonetheLoaiza
03-08-2005, 09:43 PM
Billy Beane did not draft Zito, Mulder, or Hudson, he inherited them from the previous GM.

Ah, but with the casual baseball eye...it appears that he did. The assosciation of the Big Three to Beane makes people assume that Beane was the great mind behind organizing that rotation. That being said, it is going to be a very interesting season for Mr. Beane.

NUCatsFan
03-08-2005, 09:53 PM
Good point.

It just comes off as Billy being absolutely shocked and stunned that Williams picks Blanton -- what then seemed like an obvious choice -- over Ring.

Ummm....other way around :)

SoxSpeed22
03-08-2005, 10:14 PM
The book was very biased, but then again, so are we about the Sox. The thing I like most about this is that he knows how to draft players and they accomplish stuff. But if it was me the order of attributes I would draft a player would be
1. Mentality - they have to have the drive to win, the desire to work for it, the willingness to change, a good attitude toward the game and the IQ of the game
2. Accomplishments- what they did as an amateur and how they helped their team, stats count too.
3. Physical traits- this is all of the raw physical talent known as "Stuff". Strength, speed, quickness, etc.
The reason I ordered them this way is because mentality is the most important thing in any sport. They can be a specimen, but if they didn't do nothin' as an amateur, how can you tell what they do at higher levels? Stuff is easily the most fixable out of these three. A player can always train to improve in these areas. This applies for any sport, but the differences are smaller in order of baseball>basketball>football. I have no idea about hockey, I'm not gonna go there.

Brian26
03-08-2005, 10:35 PM
I read the book 2 months ago. For what its worth, it's an ok book. It's mildly interesting if you read it with an unbiased approach from the beginning. I enjoyed the chapter on the history of sabermatics and Bill James...on how he began by taking out a one-inch ad in the Sporting News and gradually developed a cult following over years and years with a photocopied & stapled newsletter.

The Beane stuff was interesting. I didn't think he was necessarily portrayed as a god...in fact, Michael Lewis made him look like a raving lunatic at times.

It's just a throwaway sports book that makes for some good reading. Nothing more, nothing less. Let's see how Nick Swisher does this year for the A's....

Blueprint1
03-08-2005, 11:48 PM
Take a look at the moves Williams has made since he came to Chicago. He made some OK moves but never never got anything long term out of them. I am giving him this season to prove me wrong but so far I don't see anything special. I still really hate how we traded for Koch. I still really hate the Todd Ritchie deal. I know the well and colon deals were good but we didnt win anything.

dugwood31
03-09-2005, 12:24 AM
Any book about the recent success of Oakland that doesn't focus on Hudson, Mulder and Zito is a bad book.

gosox41
03-09-2005, 08:29 AM
Billy Beane did not draft Zito, Mulder, or Hudson, he inherited them from the previous GM.

Beane became GM in mid '97.

Hudson was drafted in 1997-don't know if it was before or after Beane.

Barry Zito was drafted in 1999.

Mulder was drafted in 1998.



Bob

Baby Fisk
03-09-2005, 08:49 AM
Just wanted to salute the Mods in advance of what this thread may lead to. For you: :cheers:

Hell, I'm going to start a Mod appreciation thread over in the parking lot. They've put up with lots of crap this off-season and deserve some thanks and gushing.

(and no, I'm not in trouble or sucking up... :redface: )

Flight #24
03-09-2005, 10:05 AM
What's conveniently neglected is that at the time that Durham was traded, you were literally trading 2 months of Durham's play, not the usual 2 months+compensation picks. At the time of the trade, both sides had agreed to eliminate them from the next CBA. In fact, IIRC it was a relatively unrelated item that kiboshed that proposal, the expansion of the draft to include international players. They couldn't agree on the details of that, so they left all draft-related items alone in the CBA which included comp picks.

So at the time, Durham's market value was a lot less than you'd get now, or than you've seen teams get for other players in his position. Unless you think that other GMs and KW knew or should have known that something agreed on by both parties was going to get changed in the final wording.

BainesHOF
03-09-2005, 12:31 PM
I thought it was an excellent book that gave you a great view behind the scenes of an organization. Beane's philosophies were definitely interesting to consider.

I read the paperbook version that included an epilogue talking about the baseball establishment's hilarious and stupid negative reaction to the book. Joe Morgan in particular made himself look like a fool.

Fake Chet Lemon
03-09-2005, 12:48 PM
Billy Beane's Bay area "magic" is spelled B.A.L.C.O. - ball.

Ol' No. 2
03-09-2005, 12:51 PM
I thought it was an excellent book that gave you a great view behind the scenes of an organization. Beane's philosophies were definitely interesting to consider.

I read the paperbook version that included an epilogue talking about the baseball establishment's hilarious and stupid negative reaction to the book. Joe Morgan in particular mad himself look like a fool.There are a lot of people who think the real brains of the outfit is now generally managing in LA.

Flight #24
03-09-2005, 12:51 PM
There are a lot of people who think the real brains of the outfit is now generally managing in LA.

Wow - given some of the moves being made over there I have to question how that can possibly be the case......

Baby Fisk
03-09-2005, 12:52 PM
I thought it was an excellent book that gave you a great view behind the scenes of an organization. Beane's philosophies were definitely interesting to consider.

I read the paperbook version that included an epilogue talking about the baseball establishment's hilarious and stupid negative reaction to the book. Joe Morgan in particular mad himself look like a fool.

:morgan
"How dare you! I invented baseball."

PatK
03-09-2005, 01:00 PM
From what I've heard in reviews, the radio, and this forum, I was expecting a whole chapter entitled something like "Kenny Williams is a Giant Idiot".

The book wasn't that harsh on him, and I don't think the book made Billy Beane appear to be some kind of baseball genius. It just illustrated an inside view of a different approach to producing a successful baseball team.

Hangar18
03-09-2005, 01:05 PM
I saw 3 main points about KW:

1. He had the opportunity to draft Joe Blanton but chose Royce Ring instead - clearly a bad move.

2. He traded Ray Durham and received "only" Jon Adkins in return. At the time I was upset that was all we got for him.

3. KW traded Chad Bradford, an extremely effective reliever, for a minor league catcher. I was a fan of Bradford's when we had him because he really looked like a guy that would be tough to get a good swing on. But, getting Olivo wasn't such a bad deal was it ? And, we were able to get Garcia because of him.


We didnt Draft Joe Blanton because KW got Hoodwinked and believed
$$$$$$ was going to be an Issue (isnt it always when it comes to the SOX)

We "traded" Ray Durham and lost a:
1. Top Of Order Hitter,
2. Hitter with Power,
3. Hitter for Average,
4. Hitter With Speed,
5. Middle Infielder
and HAVNT had a player with those 5 Qualities
since then, Something the SOX havnt been able to replace and has
been a WEAKNESS since then. Not very Smart Thinking.
Why did they "trade" him? They didnt want to resign $$$$$$$$$$$ him.
SOX lineup has been reeling without him ever since, leading up to the
foolish Decision to let all the Big Hitters Leave, because we "werent winning
with a Power Lineup". Um no Jerry, you need a Balanced Attack,
Lot of Power, Good speed and Average at top of lineup, and Pitching
to win.
Im still angered over those moves ..............
and Now .........Joe Blanton is going to help the A's bigtime.
Tell me we couldnt use him in our pitching staff.
All because of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Ironically, we will pay more
to fill holes in our lineup/staff down the line.

Ol' No. 2
03-09-2005, 01:10 PM
Wow - given some of the moves being made over there I have to question how that can possibly be the case......Sit tight. He's remaking the team from what he was given and it won't happen overnight. I think the Dodgers are going to emerge as the dominant team in the NL, but it may take another year or two.

Bucky F. Dent
03-09-2005, 01:13 PM
I finished it myself a few days ago. Only thing I didn't like it that it showed Beane as infallible. Like he never got a trade or a draft wrong. It's still too early to know if he really got it right or wrong.

I did like the quote in there about Jason Giambi being one of the best natural hitters ever. :)


Yeah, IMHO, it's hard to be infallible when you haven't won anything!

Flight #24
03-09-2005, 01:31 PM
Sit tight. He's remaking the team from what he was given and it won't happen overnight. I think the Dodgers are going to emerge as the dominant team in the NL, but it may take another year or two.

We'll see, but I'm not a big fan of paying big $$$ to Jeff Kent or JD Drew. Drew in the AL - sure, but not in the NL.

Hangar18
03-09-2005, 01:35 PM
I still really hate how we traded for Koch.

I still really hate the Todd Ritchie deal. I know the well and colon deals were good but we didnt win anything.


Foulke = $$$$$$$$$
Koch = $$
Im not surprised why that deal was made.

Cubs Steal Jon Lieber from Pirates for nothing
Sox TRY to Steal Ritchine from Pirates for good prospects
Wells couldve been a good deal had we kept him CHEAPLY for another
season ............
Colon couldve been a good deal had we kept him for another season,
instead forcing the SOX to deal even more prospects for more Pitching.

Kuzman
03-09-2005, 02:40 PM
instead forcing the SOX to deal even more prospects for more Pitching.

also Carl and Roberto