How and Why Billy Beane Blew It

Blaming the Cespedes-Lester trade for the A's decline last year is lunacy. Beane won that trade hands down, as Lester posted a sub 2.50 ERA afterwards while Cespedes his .269 with only 5 bombs the rest of the year. They collapsed in the 2nd half last year because their offense collapsed: Norris, Moss, et al had huge drop offs.

The inexplicable moves IMO were the offseason trade of Donaldson, a legitimate star player under several years of cheap cost control, and the 30M/3 year signing of Billy Butler. Very un-Beane moves.

But to blame the Lester trade or Beane's ego for last year is flat out silly.

And great GM's sometimes make now for future moves like the Samardijza for Russell trade when they have a shot at winning it all. See multi world champion Brian Sabean's deal of Wheeler for Beltran. I wouldn't have made the deal, but I understand the impulse. Monday morning quarterbacking of a GM trying to win it all is a bit hollow.

Taking the movie portrayal of Beane's personality as fact is amusing.

about that Donaldson-for-4-players trade ...

http://www.outsidepitchmlb.com/suddenly ... rade/30630

and don't forget Phegley, in another trade

http://fantasynews.cbssports.com/fantas ... sh-phegley

someone mentioned OBP -- just a reminder that Beane was never "about" OBP, he was about finding market inefficiencies; OBP was undervalued at one time, and he pounced, but it could have been literally any other statistic -- it just so happened to be OBP near the beginning of Beane's tenure

and according to baseball prospectus, the A's have simply been the un"luckiest" team in MLB so far this year -- see the 3rd-order projection, almost 10 wins higher that what has occurred -- in theory, they will revert to the mean, and end the season somewhere around 83-79

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

about that Donaldson-for-4-players trade ...
http://www.outsidepitchmlb.com/suddenly ... rade/30630
and don't forget Phegley, in another trade

someone mentioned OBP -- just a reminder that Beane was never "about" OBP, he was about finding market inefficiencies; OBP was undervalued at one time, and he pounced, but it could have been literally any other statistic -- it just so happened to be OBP near the beginning of Beane's tenure

As that article showed, the Donaldson trade was not a swindle. However, it is still clear Lawrie is not Donaldson--and hasn't been so for years, and the A's significantly miss Donaldson's production in the middle of the lineup--production he is significantly giving to the Blue Jays--as well as his leadership in the clubhouse. What makes that worse is Donaldson is signed through 2018 at a low cost, so they also lost a huge bargain. If Gravesman turns out to be for real, and Barreto improves on his current production, we can re-assess the trade. But, at this point, they traded away their best player and his MVP production for inequitable present production...and have suffered for it.

As for Phegley, whom they got in the Samardzija trade, he is doing fine...for a backup catcher to Vogt. He is hardly sufficient value replacement for Addison Russell and Billy McKinney, whom they traded for Samardzija. Even coupled with the poor defensive Semien, it's a poor tradeoff for Beane.

And it makes no sense to say Beane was "never" about OBP. He many never have only been about it, but Sandy Alderson--who mentored Beane--valued OBP, and Paul DePodesta (who advised Beane) also valued it...as Lewis chronicled in Moneyball. He did--as knowledgeable fans know--look for market inefficiencies, but he also valued (and still values) OBP itself, as well as those inefficiencies. So, his valuing OBP wasn't as random as Clown says.

and according to baseball prospectus, the A's have simply been the un"luckiest" team in MLB so far this year -- see the 3rd-order projection, almost 10 wins higher that what has occurred -- in theory, they will revert to the mean, and end the season somewhere around 83-79

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

I've read over this link, and nothing about it gives substantial evidence showing the A's have just been unlucky. If anyone actually wants to show how it does, please show how.

Here are some factors that have led to the A's struggles, having little to do with luck:

1. They traded away their best player, Donaldson, for a replacement who hasn't matched his production.
2. They traded away (on July 31) their most explosive player, Yoenis Cespedes, and significantly miss him and Donaldson in the lineup.
3. They no longer have two of their best starters from the second half of last year, Samardzija and Lester, and haven't adequately replaced them.
4. Their shortstop Marcus Semien, acquired in that Samarzija/Phegley trade, has been one of the worst defensive SS's in the AL this year.
5. Ben Zobrist, who cost them blue chip SS prospect Daniel Robertson, hasn't produced nearly as well as they hoped.

Those are problems coming from the team and team makeup themselves, and are significantly the result of Beane's decisions. They are not just the product of "bad luck."

Strether doesn't understand sabrmetrics, so don't bother trying to lay bare for him the A's issues with bad luck vis a vis their component stats or pythagorean expected record. It's like pounding one's head into a wall.

Clown is correct above. When on base percentage was undervalued on the free agent market, Beane exploited that. He more recently did the same with defense. It's getting harder as more front office employ sabrmetricians of their own.

and according to baseball prospectus, the A's have simply been the un"luckiest" team in MLB so far this year -- see the 3rd-order projection, almost 10 wins higher than what has occurred -- in theory, they will revert to the mean, and end the season somewhere around 83-79

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

just a random note -- according to the BP 3rd-order projection, the Twins have been the "luckiest" team so far (see the plus/minus numbers under "D3") -- last year, that luck held up for the Royals, who were a .500 projection team all year but stayed on the right side of the bell curve through the whole season

the projection indicates a 77-85 season for the Twins (i.e. for the remaining games at a .420 clip, plus the wins so far) -- check back in three months!

edit: I am also reminded that for the first half last year the Brewers were WAY overperforming compared to their BP projection -- and of course they then proceeded to collapse

It's a good thing Clown put "luckiest' in scare quotes, since he hasn't shown in any way how his report/projection successfully quantifies and establishes the "luck" for each team...or how that luck impacts it. I have no idea why he is bringing up this years Twins or last years Brewers, but i do find the suggestion the Royals won on luck amusing. Last year they had a bullpen led by:

Greg Holland--1.44 ERA, .91 Whip, 43 saves/46 svo
Wade Davis--9-2, 1.00 ERA, .85 Whip in 71 gms
Kelvin Herrera--1.41 ERA, 1.14 Whip in 70 gms
Jason Frasor--1.53 ERA, 0.96 Whip in 23 gms

Their starting rotation consisted of :
James Shields--14-8, 3.21 ERA, 1.14 Whip
Yordano Ventura--14-10, 3.20 ERA
Danny Duffy--2.53 ERA, 1.11 Whip
Jason Vargas--11-10, 3.71 ERA

And these standout performances:

Lorenzo Cain--.301 Avg, 28 stolen bases, GG-level defense
Alcides Escobar--.285 avg, 35 stolen bases, GG-level defense
Alex Gordon--19 hrs, .351 OBP--GG defense
Salvador Perez--17 hrs, GG-level defense.

These performances in a poor division are what led to the Royals' success, not "luck." However, if Clown, or anyone else, wants to show how that report actually quantifies luck and applies it to team performances. I will reconsider. He hasn't done so yet.