White Sox' Way Is to Win

[RME JICO]

White Sox' Way Is to Win

 

Williams Is Dismissive of 'Moneyball' Method, and It's Paid Off

 

By Steve Fainaru

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, March 5, 2006; E12

 

TUCSON -- When the bestseller "Moneyball" was published a few years ago, it featured a minor character named Ken Williams, the general manager of the Chicago White Sox.

 

Williams was shown being out-drafted, fleeced in a trade and mocked by Oakland Athletics General Manager Billy Beane, who was portrayed as a revolutionary remaking baseball through statistical analysis.

 

Williams ripped Beane publicly and confronted him privately. But the images lingered: the A's as the embodiment of modern baseball, the White Sox as an underachieving team symbolized by Frank Thomas, their aging, petulant star.

 

This spring, Thomas is in an A's uniform and Williams is baseball's new visionary.

 

Williams's dramatic overhaul of the White Sox led to the club's first World Series title since 1917, a sweep of the Houston Astros. Within minutes of the last out, Williams told his staff to approach the offseason as if the team had lost. He then re-signed first baseman Paul Konerko, the soul of the team, and engineered two big trades. His acquisition of slugger Jim Thome from Philadelphia finally enabled him to cut the hulking Thomas, who had accumulated seven team batting records during his 16 years in Chicago.

 

In the continuing fallout, Williams and Thomas still were at war last week. Thomas, who signed with the A's for $500,000 plus incentives, continued to complain about his unceremonious release. Williams responded by calling him "an idiot" and "selfish" in a 6 1/2 -minute, profanity-laced tirade that has already become part of Chicago sports lore.

 

Williams, interviewed two days later at the White Sox training camp here, said he regretted only that he swore. "It needed to be said; it was long overdue," he said. "I've been an enabler. What I regret is that I let it build up for so long that it finally came out in such a way that it was really tough for me to pick up the telephone and talk to my mother and my grandmother. I knew they saw it, and I knew they would be disappointed in the language that I used."

 

Thomas, 37, had rendered himself obsolete in Chicago, not only with his declining offense and limited play, but with his distracting presence. Under Williams and Manager Ozzie Guillen over the past two years, the White Sox have staked out their own ground in the ideological struggle inside baseball over how to best achieve and sustain success. Within that framework there was no longer any room for Thomas.

 

At the core of the "Moneyball" philosophy promoted by Beane and his disciples is continuous statistical analysis designed to reveal a player's worth. The most important of those statistics is on-base percentage: the percentage of time a hitter gets on base without making an out. The philosophy emphasizes patience (quantified by walks), selective hitting and nearly continuous number crunching. It deemphasizes the manager, whose primary function is to implement the overall philosophy, and intangibles such as "team chemistry."

 

The White Sox are conspicuous in their lack of attention to statistics. Williams, as one of his first moves, hired a director of baseball operations systems. But pointing at the laptop on his desk, Guillen said: "I just use this to look at my e-mail. I don't believe in it. The information I get from my scouts, I look at it a couple times, but I know what I believe."

 

Unlike A's Manager Ken Macha, who can seem nearly invisible, Guillen is the dominating figure on the White Sox. He often manages by intuition. According to a recent profile in Sports Illustrated, Guillen made his celebrated decision to pinch-hit seldom-used Geoff Blum in the 14th inning of Game 3 of the World Series after consulting with his son Oney, who was watching the game from the dugout. Blum homered in his first World Series at-bat.

 

The White Sox finished 11th out of 14 American League teams in on-base percentage last season. The club was 12th in team batting average and ninth in runs.

 

"I think it certainly has to bring some things into question, don't you think?" Williams said. "You cannot figure out this game through mathematic equations."

 

Williams pointed at Konerko, who was on his way out to the field. "I got a 40-home run guy right there," Williams said. "He's hit 40 home runs two years in a row. Did you know he was on number 39 last year and there were situations where there were guys at second base and no outs, against a couple guys he could drive the ball on. And all the swings you saw were short swings and just to move over the next guy. That's infectious. Put that into your equation."

 

"I don't have any big, great theories," Williams continued in a thinly veiled jab at Beane and the A's. "There's a lot of theories out there about how to do this job, but we've kind of gone back to the old school and things that have been timeless in baseball."

 

In truth, the A's and the White Sox are similar in many respects. Neither Williams nor Beane is hesitant to pull the trigger on trades. Both have stockpiled more starting pitchers than perhaps any other team in baseball. The teams now are in position, if needed, to deal a prominent starter in the last year of his contract: the A's with left-hander Barry Zito and the White Sox with Cuban right-hander Jose Contreras, who went 6-0 in September last year and then 3-1 in the postseason.

 

Williams said he told Guillen and other staff members on the bus after Game 4 of the World Series about his offseason approach. "I had to do it before they got drunk," he said.

 

He said his biggest concerns were losing Konerko and starting the season with a pitching staff that had piled up innings in October. "If you didn't insulate yourself, then I'm going through the season very uncomfortable," Williams said. "I just don't think it's wise to expect the same type of things every year."

 

Konerko embodies the White Sox philosophy. After hitting 40 homers and driving in more than 100 runs for the second straight year, he could have commanded more than the $60 million contract he signed to stay in Chicago.

 

He said he was influenced by the way Williams and Guillen operated. "They were just bringing in gamers, low-maintenance guys, that's the way I'd put it," he said. "I'm really comfortable here. It's the guys that are next to me. It's just a bunch of guys that hang out. Baseball is what we do to pass time between hanging out."

 

Although Konerko has never criticized him, Thomas was anything but low maintenance. Now dressing in Thomas's locker is Thome, who played just 59 games for Philadelphia because of injuries last year and was supplanted by the eventual National League rookie of the year, Ryan Howard. Thome will bat third, in front of Konerko.

 

Thome, a mild-mannered throwback from Peoria, Ill, was voted best teammate in baseball by his fellow players in a 2005 poll. Until last year, he had hit at least 30 homers in nine straight seasons and drove in no fewer than 105 runs in six straight seasons.

 

Thomas's last big year was 2003, when he hit 42 homers and drove in 105 runs, but this spring he questioned why Williams had chosen to go with Thome "when he's never done anything I haven't done on the baseball field." Williams said the decision on whether to choose Thome over Thomas "wasn't even a question."

 

"I want you to look at the record for the last five years as to how much he has been able to play, and be healthy and productive," Williams said. "Go look. Go look."

 

Still, Thomas hit 12 homers in just 105 at-bats in his limited use last year. His lifetime on-base percentage is .427.

 

Introducing Thomas at a news conference in late January, Beane called Thomas "the A's offensive poster child."

 

"This guy probably represents nirvana for us from an offensive standpoint," Beane said.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0401063_pf.html

[chitownsportsfan]

What a terrible argument. The whole premise is that "Moneyball" doesn't work and that the Sox won because they didn't use "Moneyball". "Moneyball" isn't sabermetrics, I really wish writers would realize that. "Moneyball" is about maximizing market inefficiencies--and sabermetrics is just one component of that stragegy.

 

Like Kennie said about Frank, "look it up"--ok, I will:

 

Average Wins Last 4 Seasons for A's and Sox (Kenny Williams "Era"):

 

Sox: 86.4

A's: 96

 

How does this guy even have a job? Maybe it's just insanely possible that both Kenny Williams and Billy Beane are good GM's. Maybe by one objective measure (w/l) you could say Beane is better. Maybe be another one you could say (rings) that KW is the better GM.

 

This is crap and the Washington Post should fire this guy for ignorance.

[Milkman delivers]

And those 96 wins have brought zero playoff series wins.

[Greg Hibbard]

And those 96 wins have brought zero playoff series wins.

[WCSox]

What a terrible argument.  The whole premise is that "Moneyball" doesn't work and that the Sox won because they didn't use "Moneyball".  "Moneyball" isn't sabermetrics, I really wish writers would realize that.  "Moneyball" is about maximizing market inefficiencies--and sabermetrics is just one component of that stragegy.

 

Like Kennie said about Frank, "look it up"--ok, I will:

 

Average Wins Last 4 Seasons for A's and Sox (Kenny Williams "Era"):

 

Sox: 86.4

A's: 96

 

How does this guy even have a job?  Maybe it's just insanely possible that both Kenny Williams and Billy Beane are good GM's.  Maybe by one objective measure (w/l) you could say Beane is better.  Maybe be another one you could say (rings) that KW is the better GM.

 

This is crap and the Washington Post should fire this guy for ignorance.

 

The point was that Beane does not factor leadership or other intangibles into his equation, while KW does. Put the '05 Sox under Ken Macha and I guarantee you that they don't win the WS.

[KevHead0881]

I didn't read this article as a criticism of Moneyball, but more a criticism of sabermetrics in general. I agree with Chitownsportsfan that this article inaccurately uses Moneyball as the philosophy in question. If you read the quotes from Kenny, he's questioning the statistical analysis of sabermetrics, not the entire book of Moneyball.

 

With that being said, I agree with the core or Kenny's argument that measuring simply by statistics can be misleading. While I don't disagree with many of the principles of sabermetrics, I question those who use it religiously as a way to build a team. I'm not saying Beane does that, but some think that way.

 

In the end, and the article alludes to this, I think Beane and KW have many similarities as to what they think makes a successful team: Strong pitching, good defense, quality situational hitting. This is the reason the A's have continued to have success, and a big reason we won it all last year.

[chitownsportsfan]

In the end, and the article alludes to this, I think Beane and KW have many similarities as to what they think makes a successful team: Strong pitching, good defense, quality situational hitting. This is the reason the A's have continued to have success, and a big reason we won it all last year.

 

Exactly. KW and BB are two of the most similiar GM's in the game today. They have differences sure, but they have very similiar philosophies on team construction.

 

Good post Kevhead. Does KW use sabermetrics? Yes. Does KW consider other things like leadership and and attitude: Yes. Is sabermetrics perfect: No.

 

The article is a series of "straw man" arguments about "Moneyball". It's stupid and a child could see through the logic. I wonder if the author has even read "Moneyball". It's like he got the cliff's notes version from Joe Morgan: Billy Beane only cares about OBP. No he doesn't. Nobody in sabermetrics does. It's a useful stat sure, more useful than average, but it's not the holy grail of how Beane or sabermetricians judge a player and build a team. I guarantee you Beane cares more about OPS or the many other offensive formulas that more accuractly judge a players worth.

[UC76]

Both Williams and Beane have done solid jobs. Williams has a Series ring, and Beane continually produces a contender despite routinely being forced to cast off his best players to clubs with more $$$$. (Damon, Giambi, Hudson, Tejada, etc.)

 

I don't think Williams nor Beane can be faulted much regarding their resumes. Both have acoomplished plenty thus far.

[RME JICO]

I thought the article tried to show the differences between KW and Beane, and ended up doing a pretty bad job. Every GM uses different methods to achieve the same goal, that is not really newsworthy.

 

Beane might have averaged 96 wins, but Oakland has not even came close to the World Series with him as a GM. They have never even won a single post season series under Beane. Also, how many of those wins were aided by performance enhancers (Giambi, Tejada, etc)?

[CWSGuy406]

Beane might have averaged 96 wins, but Oakland has not even came close to the World Series with him as a GM.  They have never even won a single post season series under Beane.  Also, how many of those wins were aided by performance enhancers (Giambi, Tejada, etc)?

 

I don't know how much of the 'no-playoff-series' wins thing is Beane's fault, though. From 2000-2003, the A's made the playoffs every year and were knocked out every year in the first round. In all four of these series', the A's lost game five to lose the series. They've lost these four Game-5 games by a combined total of six runs.

 

Both Williams and Beane have done solid jobs. Williams has a Series ring, and Beane continually produces a contender despite routinely being forced to cast off his best players to clubs with more $$$$. (Damon, Giambi, Hudson, Tejada, etc.)

 

I don't think Williams nor Beane can be faulted much regarding their resumes. Both have acoomplished plenty thus far.

 

Nice post. It's a shame more people can't take this type of stance and be a little more objective.

 

(And, BTW, I was as guilty as anyone a couple of years ago with the one-sided bashing.)

[RME JICO]

I don't know how much of the 'no-playoff-series' wins thing is Beane's fault, though.  From 2000-2003, the A's made the playoffs every year and were knocked out every year in the first round.  In all four of these series', the A's lost game five to lose the series.  They've lost these four Game-5 games by a combined total of six runs.

 

So what would and wouldn't be a GM's fault? He should be accountable for everything that happens with the team. Maybe he didn't pull the trigger on a trading deadline deal that could have gotten them over the hump. Either way if he gets credit for all those regular season successes then he should get credit for the playoff failures as well.

 

A team's regular season wins and losses are worthless in the playoffs. Don't get me wrong, Beane knows what he is doing, but it looks like his formula just builds a great regular season team that cannot compete in a 5 or 7 game series. That is where baseball strategies change. Since you rarely play a team more than 4 games straight in the regular season, you can get away with some things that get exposed in a 7 game series. Oakland has done this too many times to be a coincidence.

[SSH2005]

Maybe someone can write a book called Kennyball: The Art of Winning a World Series so Beane can read it and know what it feels like to have a World Series ring.

[RME JICO]

Maybe someone can write a book called Kennyball: The Art of Winning a World Series so Beane can read it and know what it feels like to have a World Series ring. 

 

Ouch!

 

[RockRaines]

What a terrible argument.  The whole premise is that "Moneyball" doesn't work and that the Sox won because they didn't use "Moneyball".  "Moneyball" isn't sabermetrics, I really wish writers would realize that.  "Moneyball" is about maximizing market inefficiencies--and sabermetrics is just one component of that stragegy.

 

Like Kennie said about Frank, "look it up"--ok, I will:

 

Average Wins Last 4 Seasons for A's and Sox (Kenny Williams "Era"):

 

Sox: 86.4

A's: 96

 

How does this guy even have a job?  Maybe it's just insanely possible that both Kenny Williams and Billy Beane are good GM's.  Maybe by one objective measure (w/l) you could say Beane is better.  Maybe be another one you could say (rings) that KW is the better GM.

 

This is crap and the Washington Post should fire this guy for ignorance.

Sweet argument. I looked up an even better stat.

 

Sox: 1 World Championship

A's: 0

[WCSox]

I don't know how much of the 'no-playoff-series' wins thing is Beane's fault, though.

 

A few years ago, I read somewhere that Beane's philosophy is that it's his job to bring in enough talent to get his team to the playoffs and that the rest is up to the players and coaches. IMO, he comes up short by not focusing more on the coaching/leadership aspect of his team. Good managers/coaches make a huge difference. Ozzie was, by far, the most important factor in the Sox winning it all last year. On the other hand, the A's completely out-played the Sox over the past 7 yeras, winning 87, 91, 102, 103, 96, 91, and 88 games, but didn't win a single playoff series.

 

Beane's done a hell of a job, especially considering the financial constraints he's had to work around. But he's not going to win anything until he focuses more on the quality of his coaching staff.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 6, 2006 -> 03:43 AM)

I don't know how much of the 'no-playoff-series' wins thing is Beane's fault, though.  From 2000-2003, the A's made the playoffs every year and were knocked out every year in the first round.  In all four of these series', the A's lost game five to lose the series.  They've lost these four Game-5 games by a combined total of six runs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:rolly

 

It's his team he put together. What do you expect to happen when you build a team around base-glogging, and are not willing to give up an out to get a runner closer to scoring position? You can't go into a playoff series hoping to get a couple of walks, and then a double in the inning when facing, Pedro, Contreras, Buehrle, Santana, and other high quality starters.

Edited March 6, 2006 by santo=dorf

[CWSGuy406]

A team's regular season wins and losses are worthless in the playoffs.  Don't get me wrong, Beane knows what he is doing, but it looks like his formula just builds a great regular season team that cannot compete in a 5 or 7 game series.  That is where baseball strategies change.  Since you rarely play a team more than 4 games straight in the regular season, you can get away with some things that get exposed in a 7 game series.  Oakland has done this too many times to be a coincidence.

 

How should he build his team? Every year he's been in the playoffs, he's gone with the Big 3. You could argue that he didn't put enough 'value' into defense thos years (though I don't remember any of their series'), but it seems to me that, at the very least, he's learned his lesson -- Oakland will have one helluva defensive team this year.

 

BTW -- I'm still not buying the 'exposed in the playoffs' argument. So, Oakland gets exposed, but only exposed enough to lose each series by one game, and by one run?

 

I will say this. Beane has NEVER put together a pitching staff as good as the White Sox' of '05.

It's his team he put together. What do you expect to happen when you build a team around base-glogging, and are not willing to give up an out to get a runner closer to scoring position? You can't go into a playoff series hoping to get a couple of walks, and then a double in the inning when facing, Pedro, Contreras, Buehrle, Santana, and other high quality starters.

 

Why not? Isn't that pretty much what the Sox did? Get some guys on base and wait/hope for the longball? Other than the clinching game of the World Series, I think the Sox were aided by a homer in all of the playoff games.

 

You're right about base-cloggers, though. Ick. Look at his team in 2000 -- Ben Grieve, Matt Stairs, the Giambi brothers, Ramon Hernandez -- wouldn't Ozzie just love that team?

[WCSox]

Why not?  Isn't that pretty much what the Sox did?  Get some guys on base and wait/hope for the longball?  Other than the clinching game of the World Series, I think the Sox were aided by a homer in all of the playoff games.

 

They were this season, but that was only part of the equation. They were also able to manufacture runs. On the other hand, they relied on nothing but extra-base hits in 2000, which is one reason why they did jack offensively.

[santo=dorf]

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Mar 6, 2006 -> 02:02 PM)

Why not?  Isn't that pretty much what the Sox did?  Get some guys on base and wait/hope for the longball?  Other than the clinching game of the World Series, I think the Sox were aided by a homer in all of the playoff games.

 

You're right about base-cloggers, though.  Ick.  Look at his team in 2000 -- Ben Grieve, Matt Stairs, the Giambi brothers, Ramon Hernandez -- wouldn't Ozzie just love that team?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why not? You're big into the numbers. Do you honestly expect a great pitcher with a WHIP in the .9-1.1 range will walk two batters and give up a base hit in the same inning when it all matters?

 

How about game 2 of the ALCS? What would've happened if Ramon Hernandez struckout on a drop third strike? ....and this isn't just about hitting home runs. Every team does that. I'm talking about trying to win a game by having one big inning.

 

The Sox's pitching staff won almost all of the games in the playoff last year. The solo home runs were not the deciding factor.

[CWSGuy406]

The Sox's pitching staff won almost all of the games in the playoff last year.  The solo home runs were not the deciding factor.

 

I agree, and I don't think I've said anything to the contrary.

 

I'm just saying that, for the most part in the postseason (and in the regular season, for that matter), the Sox offense was built off of the homerun.

[WCSox]

I agree, and I don't think I've said anything to the contrary.

 

I'm just saying that, for the most part in the postseason (and in the regular season, for that matter), the Sox offense was built off of the homerun.

 

That's true...

 

ALDS

Game 1 - 5 HRs

Game 2 - 1 HR

Game 3 - 2 HRs

 

ALCS

Game 1 - 1 HR

Game 2 - (none)

Game 3 - 1 HR

Game 4 - 2 HRs (one a three-run shot)

Game 5 - 1 HR

 

WS

Game 1 - 2 HRs

Game 2 - 2 HRs (one a GS)

Game 3 - 2 HRs

Game 4 - (none)

 

Sox starting pitching was bad in Game 2 of the ALDS and Games 2 and 3 of the WS. Outside of that, the starting pitching ranged from good to spectacular.