I cant stand Billy Beane - Page 2

Plutoro · 07-23-2003, 01:15 AM

My point on his postseason success was that he hadn't dont what every teams goal is, WIN A RING.

His attitude I get off the not giving Giambi a no-trade clause and refusing to deal with Tejada now. Guys that are "stars" but dont fit his system perfect.

yes stepping his system a step higher after experiencing success is logical, but not to the extent he did it.

Dwolfson20 · 07-23-2003, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Plutoro
My point on his postseason success was that he hadn't dont what every teams goal is, WIN A RING.

His attitude I get off the not giving Giambi a no-trade clause and refusing to deal with Tejada now. Guys that are "stars" but dont fit his system perfect.

yes stepping his system a step higher after experiencing success is logical, but not to the extent he did it.

Getting two high draft picks is worth more to him than spending way too much money just to keep one player.

holyroller · 07-23-2003, 01:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Plutoro
My point on his postseason success was that he hadn't dont what every teams goal is, WIN A RING.

His attitude I get off the not giving Giambi a no-trade clause and refusing to deal with Tejada now. Guys that are "stars" but dont fit his system perfect.

yes stepping his system a step higher after experiencing success is logical, but not to the extent he did it.

You think he let Giambi go because he didn't "fit his system." He let him go, and will let Tejada go because he has a very limited payroll and it makes no sense to play a single player the portion of that payroll it would require to keep them. It has nothing ot do with ego, it has to do with wanting to win.

crackpott · 07-23-2003, 01:26 AM

Giambi fit his system perfectly... actually, if there is one player I would think of off the top of my head to fit the good patience/good power mould, it would be Giambi...

Long_Long_Name · 07-23-2003, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Plutoro
I mean I dont agree with his philosophy which is fine really, but when he was moderate with it I liked him but now that he is so extreme and smug it has become annoying.

Phil posted something very similar to this, and I agree with what Phil says.

If his system works, why shouldn't he consolidate it? He tried something out, saw it worked so why not use it even more? What would you have liked him to do, tell hiself "It seems to be working, but I'm not too sure, I won't get too involved with this system."

Anyway, crackpott said it better. Sorry.

Hammer755 · 07-23-2003, 02:20 AM

My favorite part is that he tells people that he likes to get cheap closers, inflate their value, and trade them for far more than they're worth. Yet he still manages to unload Koch on Kenny Williams for Foulke.

It's like a burglar telling you exactly when he's going to rob your house and manages to do it even though everyone knows it's coming.

crackpott · 07-23-2003, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hammer755
My favorite part is that he tells people that he likes to get cheap closers, inflate their value, and trade them for far more than they're worth. Yet he still manages to unload Koch on Kenny Williams for Foulke.

It's like a burglar telling you exactly when he's going to rob your house and manages to do it even though everyone knows it's coming.

Koch was cheap?

Hammer755 · 07-23-2003, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackpott
Koch was cheap?

Definitely, by today's standards. He made $700k in 2001 and $2.4MM last season and had 144 career saves in 4 seasons.

He may have cost the A's Hinske, but they had no room for him anyway.

crackpott · 07-23-2003, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hammer755
Definitely, by today's standards. He made $700k in 2001 and $2.4MM last season and had 144 career saves in 4 seasons.

He may have cost the A's Hinske, but they had no room for him anyway.

I was thinking more in player costs. I think Hinske and Miller was far from cheap, even if they DIDN'T need hinske.

Skipaway · 07-23-2003, 05:25 AM

I don't really believe Billy Beane is that great at ripping others off in trades. He did give out value for the players he got. He's just better at keeping the team competitive. He's routinely dealt good prospects for good players that's still cheap. Basically turning good minor league talent into usable major league parts faster than the usual "development" cycle.

Players he sent away like Cotts, Olivo, Bonderman are not bad at all. Just that Beane did not really wait for them to develop. The drafting-college-player idea got the same effect. College players are more developed and would advance to major league or turn into valuable trading cards faster.

Not bad for a low-budget team to prevent the rebuilding cycle and be competitive for a long time.

ThisGuy666 · 07-23-2003, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackpott
I was thinking more in player costs. I think Hinske and Miller was far from cheap, even if they DIDN'T need hinske.

That's a good point -- even though Hatteberg's doing a fairly decent job at first for the A's (and he is an OBP guy), Hinske could've just been moved to first base to replace Giambi. It probably would've been worth it to get him into the lineup, and his defense at third is atrocious anyway.

cooper_gd · 07-23-2003, 08:49 AM

Time will tell with Beane (euphuism of sabermatrics? does that get confusing?)... he's right... and probably wrong. There will be some sort of slap back and adjustment period as there is with any mathematical theory that does not deal with an exact constant (human influenced events can never be exact). You will never be able to produce an exact constant in sports, especially baseball. So evolution of the game and the probable over/under evaluation of some of the formulas used will lead to an evolution of the theory as well.

The thing I like is that the theory is able to evolve and adjustments can be made. The lack of an exact constant also allows the philosophy to change the constant to fit with variables and the times.

Right now his philosophy is just at the beginning stages. One can reference past stats and make subjective -or- objective arguments all one wants.

The proof will be 10 years from now. And I bet the results are more likely to be "better" than "worse" - though not perfect.

Crapshoot · 07-23-2003, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dwolfson20
I'd like to respond to this, but I honestly have no idea where to start.

Damn it Dwolf, you're channeling my thoughts-

Crapshoot · 07-23-2003, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixto
So basically he's better than your team's GM but you don't really like that fact so you want to knock him down a peg. I understand, truly. Ed Wade is my team's GM.

'

Eck, can you put him on the board for this one ?

Crapshoot · 07-23-2003, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipaway
I don't really believe Billy Beane is that great at ripping others off in trades. He did give out value for the players he got. He's just better at keeping the team competitive. He's routinely dealt good prospects for good players that's still cheap. Basically turning good minor league talent into usable major league parts faster than the usual "development" cycle.

Players he sent away like Cotts, Olivo, Bonderman are not bad at all. Just that Beane did not really wait for them to develop. The drafting-college-player idea got the same effect. College players are more developed and would advance to major league or turn into valuable trading cards faster.

Not bad for a low-budget team to prevent the rebuilding cycle and be competitive for a long time.

Ray Durham for Jon Adkins- and then they got a 1st round pick (and a supplemental) for Durham.

Jonhny Damon, Cory Lidle, and Mark Ellis for Angel Berroa and Ben grive- grieve's gone down the ****ter, and Berroa's just shining- but Lidle provided 2 good years, Elis is a sold player, Damon provided a decent year and then 2 picks

Jason Isringhausen for Billy taylor- taylor was waived after the season by the Mets, while Izzy pitched well for 2 years, then yielded 2 draft picks.

Jermaine Dye for 3 scrubs- While he's stuggled this year, he was a big part in that years team-possibly the worse trade that Oakland has made.

jeremy Giambi for some arm- Giambi was good for 3 years, then dealt in some sort of hissy fit.

Id say his record has been pretty good...

chrisj · 07-23-2003, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Plutoro
His attitude I get off the not giving Giambi a no-trade clause

You know what though? It's refreshing to see a GM not give a no-trade clause, given that half of them give them out and then a year later ask the player to drop it so he can trade him.

Gastric ReFlux · 07-23-2003, 11:14 AM

Billy Beane is an arrogant prick who is using underhanded methods that are ruining baseball. If we continue to let him run rampant, we'll all be watching soccer in 2015.

Crapshoot · 07-23-2003, 11:19 AM

Actually, ownership said no to the no-trade clause- Billy was okay with it.

draven085 · 07-23-2003, 11:23 AM

Aadik-

please refrain from bringing facts into this thread. Thank you.

Signed,
Plutoro

Crapshoot · 07-23-2003, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by draven085
Aadik-

please refrain from bringing facts into this thread. Thank you.

Signed,
Plutoro

my mistake- what I meant to say was the Giambi isn't a proven winner- Beane should have gone out and gotten Luis Sojo...

07-23-2003, 01:15 AM	#21
Plutoro Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 276	My point on his postseason success was that he hadn't dont what every teams goal is, WIN A RING. His attitude I get off the not giving Giambi a no-trade clause and refusing to deal with Tejada now. Guys that are "stars" but dont fit his system perfect. yes stepping his system a step higher after experiencing success is logical, but not to the extent he did it. __________________ SMLB-San Diego Padres: Pre-season 2003, currently rebuilding (year 1 of 5). 15-22 now, Klesko and Burroughs are hot each hitting .325 plus, Bartosh and Keisler both making strong cases for RoY in the early season.

07-23-2003, 01:26 AM	#24
crackpott Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,961	Giambi fit his system perfectly... actually, if there is one player I would think of off the top of my head to fit the good patience/good power mould, it would be Giambi... __________________ Abandoned Planet - Check it out. The photos don't suck anymore.

07-23-2003, 05:25 AM	#30
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	I don't really believe Billy Beane is that great at ripping others off in trades. He did give out value for the players he got. He's just better at keeping the team competitive. He's routinely dealt good prospects for good players that's still cheap. Basically turning good minor league talent into usable major league parts faster than the usual "development" cycle. Players he sent away like Cotts, Olivo, Bonderman are not bad at all. Just that Beane did not really wait for them to develop. The drafting-college-player idea got the same effect. College players are more developed and would advance to major league or turn into valuable trading cards faster. Not bad for a low-budget team to prevent the rebuilding cycle and be competitive for a long time. __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

07-23-2003, 08:49 AM	#32
cooper_gd All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: PopBunker.net Posts: 1,011	Time will tell with Beane (euphuism of sabermatrics? does that get confusing?)... he's right... and probably wrong. There will be some sort of slap back and adjustment period as there is with any mathematical theory that does not deal with an exact constant (human influenced events can never be exact). You will never be able to produce an exact constant in sports, especially baseball. So evolution of the game and the probable over/under evaluation of some of the formulas used will lead to an evolution of the theory as well. The thing I like is that the theory is able to evolve and adjustments can be made. The lack of an exact constant also allows the philosophy to change the constant to fit with variables and the times. Right now his philosophy is just at the beginning stages. One can reference past stats and make subjective -or- objective arguments all one wants. The proof will be 10 years from now. And I bet the results are more likely to be "better" than "worse" - though not perfect. __________________

07-23-2003, 11:19 AM	#38
Crapshoot Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: watching: DArwin's missing link in action Posts: 3,112	Actually, ownership said no to the no-trade clause- Billy was okay with it. __________________ Senior Senor Member of the OOTP Boards Pittsburgh Playmates- OTBL

07-23-2003, 02:20 AM	#26
Hammer755 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 2,348	My favorite part is that he tells people that he likes to get cheap closers, inflate their value, and trade them for far more than they're worth. Yet he still manages to unload Koch on Kenny Williams for Foulke. It's like a burglar telling you exactly when he's going to rob your house and manages to do it even though everyone knows it's coming.

07-23-2003, 11:14 AM	#37
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	Billy Beane is an arrogant prick who is using underhanded methods that are ruining baseball. If we continue to let him run rampant, we'll all be watching soccer in 2015.

07-23-2003, 11:23 AM	#39
draven085 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Jersey Posts: 2,074	Aadik- please refrain from bringing facts into this thread. Thank you. Signed, Plutoro