KingKongvs.Godzilla

While I'm very sure that guys like Joe Morgan completely missed the point, Tony LaRussa is not some idiot. In fact, LaRussa, and the guys like him in the sport, was probably in on baseball numbers long before it was cool. The bitterness in the joke probably comes from actually seeing the impact the book had on personnel and FOs first hand. Not to mention that post-MoneyBall guys who spent decades thriving in baseball were suddenly idiots, ignoramuses, and dinosaurs according to the sudden surge of people who "got it" because they read a book and can recite "MoneyBall isn't about statistics, but rather using statistics to detect market inefficiencies" when faced with the *craaaazy, waaaaacky* idea that that book had an impact upon the culture of the game itself. Just looking at this from the perspective of a really old school baseball guy...hell you don't even have to be *that* old school for this to irk...Why wouldn't some people be pissed at something that opened up the door for them being labeled inefficient, antiquated idiots? Why wouldn't they be pissed that FO and GM jobs that might have gone to them with a few breaks to kids out of Ivy League business schools (some like Mark Shapiro and Paul DePodesta who admitted to having little clue about the game before they got in it)? Anyway, this is something that I'll never be able to cover completely on a message board in a few posts. You can write a whole book on the impact of MoneyBall on MLB, and why people feel the way they do about the book one way or another. There's logic to both sides, which is why we're seeing the smartest and best franchises blending both sides as well as the big debates of last decade (that I guess continue to this day). Also, I'll throw in that one of the many reasons the book got attacked (besides the fact that it was 10, 15, 20+ years behind what some teams like the Yankees and A's were doing) was that it could be viewed as an attack on the humanity in something as human as sport. Iunno I'm just going to stop rambling and let this post take the incoming beating and let the whole "KKvG hates stats" thing perpetuate. I just think the idea that Tony LaRussa doesn't get MoneyBall just because he dare speak ill is just laughable...Oh, and the joke was funny.

Whoa random....one of my favorite players growing up and a really smart, tough guy. I hope he sucks there because [expletive] the Sox.

I'm just offended by your sense of humor if you think what he said was funny or clever at all. That's fine. Different strokes...I imagine a dry delivery, which to me b Hits the spot.

I haven't read much of a general opinion one way or another at 2B. Another thing I'm thinking about is that the last tall 2B I can remember as a prospect is Chase Utley, who BA listed as a 3B as late as '03 or '05 or both. It's just talk...seeing him play you can see there's a smart, decisive defender who moves well laterally but not SS well....though I think he could handle a start at SS in an emergency. His D is a big part of why I'm high on Lemahieu...that and he's really got an excellent "way about him" as far as makeup is concerned. Oh and Im remembering that when he was drafted Wilken mentioned that his power was probably 3+ years away. Its something Ithink they were aware of but likedthe things he COULD do enough to take him in the 2nd.

You think he's just too tall? Who's the biggest defensively solid 2B you can think of? Sandberg? DeRosa? it's more that he's viewed as not having elite reactions/range at 2nd. LeMahieu at 2nd is a ... Theriot at shortstop type in that, he gets to the balls he can. Now, if LeMahieu's power developed a bit more (and the hit tool stayed the same), you could live with average, maybe a tick below average defense there. Lemahieu at SS is more like what you describe Lemahieu at 2B. I thought he moved really well at 2B, and his tools play up bc he's a player who doesnt waste moves and keeps his head on.

I think he could handle 2B just fine. There he's Barney with room for growth.

Or they just could be negotiating compensation. If they wanted Theo to stick around, why not just decline the permission? Then we'd have nothing to speculate on during playoff season.

Yep then it just faded into an impactless, controversy free sunset, forever forgotten. Suuuunshine lollipops rainbows smiley days or sumpin. Doesn't the fact that you guys are so offended for MoneyBall kind of tell you that this book had an impact on the way people perceive and think about and through the sport? Is it against some rule to mock the sheer number of numbers that came post-MoneyBall, which is the root of the joke? What's the big deal here?

Are you just getting that from the movie? His daughter is in college or graduated by now, so if she really was what kept him from Boston, I doubt it would now unless he has other kids there as well. I think he has 4 year old twins too. Someone linked a Peter Gammons article a few pages back, and he doesn't seem like a guy willing to take on a new challenge. He seems pretty content in Oakland. Epstein is plenty content in Boston with a young family to take care of...yet here we are on day whatever of "Epsteins going to be offered the job." Beane is still very much a candidate IMO and one that for whatever reason is being slept on. He needs more headlines somehow.

Boo. It's a valid concern. People have been saying "the power will come" since he was in college, but it never really has. And it likely wont unless he completely retools his swing. That's scary. It is valid, but the player beyond that is an interesting one and a pretty solid looking one for 22. The book isn't closed on him gaining power either. I could see him ending up a gap hitter who can hit maybe 8-12 HRs, possibly better. He did do better getting XBHs in the minors last year, and physically he's a taller, lankier guy who can get stronger.

These two make such a cute couple. Yea, but "multiply by [expletive]" is still pretty funny.

A worthy heir to Ted Lilly, and could be better. I'm on the wagon, but he's a longshot.

No need to be obtuse. He was obviously taking a shot at the embracing of baseball statistics by the mainstream, which was (whether anyone will admit it in an argument or not) a product of MoneyBall's shockwave in baseball culture. He did this by telling the reporter he's not a MoneyBall fan because something something multiply it by [expletive].

The dinosaurs are wondering why they're dinosaurs when they occupy and witness the reality of what the numbers are collected in, and in fact know the people those numbers are collected on on a personal level. They help train those people, they talk and give advice to those people, and they see their habits and eccentricities on some kind of more substantial basis than a vast majority of the population, who mostly just have numbers. That's not even going into the fact that most of those stupid dinosaurs were in on baseball statistics long before your average fan started categorizing them as dinosaurs. Being a numbers analyst is a dime a dozen skill now in baseball, and next (already happening really) is more research to quantify the physical attributes and traits of athletes (quantify scouting). Even then, there's a million different things that can come together to be a good and useful player and then a winning roster. There's always going to be people who know the numbers and still like to use the 'ol c and b set in there.

Boo.

It was the fun debate making baseball interesting, as opposed to the other major issue (steroids) which was really pretend hurting baseball. It was a relevant book in baseball history, they made a movie about it, the movie is really good and just came out, and he made a pretty good joke out of it. How is multiply it by bullshitnot not funny?

Pretty much. His fastball velocity is going to set the perceptions of him, and it's hard to get a good read on what his fastball really is. He's big and strong with good mechanics and a loose arm though so I definitely agree that he's being a little overlooked to make up for the over hype last year.

Lol stop being mad over invisible [expletive]. What Tony LaRussa, manager of the Cardinals and enemy of the Cubs and humanity said in that instance was funny.

I've said it before and I'll say it again...Chris Archer is a closer or really good set up man waiting to happen. "Needs to throw more strikes" and "tries to trick people with his breaking pitch" have been the knock for years now, and except for one stretch in High A last year he hasn't really shown either. Didn't we do the whole "can he learn to throw strikes and rely less on his breaking ball" thing with Kerry Wood? Archer is going down the same path. I'm not sure on McNutt. I didn't buy him last year, and this year did nothing to raise my hopes or expectations.

Good to see Carpenter doing well. I think he could be a key 'pen arm next year if he's not used in a trade this offseason. He's really got the potential for electric stuff out of the pen.

Vitters played 1B yesterday. That does not = Vitters is a 1B forever. I'm not making a direct comparison to them. I'm saying Ramirez isn't much of a walker, but is a high contact hitter with a fairly textbook swing that generates a ton of hard contact. Vitters has similar talents/potential skills, but hasn't put it together yet. I realize that by his age Ramirez had over 600+ PAs and was a much faster riser as a prospect. You'll notice in those 500 PAs Ramirez sucked pretty bad. The Cubs' other best hitter...Castro...same thing. High contact, fast swing that generates a ton of hard contact , doesn't K much and doesn't walk much. '08/'10 Geo is like that...to a much lesser degree Barney is another guy with a textbook swing that generates alot of contact without many K's or BBs. Vitters fits a profile that the Cubs have actually been pretty successful at developing, and has the pedigree of a top 5 draft pick who was not considered a reach by any means. That'd be enough to keep him somewhat interesting, but tracking this season this year was interesting itself. He had a couple of really hot streaks (one that was like 2-3 weeks in May/June) that were stopped by an injury and then a HBP in the head or hand. I think he's capable of opening up hot next year if/when he starts off in AA.

Fixd for accuracy.

and we are done HERE Why? I got alot of jokessss. Tss the Cubs need to declare WAR on losing tsss tsss. The Cubs' ERAs need to take a DIPs. I'm a jokesta.

As soon as people accept the fact that he's never going to be a guy that takes a ton of walks, the better. I keep hearing how great his swing is, and he's definitely shown flashes of greatness. I don't think he'll ever live up to his orignal potential but will end up a solid big league starter. Hopefully, we can sign Aramis to a team friendly 3 years deal, and if Vitters seems ready for the big leagues at the end of 2013, trade Aramis in the following offseason or if we're not contending mid season. The weird thing is that the Cubs' best hitter over the past decade...Aramis Ramirez....doesn't BB a ton either...and was known for a pretty and fast RH swing. Not that Vitters is a lock to be a high end big league hitter, but I really don't think it's as out of the picture as is often painted. I love the tools at the plate...if you've seen in his swing in game it's legit. Built for contact and you can tell there's power a'comin....I agree with the underrated hitter line. He's got my favorite skillset amongst the upper level group, along with LeMahieu (who doesn't have Vitters' power or power potential).

How does BJ Upton sound like a comp for Jackson offensively? Keep in mind that Upton plays in a run hungry MLB in a run depressing park...Jackson's got one advantage Upton doesn't have in that he hasn't gone through any significant issues with his shoulder...OTOH Upton is probably the better athlete, which is more of a compliment to him than a knock on Jackson.