Anyone Gonna See "Moneyball"?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

ABM

Happily Married In Music City, USA!
Joined
Sep 12, 2008
Messages
31,865
Likes
5,785
Points
113
I've really been wanting to see this movie. It opens this week. I've heard that Brad Pitt delivers and outstanding performance as Billy Beane, as well as Jonah Hill's depiction of Pete Brand. (Say, didn't Kevin Pritchard hire Jeffrey Ma - the MIT whiz-kid - to do something similar for the Blazers?)

Should be a fun movie to watch.
 
I lived in the Bay Area at the time. La Russa was the manager. There was quite a buzz about how the team was using advanced statistics to determine who played, and when. It didn't guarantee victory, but the team was a solid contender. They made the world series against the giants and there was a major earthquake during one of the games...
 
I want to see it, but I don't think it's the kind of movie you pay $10 to see in theaters.
 
I want to see it, but I don't think it's the kind of movie you pay $10 to see in theaters.

The gf loves the whole theater experience - replete with stadium seating, sound system, popcorn, the whole 9 yards. Before meeting her, I was your basic stay-at-home and wait for the dvd kind of guy. It's all good, though. She doesn't require much in terms of entertainment $$. Movies are her bag. I'll roll with it.
 
is this going to be another "Major League" situation where the team makes the playoffs as the big climax? his teams could never win in the playoffs, it was a nice way to compete over 162 games but you need power pitching to win in the postseason and they could never find that.

and i don't think that 89 team was put together with sabermetrics and beane. considering that team had guys like McGwire, Canseco, and Dave Henderson, which seem like the complete opposite of what beane and company were trying to do there.
 
The movie description says for the 2002 season.

But I remember they were using the advanced statistics in the 1980s. The 2002 season was a full commitment to the strategy.

EDIT: I found this:

http://miscbaseball.wordpress.com/2009/11/30/more-on-sabermetrics-in-1983/

(and another that said LaRussa didn't allow any of his custom stats to be made public, like who had what batting average against lefties.)
 
IMO, this was a rather thought-provoking viewer review...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1210166/reviews

Just caught this at the Toronto Film festival. It is undoubtedly one of the higher quality dramas in 2011. At its heart is a baseball-centric docu-drama, but even folks with zero baseball knowledge/interest can enjoy and be moved by this movie.

Jonah Hill's performance in the film is phenomenal, and this may be the break that that young actor has been joshing for. His portrayal Peter Brand, a Yale Economics major and full time computer nerd is beyond believable, you practically swear that you know him personally a few days after the movie.

The role of Billy Beane, played by Brad Pitt, is an incredibly demanding one. While there are tons of dialog, hack arguments, display of physical rage, etc; it is the silent story telling, emotional turmoil, change-of-heart reflections, pupils-triggered catharsis, and so on that are the toughest to convey and requires a well-seasoned character actor. This is easily Brad at his widest acting range - and you see all of it in a little over two hours.

To be totally honest, I have not been tracking Philip Seymour Hoffman's acting career until this film. His portrayal of the ready-to-exit Oakland A's coach Art Howe, caught between "the for-sure old money" and the "crazy senseless new reality", convinced me that they couldn't have casted this part any better. Hoffman delivers on every single scene and you literally sweat his frustration along with him. This foil to Brad Pitt's character is actually effective enough to save several heavy- drama exchange where Brad's delivery falls slightly short of the mark.

This is an "onion" movie, constructed purposely to be entertaining on many levels. It can be watched purely as an entertaining account of modern baseball history - how player statistics became one of the most important factors determining financial success in modern baseball.

For more sentimental audience it tracks the journey of a man, forced to embrace change and disappointment as he fumble aimlessly through life etching out an unremarkable career first as a failing professional player, then small-time scout, and washed-out General Manager; only to finally wake up - and find himself becoming one of the greatest living innovator of the modern game.

Finally, for the abstract-at-heart, and those who knows or cares little about the game of baseball (like yours truly), this is a tale of an industry under irreversible change; a documentary of the conflict between innovators who brave the slings-and-arrows to map out the new ways, and the old stalwarts who goes all out to protect their crumbling turf.

At this historic moment in time, the message really hits a home-run! Other than baseball, we've recently witness similar changes and conflicts played out in public across the automobile, music distribution, movie distribution, book distribution, home computer, banking , and many other industries. Every unemployed in a vanishing industry can easily identify with the old Billy Beane, it is how Billy leverage his disappointment and experience, to turn his life around that we can all aspire to.

A worthy note is the soundtrack for the movie, grass-root simple and heartfelt, it sent me looking for the album on itunes - only to realize that the movie has not been officially released yet.
 
The movie description says for the 2002 season.

But I remember they were using the advanced statistics in the 1980s. The 2002 season was a full commitment to the strategy.

EDIT: I found this:

http://miscbaseball.wordpress.com/2009/11/30/more-on-sabermetrics-in-1983/

(and another that said LaRussa didn't allow any of his custom stats to be made public, like who had what batting average against lefties.)

i'm sure coaches have been using those kinds of stats long before 83 but the computer made it easier. that isn't the "moneyball" approach though.
 
is this going to be another "Major League" situation where the team makes the playoffs as the big climax? his teams could never win in the playoffs, it was a nice way to compete over 162 games but you need power pitching to win in the postseason and they could never find that.

and i don't think that 89 team was put together with sabermetrics and beane. considering that team had guys like McGwire, Canseco, and Dave Henderson, which seem like the complete opposite of what beane and company were trying to do there.

Well......

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1210166/reviews

The answer to the conundrum of fielding a competitive team with a limited budget is in fact the one sought by Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland Athletics. In 2001, after sending a team to the divisional playoffs only to lose in a heartbreaking game 5 to the big market big money New York Yankees (who went on to lose the World Series to Arizona), he was losing three of his star players and he simply could not afford to replace them. He hit the realization that in order to compete, he had to re-think the way that baseball business is done. No longer could he think in terms of buying his way into the playoffs (as the Yankees seem to do every year), but instead he would devise a system that would revolutionize the way that baseball is played…or at least they way a team is constructed. To this end, he constructed an unorthodox and unconventional system which at the time was completely unheard-of. Suddenly, players were valued not for home runs or batting average, but for walks and runs scored. Under this system, 3 players making 250,000 each were worth the same as one player making 7 million. And in doing so, Beane managed to field a winning team who set an American League record for consecutive wins. Critics may point out that as yet, under this system, the A's still haven't won a championship. But they were always competitive, which is more than we can say for the majority of the teams in the league who also are not winning championships and are in fact spending a lot more money.
 
well ...... i'm not sure what you did there but prove my point. he found a way to compete for 162 games with a limited budget and changed the way the game is played. i said that, but i also said what that blurb did, that he couldn't win with it in the playoffs. what he really did was show teams like Boston how to build a team using those same principles but with the cash to get the one or two players they really needed to put them over the top. to me the "moneyball" system works with your everyday players, but in the end you need the pitching. beane got lucky (or drafted wisely) on some good, but not great, pitching (tim hudson, mark mulder, barry zito). i commend him for changing the game and really sports as a whole and am not saying he doesn't deserve the book/movie but in the end it was the red sox that really won with the "moneyball" system.
 
The Cubs had two ace pitchers and a stacked lineup a few years back. They choked in the playoffs, badly.

So there is a clutch element that the advanced stats can't show without history (playoff data).

In any case, I was there, and they talked on the local sports about how LaRussa was using unorthodox stats (and computers) in ways nobody else was. The word "sabremetrics" was used frequently. It was of particular interest to me as I was a big fan of Bill James, his stats projects, and his books back when I was in HS in the 70s...
 
I think I read somewhere that there were legal issues/permission not given or something for not being able to use DePodesta's name, but using Beane, Hatteberg, etc.

I'm intrigued by the movie. They're never as good as the books, but I might spend 3.99 on demand or get it out of a redbox in a couple of months. I'm still trying to get Mrs. FromWA to find time in her schedule of raising two kids under 18 months to sit down for 90 minutes and watch Thor. :dunno:
 
not at all really, i hate the a's and the dodgers, depos next team

That said, I think the whole "metrics" concept is rather intriguing. IMO, it can't hurt.
 
cant hurt what exactly? the movie?

im a fan of sabermetrics in baseball especially, there is generally such a large sample size, and everything a player does can be easily quantified

although, the one thing that most stat nerds/laymen can not agree on is the existence of "clutch", as in, most believe it doesnt exist, and is merely a byproduct of good or bad luck ala babip
 
cant hurt what exactly?

To me, bigbailes "appeared" to be implying that Beane couldn't win in the playoffs using the system. I don't think the metrics portion was the problem so much as he simply didn't have enough talent. Metrics could only take him so far. Overall, talent wins, though. Can't deny that fact.
 
well, what the bigger markets have as an advantage is the ability to gamble on high salaries...if they dont work out they can absorb the loss and move on

the a's actually have a great pitching staff again, and could surprise people next year
 
I agree Denny, but that Cubs team wasn't built with "sabermetrics" or "moneyball" in mind. That team lacked the mental toughness to get past one fan doing what anyone else would have done and one shortstop that booted a routine double play ball. Then you look at the '04 Sox who were built with that approach but were able to add in the power pitching and they had just enough "idoits" who didn't care about the "curse" that it worked. There is no doubt that it also takes a little luck to win in the postseason, I mean say Jeter doesn't make that flip (i still think Giambi may have been safe) that series could turn and the A's might have won it all.
 
abm, the moneyball approach def works but you gotta have the horses to get you through the postseason. i find it interesting how other teams in other sports (ie the blazers) have tried to use this approach to varying degrees of success.
 
I'l probably go see it when it comes to dvd or i can rent it. But If it get's really good reviews I'l probably go see it in the movie theater.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top