The Oakland Way, and how it can be applied to Sox

[caulfield12]

He spent a majority of his career in Colorado

 

But two seasons with the A's, as well.

 

And they identified him largely based on his OBP skills...he has 27 walks in only 159 AB's this year (one every 5.89 AB's) in SD, offsetting the relatively pedestrian 6 homers and 21 RBI's.

 

 

Playing half his games in Oakland knocked down his OPS to 753 and 720 (as part of a platoon) in 2012 and 2013...89 walks in 751 at-bats (one every 8.44), whereas in Colorado he had 142 walks in 1277 AB's (one every 9) and an 825-ish OPS in parts of four seasons.

 

It is pretty incredible he went from a hitter's park to pitcher's park to another pitcher's park and upped his walk rate and OPS so much. We'll see how long it lasts, but he's been in the Top 10 for OPS all season long.

 

 

[GreenSox]

I read another article that shows today they are overpaying in prospects to win now. That part of the recipe we don't need to copy.

Edited June 4, 2014 by GreenSox

[caulfield12]

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/ast...e02ca9cd87bd7f9

 

Here's another side of the SABR revolution that's just starting to impact the game for the first time...

 

 

On the field, the Astros shift their defenders into unusual positions to counteract hitter tendencies more than any other team, including in the minor leagues. They schedule minor league starting pitchers on altered and fluctuating rotation schedules, what they call a "modified tandem" system, a development strategy unique in baseball.

 

Off the field, the Astros are said to handle contract negotiations and the timing of player promotions with a dehumanizing, analytics-based approach detected by some across their operation.

 

 

"I don't think anybody's happy. I'm not," one Astros player said recently on the condition his identity not be revealed. "They just take out the human element of baseball. It's hard to play for a GM who just sees you as a number instead of a person. Jeff is experimenting with all of us."

 

.....

 

 

"If you look at every organization, I think the trend is going toward sheer statistical-driven analysis, and I think that (the Astros) are certainly on the front lines of that," said former Astros shortstop Jed Lowrie, now with Oakland. "Baseball is kind of going through this tectonic shift, and there are people out there banging on tables saying, 'This is not the way the game's supposed to be played or evaluated.' But from a business standpoint, I get it.

 

"It is a purely statistical analysis. I think you can't have that approach and expect to have good personal relations. That seems like a hard balance to strike, when you're judging someone strictly on numbers and nothing else, and I'm not talking about whether it's a good guy or a bad guy. But there are certain intangibles, and the perception is the numbers are trying to drive out (the importance of) those intangibles. (see The Will To Win/Hawk Harrelson or clutch discussions)"

 

 

Sig Mejdal, the Astros' director of decision sciences, worked with Luhnow as his right-hand man in St. Louis, too, and criticism was relentless there.

 

"In my experience, change in any industry is difficult," said Mejdal, who worked for NASA and has a background in cognitive psychology. "Supporting a change that doesn't feel right is extraordinarily difficult. … If they felt right, they would already have been done.

 

"Human beings are risk-averse. It's hard to change and deal with all the pushback from change. Why weren't teams positioning their infielders different half a decade ago? I don't know. The data was all there."

 

......

 

The Astros saved themselves money. But the question is whether the team handles these matters in a way that fosters confidence, and how much they should care about that perception in a business worth half a billion dollars based on a core product of 25 players.

 

"Players are people, but the Astros view them purely as property that can be evaluated through a computer program or a rigid set of criteria," one player agent said, echoing the comments of others. "They plug players into it to see what makes sense from a development or contractual perspective, and it does not engender a lot of goodwill in the player or agent community.

 

"They wield service time like a sword (in contract extension negotiations) and basically tell a player, 'This is what you are worth to us, take it or leave it.' "

 

Extension offers for players who have little or no major league experience have grown in popularity in recent years as teams try to get them at a bargain price, and the Astros have made several such offers.

 

The premise is not what some agents said bothers them, but how the Astros approach dealings and appear to handle clients.

 

Springer had an offer last year that reportedly was worth about $7 million guaranteed with the potential to earn more. The Astros also have made third baseman Matt Dominguez an offer worth $14.5 million for five years, plus two options, and outfielder Robbie Grossman received at least one similar offer - $13.5 million for six years plus two options, a person familiar with the offers said.

 

None of the players accepted.

 

(Interestingly, Grossman is now back in the minors, and Singleton accepted his deal in the past week).

[caulfield12]

I read another article that shows today they are overpaying in prospects to win now. That part of the recipe we don't need to copy.

 

 

What are the examples?

 

You would have said the same thing about the KW philosophy with the White Sox, but it led to a World Series trophy (most specifically, the Reed/Olivo/Morse deal for Garcia)...later, to the 2008 playoffs with the C. Carter/Quentin deal, along with McCarthy for Danks, the Floyd trade and signing Alexei.

 

And we always have these arguments back and forth...and almost none of the prospects the White Sox traded every amounted to anything of significance over that entire time other than Gio Gonzalez.

 

It's not like we are talking Phillips/Sizemore/Lee for Colon, or Andrus/Salty/Harrison/N.Feliz for Texeira.

 

 

Of course, in the end, the system was essentially barren under KW...not so much decimated by trades, but by poor drafting/coaching/non-performance and a few injuries mixed in.

Edited June 4, 2014 by caulfield12

[LittleHurt05]

I think there is something else at work in Oakland as well, and it is a positive symptom of their limited resources. As a result of Oakland's limited resources, they very rarely can afford to enter into large contracts. While this forces them to find players with some warts, it insulates them from two things: 1) disastrous long-term contracts, and 2) over-reliance on particular players due to those long-term contracts. Thus, Oakland always has contingency plans. They've always got another guy that can step in because they don't have prohibitive favorites at many positions. This allows for a more flexible roster, it probably creates better team chemistry, and it keeps them better prepared to address the unexpected or unknown. They aren't married to any particular method of doing things, because they can't afford to; their only chance of success demands being able to acclimate on the fly.

 

I agree with this. People always assume that Beane or TB's Freidman would win so much if they had a NY or LA payroll, but I just don't think that's true. If they suddenly had all types of money to spend, that would change the way they play the game. It's much easier to throw money at a top FA to take care of today, instead of finding the diamonds in the rough or platooning. That leads to future problems. With the larger payroll comes larger expectations, so you need to win every year as well. If they take a few chances on cheaper lesser known guys and they don't pan out, they will hear about it.

[southsider2k5]

I agree with this. People always assume that Beane or TB's Freidman would win so much if they had a NY or LA payroll, but I just don't think that's true. If they suddenly had all types of money to spend, that would change the way they play the game. It's much easier to throw money at a top FA to take care of today, instead of finding the diamonds in the rough or platooning. That leads to future problems. With the larger payroll comes larger expectations, so you need to win every year as well. If they take a few chances on cheaper lesser known guys and they don't pan out, they will hear about it.

 

Again I think Andy McPhail is the perfect name here. He did amazing things in MN with zero payroll. Cub fans thought he was a slam dunk here because of having all of the extra money to spend. That didn't work out too well.

[Balta1701]

Again I think Andy McPhail is the perfect name here. He did amazing things in MN with zero payroll. Cub fans thought he was a slam dunk here because of having all of the extra money to spend. That didn't work out too well.

Huh? It seems like it worked pretty much perfectly to me.

[ptatc]

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/ast...e02ca9cd87bd7f9

 

"If you look at every organization, I think the trend is going toward sheer statistical-driven analysis, and I think that (the Astros) are certainly on the front lines of that," said former Astros shortstop Jed Lowrie, now with Oakland. "Baseball is kind of going through this tectonic shift, and there are people out there banging on tables saying, 'This is not the way the game's supposed to be played or evaluated.' But from a business standpoint, I get it.

Wow, a MLB player using tectonic properly. Even the player are getting smarter.

[cabiness42]

Wow, a MLB player using tectonic properly. Even the player are getting smarter.

 

Lowrie went to Stanford.

[GreenSox]

What are the examples?

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/beane-a...wn-terms-052914

 

We traded 1 prospect for Quentin, who, himself, was a prospect.

Early, williams traded off top prospects. Later, he just acquired too many mediocre players and our drafting wasn't good.

 

I like Oak's philosophy - it's like we overreacted with "tools" after we drafted that stiff Broadway. Williams has always liked hard throwers...Koch, MacDougal and the like. I prefer Oak's approach. Ks are good, but you don't need to throw 96 to get them.

 

I would take Nola...but only because I have a heavy distrust, perhaps bias, of drafting HS pitchers early. If there were a really top hitter, I'd take him first.

[Chris Sale]

If Rodon was still available, I'd take him, but I don't think two HS pitchers will be the first two picks. I would take Nola (or even consider taking a hitter, like Alex Jackson or Nick Gordon). HS pitchers really do scare me, and looking at K/BB ratios, Nola is really where its at. Although I wouldn't be too surprised if Nola and Rodon were the first two picks (in which case I'd probably go with Aiken).

[caulfield12]

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/beane-a...wn-terms-052914

 

We traded 1 prospect for Quentin, who, himself, was a prospect.

Early, williams traded off top prospects. Later, he just acquired too many mediocre players and our drafting wasn't good.

 

I like Oak's philosophy - it's like we overreacted with "tools" after we drafted that stiff Broadway. Williams has always liked hard throwers...Koch, MacDougal and the like. I prefer Oak's approach. Ks are good, but you don't need to throw 96 to get them.

 

I would take Nola...but only because I have a heavy distrust, perhaps bias, of drafting HS pitchers early. If there were a really top hitter, I'd take him first.

 

 

Let's also remember that applied more to bullpen arms, with the irony being that Koch's arm was shot after so many appearances with the A's and Blue Jays...and was straight as an arrow at 93-94.

 

And an overreaction to not having a flame-throwing traditional closer in Keith Foulke.

 

It's what also led to the acquisition of guys like Aardsma, MacDougal, Sisco and Masset, who we must have read 25 quotes was a flamethrower coming up with the Rangers and then with the White Sox was sitting at 90-94 most of the time...and of course we later heard he was throwing that speed in order to control his stuff and get more movement/Don Cooper's influence, etc.

 

Which led back to the "must get veterans, not projects" acquisitions of Dotel and Linebrink before 2008.

 

 

I always found it amusing the best of all the lefty relievers that we auditioned at that time...and there were maybe 12-15 of them, ended up being traded rather quickly to the Red Sox, where he started a very long and fruitful loogy career. Javier Lopez.

Edited June 4, 2014 by caulfield12

[ptatc]

Lowrie went to Stanford.

Don't say that on this message board. I once said that Richard Sherman had to have some intelligence because he went to Stanford.

 

What followed was an attack about how going to college, or a certain college or anything doesn't mean you are intelligent because of grade inflation, poor teachers, street smarts..............

[cabiness42]

Don't say that on this message board. I once said that Richard Sherman had to have some intelligence because he went to Stanford.

 

What followed was an attack about how going to college, or a certain college or anything doesn't mean you are intelligent because of grade inflation, poor teachers, street smarts..............

 

Grade inflation happens for athletes at 95% of DI schools, but Stanford is in the other 5%.

[caulfield12]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/winnin...p;vkey=news_mlb

 

Winning Formula...Five Reasons For Oakland As Lasting Success

[ptatc]

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article/mlb/winnin...p;vkey=news_mlb

 

Winning Formula...Five Reasons For Oakland As Lasting Success

So the most common theme is having players without egos, thus no "star" players. So all teams should go the cheap route and not attract star players with egos

[ptatc]

Grade inflation happens for athletes at 95% of DI schools, but Stanford is in the other 5%.

Not according to the posters who attacked me about Richard Sherman. It was also in reference to all students not just athletes.

[caulfield12]

So the most common theme is having players without egos, thus no "star" players. So all teams should go the cheap route and not attract star players with egos

 

 

I guess it depends on the egos of those star players. Abreu has a certain confidence, but he doesn't have the attitude of a star, at least yet.

 

Sale's pretty down to earth and can make fun of himself, too.

 

With the A's, Cespedes carries himself like a star. Donaldson's been on the map for two years now, but isn't nearly as hyped as Pablo Sandoval across the Bay. It's more Moss who has emerged this year. The pitching staff, Kazmir has battled back from the verge of being out of baseball, and Gray/Doolittle are largely unknown out of the roto leagues and West Coast baseball fans.

[Kyyle23]

I guess it depends on the egos of those star players. Abreu has a certain confidence, but he doesn't have the attitude of a star, at least yet.

 

Sale's pretty down to earth and can make fun of himself, too.

 

With the A's, Cespedes carries himself like a star. Donaldson's been on the map for two years now, but isn't nearly as hyped as Pablo Sandoval across the Bay. It's more Moss who has emerged this year. The pitching staff, Kazmir has battled back from the verge of being out of baseball, and Gray/Doolittle are largely unknown out of the roto leagues and West Coast baseball fans.

 

That's because Pablo has a ring. The Oakland Way has not produced that

 

[GreenSox]

If you platoon intelligently, you can make an excellent player out of 2 mediocre players. I suspect we'll see more of that in MLB.

And they've always had good pitching and been able to peddle it for nice returns when the pitchers hit their contract years.