Tuesday, June 08, 2004
What is amazing to me is that the A’s are just ninth in the AL in OBP, eleventh in runs, and seventh in slugging. At the end of Moneyball, Michael Lewis addressed criticism of the A’s anemic 2002 and 2003 offensive stats by stating that the A’s weren’t following their own script any more themselves because the market was getting too efficient: too many teams were looking for what they used to (e.g. the Toronto Blue Jays, the Boston Red Sox, the L.A. Dodgers, etc.) Is that true? By any measure, both of the Moneyball teams (the A’s and Blue Jays) aren’t doing well offensively: the Blue Jays have their own problems: eleventh in OBP, eleventh in runs, and twelfth in slugging. Are Beane and Riccardi failing to execute their own plans? Or are there internal problems with a pure-sabremetrics approach to baseball?
Why are the A's still winning? A: The A’s are being saved by their stingy pitching: they are first in the Major Leagues in ERA, despite playing in the land of the designated hitter. Overall their pitchers are hurling well, but Hudson and Mulder are a combined 13-4 (though I note that Hudson's BAA is about forty points lower than Mulder's) and they are really carrying that team. I hope for the A's sake that the Big Three go back to being the Big Three soon.
Comments on Moneyball are forthcoming ... Monday, my friends. Monday.