Moneyball (2011)
Plot
Showing all 5 items
Jump to:

Summaries (4)

Synopsis (1)
Summaries

Oakland A's GM Billy Beane is handicapped with the lowest salary constraint in baseball.
If he ever wants to win the World Series, Billy must find a competitive advantage. Billy is
about to turn baseball on its ear when he uses statistical data to analyze and place
value on the players he picks for the team.
—Douglas Young (the-movie-guy)

In 2001, General Manager Billy Beane's Oakland A's lose to the Yankees in the playoffs
then lose three stars to free agency. How can Beane field a competitive team when the
A's player salaries total less than a third of the rich teams'? To the consternation of his
scouts, Beane hires and listens to Peter Brand, a recent Yale grad who evaluates
players using Bill James' statistical approach. Beane assembles a team of no
names who, on paper, can get on base and score runs. Then, Beane's manager, Art
Howe, won't use the players as Beane wants. Can Beane circumvent Howe, win games,
make it to the 2002 Series, and stand baseball's hidebound conventions on their heads?
—<jhailey@hotmail.com>

The Oakland A's end their 2001 season with a loss in the AL fifth game of a best of five
elimination series, still an admirable accomplishment seeing as the A's are considered a
poor team with a payroll one-third of that of a rich team like the New York Yankees. During
the off season, they lose three of their star players through free agency, most problematic
being first baseman Jason Giambi. Without more money which he doesn't get from owner
Stephen Schott, the A's GM, Billy Beane, knows that they will never win the World
Series as richer teams will always be able to pilfer their best players - ones they
have been able to nurture - with more lucrative contracts. Billy knows they have to
think differently about how to replace the three, looking at what they require in
combination rather than looking at the three as individuals, which is different than
the way scouts have looked at players over the sport's history. In a meeting with
Cleveland Indians management about players, Billy meets Peter Brand, a quiet Yale
Economics graduate, who works for the Indians doing player analysis. Upon questioning
Peter later in private, Billy realizes that purely academic Peter has much the same thought
process as he does. Billy hires him as the A's Assistant GM after receiving what he
considers the correct answer to Billy's question on his own checkered past as a first round
1979 draft pick which led to notoriety as a failure as a player. But once on the payroll,
Peter convinces Billy to look at the entire dugout, and acquire undervalued players for
what they can do in order for the team to win. As an example, they acquire former
catcher Scott Hatteberg, whose career is seen as being over by all other teams due to an
elbow injury that doesn't allow him to throw. Although not a hitter, they acquire him for his
ability to "get on base" in whatever way required (usually by walks), and plan to teach him
how to play first base, a generally non-throwing position. These moves don't sit well with
the A's scouting team and sports analysts. Problematic is that the A's Manager, Art Howe,
who also doesn't agree with or understand the strategy, refuses to listen to Billy about
how best to manage the team as assembled. Billy knows that his and Peter's jobs are on
the line if they don't produce, which he realizes means nothing less than winning the
World Series. But more important to Billy is to show the world of baseball that his way is
the right way.
—Huggo
Synopsis

The Oakland Athletics baseball team won many games and succeeded in reaching the
"Playoffs" games of the 2001 post-season. When they lose the elimination games against
the Yankees, their general manager Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) is very disappointed. He
knows that several good players will soon be leaving the team: i.e. star players Johnny
Damon (Johnny Damon), Jason Giambi (Jason Giambi), and Jason Isringhausen. Beane
negotiates for replacement players in the hope of assembling a competitive team for the
following year, but the teams budget for payroll is limited. During a visit to the Cleveland
Indians, Beane meets Peter Brand (Jonah Hill). Brand says that he is a Yale economics
graduate. Beane sees that Brand has radical ideas about assessing players' value. Beane
tests Brand's theory by asking whether Brand would have drafted him. Despite the fact
that Beane was a Major League player before becoming general manager, and scouts
considered Beane a phenomenal player, Brand says that he would not have drafted
Beane until the ninth round. He adds that Beane would probably have gone to college
instead. Sensing opportunity, Beane hires Brand as the Athletics' assistant general
manager.
The team's scouts are first dismissive of and then hostile towards Brand's non-traditional
ideas for scouting players. Rather than relying on the scouts' experience and intuition,
Brand selects players based almost exclusively on their on base percentage (OBP). By
finding players with a high OBP but characteristics that lead scouts to dismiss them, Brand
assembles a team of undervalued players with far more potential than the A's hamstrung
finances would otherwise allow. Despite vehement objections from the scouts, Beane
supports Brand's theory and hires the players he selected, such as unorthodox submarine
pitcher Chad Bradford (Casey Bond). Following the free agent signings, Beane finds that
he also faces opposition from Art Howe (Philip Seymour Hoffman), the Athletics' manager.
With tensions already high between them because of a contract dispute, Howe disregards
Beane and Brand's strategy and plays the team in a traditional style despite their
unsuitability. Beane is eventually forced to trade away the lone traditional star player,
Carlos Peña (Gerardo Celasco), to force Howe to use the new recruits.
Early in the season, the Athletics fare poorly, leading critics within and outside the team
to dismiss the new method as a dismal failure. Beane convinces the owner to stay the
course, and eventually the team's record begins to improve. Ultimately, the Athletics win
an unprecedented 20 consecutive games, setting the American League record. Their
streak is capped with a victory over the Kansas City Royals. Like many baseball players,
Beane is superstitious and avoids attending or sometimes even following games as they
are in progress. His family convinces him to go to the A's game against the Royals, as
Oakland is already leading 11 to 0 after the third inning and appears set to continue their
winning streak. Beane arrives, only to watch the team go to pieces and allow the Royals
to even the score. Finally, the A's do clinch the victory with a walk-off home run by one of
Brand's picks, Scott Hatteberg (Chris Pratt). Despite all their success, the A's lose in the
first round of the postseason, this time to the Minnesota Twins. Beane is disappointed,
but satisfied at having demonstrated the value of his and Brand's methods.
In closing, the film notes that Beane passed up the opportunity to become the general
manager of the Boston Red Sox, despite an offer of $12.5 million a year salary, which
would have made him the highest paid GM in baseball history. Also noted is Boston's
World Series victory soon after in 2004, based on the theories that Beane pioneered.
Moneyball is a narrative with a powerful, universal theme: the perseverance of the
underdog. For Michael Lewis, this perseverance is seen in no better place than
professional baseball. Lewis notes that the idea for the story came about from seeing
undervalued baseball players and executives alike being kept out of the major leagues.
By banding together, these same individuals then went on to become one of the greatest
franchises in baseball history. The book itself has a large audience. It appeals to fans for
many reasons, in part because of its attention both to baseball history and folklore, taking
readers onto the “frontlines” of baseball’s greatest teams. It also appeals to readers based
on its investigation of the business side of things, as exemplified in Billy Beane’s
approach—and that of his colleagues—to Major League Baseball.
While pondering the Oakland A’s success, Lewis noted that the Oakland Athletics, also
known as the A’s, were actually winning a lot of games despite being one of the poorest
teams in the league as far as finances were concerned. He gives examples of some of
the highest payroll teams, like the New York Yankees, which sets up the hypothesis that
something the A’s were doing in regard to the team was definitely different than the rest
of the other high-paying teams.
As it turned out, the A’s general manager, Billy Beane, went about making the A’s a
powerhouse team despite the financial hurdle. Beane and his colleagues actually
researched the field and began scouting for the skills that were undervalued in Major
League Baseball at the time, such as plate discipline. When Beane began recruiting
players based on this new research and his search for undervalued players, the A’s met
with a lot of success. In time, other teams noted Beane’s approach and success, and
began incorporating his methods into recruiting. This led to Billy Beane being considered
one of the greatest innovators of modern baseball.
Lewis then sets about investigating how Beane went about changing his view on
undervalued players and skills. He delves into Beane’s past to better understand the
present (which was 2002 for Lewis), as well as some of Beane’s coworkers, including
Paul DePodesta. Lewis looks not only at Beane’s strategies and style of play, however,
he also addresses what is known as sabermetrics, which is an analysis of baseball via
detailed statistics. Sabermetrics was created by fans and, in the past, had not been
accepted by Major League Baseball as an acceptable way to evaluate success. Lewis
hones in on Bill James, a preeminent sabermetrician, and one of DePodesta’s influences
as well.
By evaluating Beane’s approach to baseball from these various avenues, Lewis is able
to show the decision-making factors that launched the A’s to their success. He gives two
notable examples of this, citing the team’s acceptance of business-oriented solutions in
regard to approaching recruitment over instinctive solutions. In other words, the A’s went
for objective qualities versus subjective qualities. These subjective qualities were what
organized baseball had always run on, and were limited to “pluses” like the ability to run,
hit and throw. By expanding his purview and adding empirical evidence to recruitment,
Beane was able to avoid the pitfalls of major teams with more than twice his budget and
payroll. His success in honing a team to success “based on the facts” effectively changed
the face of baseball.
The narrative is interspersed with Beane’s own initial success and subsequent failures.
He was scouted and viewed to be a potential success early on, but there were key factors
that were overlooked. He even gave up his chance to go to Stanford and play, and lost
his dream of signing with the Mets, when he did not make the cut. Highlighting these
issues shows how Beane’s recruitment indicated problems beforehand that were
overlooked based on the old ways of evaluating potential. By showing Beane’s
background, and then showing how he rebounded to make a better life not only for himself
but for other players and Major League Baseball in general, Lewis highlights how powerful
the underdog can be when given the chance.
Moreover, Moneyball shows how these underdogs have the potential and the knowhow,
they just need a system that is able to grow and evolve along with the times. By
establishing a new system, Beane showed that the talent in these individuals was there
all along, it was just being overlooked based on a traditional view of success. This theme
is symbolic and indicative of the way people in general approach life and success. People
learn and grow in different ways, and those that are considered underdogs or lacking may
only be on the bottom because of a system that inadequately defines both talent and
success.
Moneyball is a 2011 American sports film directed by Bennett Miller and written
by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin. The film is based on Michael Lewis's
2003 nonfiction book of the same name, an account of the Oakland
Athletics baseball team's 2002 season and their general manager Billy Beane's attempts
to assemble a competitive team.
In the film, Beane (Brad Pitt) and assistant GM Peter Brand (Jonah Hill), faced with the
franchise's limited budget for players, build a team of undervalued talent by taking a
sophisticated sabermetric approach towards scouting and analyzing players. Columbia
Pictures bought the rights to Lewis's book in 2004.[4]
Moneyball premiered at the 2011 Toronto International Film Festival[5] and was released
on September 23, 2011 to box office success and critical acclaim. The film was nominated
for six Academy Awards including Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor for
Pitt and Best Supporting Actor for Hill.
Plot[edit]
Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane is upset by his team's loss to the New
York Yankees in the 2001 postseason. With the impending departure of star
players Johnny Damon, Jason Giambi, and Jason Isringhausen to free agency, Beane
needs to assemble a competitive team for 2002 within Oakland's limited payroll.
During a visit to the Cleveland Indians, Beane meets Peter Brand, a young Yale
economics graduate with radical ideas about how to assess player value. Beane tests
Brand's theory by asking whether he would have drafted Beane out of high school; though
scouts considered Beane hugely promising, his career in the Major Leagues was
disappointing. Brand admits that, based on his method of assessing player value, he
would not have drafted him until the ninth round. Impressed, Beane hires Brand as his
assistant manager.
Rather than relying on the scouts' experience and intuition, Brand uses sabermetrics,
selecting players based on their on-base percentage (OBP). Brand and Beane hire
undervalued players such as unorthodox submarine pitcher Chad Bradford, aging
outfielder David Justice, and an injured catcher, Scott Hatteberg.
Oakland scouts are hostile towards the strategy, and Beane fires one, Grady Fuson, after
he accuses him of destroying the team. Beane also faces opposition from Art Howe, the
Athletics' manager. With tensions already high between them due to a contract dispute,
Howe disregards Beane's and Brand's strategy and plays a lineup he prefers.
Early in the season, the Athletics fare poorly, leading critics to dismiss the new method
as a failure. Brand argues their sample size is too small to conclude the method does not
work, and Beane convinces the owner to stay the course. He trades away the lone
traditional first baseman, Carlos Peña, to force Howe to use Hatteberg, threatening to
make similar deals if Howe does not cooperate.
The Athletics win 19 consecutive games, tying for the longest winning streak in American
League history. Though Beane does not watch games, his young daughter persuades
him to attend the game against the Kansas City Royals, where Oakland is leading 11–0
after the third inning. Beane arrives in the fourth inning, only to watch the team falter and
allow the Royals to even the score. Thanks to a walk-off home run by Hatteberg, the
Athletics win a record-breaking 20th consecutive win. Beane tells Brand he will not be
satisfied until they have "changed the game" by winning the championship using their
system.
The Athletics lose in 5 games in the postseason. Beane is contacted by the owner of
the Boston Red Sox, who realizes that sabermetrics is the future of baseball. Beane
declines an opportunity to become the Red Sox general manager, despite the $12.5
million salary, which would have made him the highest-paid general manager in history.
He returns to Oakland. Two years later, the Red Sox win the 2004 World Series using the
model pioneered by the Athletics.
What makes this movie so appealing for me is that it portrays complex people
with exaggerated and fascinating personality styles. I really loved it. Okay, let’s take a
look, not only at the personalities but also let’s look at some of the relationship themes.
The Superiority personality types live their lives according to certain core ideas, a few of
which are:
1. I love information. (These people are always experts in some subject.)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
I can set multiple goals and I will reach them.
I treat life seriously.
I must figure it out (whatever it is).
I must be accurate, thorough and maintain high standards at whatever I do.
I want to make some meaningful contribution to life.
Using the information above and studying both Billy Beane and DePodesto, we can see
that they are both exaggerated Superiority people. There’s no compromise of their
beliefs, decisions or actions. In the face of incredible odds, they take on, not only the
Oakland A’s’ organization, but also the entire world of Professional Baseball.
So
yes, exaggerated Superiority styles they both are.
The relationship between these two men is interesting. Superiority people can
be active or passive with their behavior. Those who are active focus on a goal and
concentrate all their energy on reaching it. Once they decide to go for the finish line, they
will take calculated risks to succeed. (We see this personality a lot in small business
owners.) Billy Beane, in 2002 guiding the Oakland A’s,’ fits this description and we see
DePodesta coming unglued at Beane’s risks in a couple of situations.
Passive Superiority people are more cerebral; we see them use much less active
behavior. Passive people “wait” more than active people. Their goals are more detailedinformation oriented. We see them often in the university setting as PhD’s who study,
teach and write. If they’re in the corporate world, they’re often CEO visionaries whose
biggest personal asset is being able to see an end result quicker and better than
others. De Podesta fits this description in Moneyball.
Superiority people mostly live “in their heads;” so they’re not always at their best in
relationships. In other words, they’re “head” people instead of “feelers.” Often, they come
off as detached.
We see this in Moneyball with both men. Instead of “letting off steam” verbally, Beane
doesn’t talk about his frustration; he acts it out by throwing chairs, water coolers,
etc. DePodesta only verbalizes his fear in one scene when Beane trades Pena. One
other time, DePodesta throws a ball at Beane. We know he’s feeling fear (Will Beane
take the Red Sox offer?) but he doesn’t talk about it.
We also see Beane’s lack of talk in his relationships with his team manager and his head
coach. Instead of talking, he acts: he trades Pena when the A’s’ manager won’t use
Beane’s first base choice and he fires the head coach, without warning, after the coach
makes personal, disrespectful remarks about Beane’s record as a player.
The only place we really get to see the “feeling” side of Beane is when he’s with his
daughter. And, if DePodesta has “feeling” relationships with anyone, we don’t see it in
this movie.
The relationships between Beane and DePodesta feels good to me. It’s obvious that they
respect and like each other and that they enjoy working together. In real life, DePodesta
stayed with Beane for 5 or 6 years before moving on to another ball club.
Moneyball seems to be a movie about the Oakland A's hiring baseball players
when they didn't have a lot of money. Okay. It is that. But it's also a movie
about a fundamental conflict in psychological paradigms.
The old-line scouts gathered around the table try to pick players by looking at
the players. "He has a great swing." "He has weak legs." "He's getting old."
In other words, they are trying to pick players, really to predict performance,
by looking at the player. Some even get into personality analysis. "He has an
ugly girlfriend. Lacks confidence."
Source:
Billy Beane, general manager of the A's and the hero of the movie, hires a fat,
unathletic math genius Peter Brand. Brand persuades him to do a different kind
of analysis. What do you want? Wins. How do you get wins? By getting runs. So
you want to look for players who get on base a lot.
And the strategy worked for Billy Beane. (At least until the playoffs.)
He had adopted what was basically a behaviorist paradigm. We're going to try
to predict behavior, not by looking at the actor, but by looking at the
observable behavior. In the old behaviorist model, the player is a black box.
Non-behaviorist psychology would try to look inside the box. The behaviorist
psychologist looks at the inputs (= pitches), and the outcomes (= number of
times the player gets on base). To heck with what's inside the box. With trying
to psych out the player. We can't do that.
But, and a very big but it is, as the stock prospectuses say, "Past performance
is no guarantee of future results." Moneyball points to a fundamental crux in
psychology. As a science, psychology aims to predict and control behavior.
One can predict behavior on a statistical basis, for large groups. Election polls
do that all the time and do it pretty well. But you can't predict for individuals.
And some of the particular choices Billy Beane and his sidekick make don't
work out.
In other words, and I suppose I must be stating the obvious, the limitation on
psychology as a science or hiring players as a science is free will—whatever
that is. We can't predict any but the most physiological behaviors of an
individual. And perhaps that is the saving grace for us as human beings even
if it's bad for psychology and even if it makes for a pretty good movie
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/is-your-brain-culture/201110/moneyball-thebehaviorist-movie
December 14, 2016
MONEYBALL: OVERCOMING RESISTANCE
I recently finished teaching two sections of Management Information Systems (MGIS
317) at the Haskayne School of Business here in Calgary, Alberta. One of the topics
that we covered was Change Management. As a professor, I like to have classes that
are educational and interesting. With this in mind, I thought for the topic of change
management I would review the movie Moneyball from a management perspective.
Since the lecture was well received by the students I thought I would write a post on
this topic.
The movie came out in 2011 starring Brad Pitt as Billy Beane the general manager of
the Oakland Athletics, Jonah Hill as Peter Brand the stats analyst, Philip Seymour
Hoffmann as Art Howe the manager, Robin Wright as Sharon, Billy Beane's ex-wife,
Chris Pratt as Scott Hatteberg the first baseman and Robert Kotick as Stephen Schott
one of the A's owners. The book, Moneyball written by Michael Lewis was published
in 2003. I have read the book twice and seen the movie a least 3 times. The book is
interesting but a bit dry at times. From an entertainment point of view, the movie is
better.
When we look at the movie from a management perspective the movie is about Billy
Beane (one of Brad Pitt's best acting roles) overcoming various constraints and
formidable obstacles.
First, we start with a severe constraint. In one of the opening scenes Beane meets with
the owner Stephen Schott to ask for more money to hire better players. Schott refuses
and tells Beane that he has to live within the existing budget.
This initial constraint of "no more money" sets the tone for the entire movie. Anyone
in business knows that this is a common constraint. Most owners impose budget
constraints. What is interesting is Beane's response. He decides to live with
the constraint (willingly as opposed to grudgingly) but has to shift his entire way of
thinking and his method for managing the Oakland A's. He reacts by hiring Peter
Brand (a fictional character of the real assistant GM, Paul DePodesta) from the
Cleveland Indians. Brand (played brilliantly by Johan Hill) plays a sophisticated
analyst using sabermetrics. Sabermetrics, a term coined by Bill James (mentioned
extensively in the book), is the empirical analysis of in-game baseball statistics.
Beane and Brand come up with a list of players that they would like to hire but
immediately face resistance from the existing squad of traditional scouts.
The scenes in the movie are exaggerated but overcoming this second obstacle - team
resistance - makes for good drama. Although Beane tries to use his skills of
persuasion, none of the scouts are able to switch from traditional methods of scouting
to making decisions based on data and numbers. This is highlighted when they insist
on replacing a player poached by another team with a high priced player instead of
hiring a few cheaper players based on replacing the "on-base percentage"
statistics. "On-base Percentage" (OBP) is a key metric for determining who can get a
team on base. If a team can get on base they can score runs. And if they score runs
they have a chance to win games. By reversing this logic, a low OBP by a team means
that the team has less of chance to score runs and win games.
Ultimately, Beane and Brand hire the players are cheap and have the right statistical
mix. They think they are set-up well to win games only to find out that the manager,
Art Howe (a small role but well played by Philip Seymour Hoffman), won't play these
players and instead favors players that he prefers. This is the third obstacle - midmanager resistance.
Encountering resistance from managers is an experience that I have had all
too frequently. And expected. Often people don't like change. And often people are
looking out for themselves more than the company they are working for. In the case of
Beane and Brand, their solution is to trade away all the players that Howe likes and
leave him with just the players that they want to be played.
This tactic, although drastic, works well. Howe starts to play the right players. But
then Beane and Brand experience the fourth level of resistance - from the players.
They aren't taking the game and their part in it seriously.
Employees get paid to do a job. However, sometimes when you ask them to change
they resist. This happens all the time and that is what managers are for - to manage
people and processes. In this case, Billy Beane reacts by getting mad and calling their
behavior into question. Anger isn't always the right response to resistance and
inappropriate behavior but sometimes it works. A good manager or leader knows
when to show anger and when to use other skills in their arsenal.
The movie plays out the drama and ultimately the Oakland A's win 20 straight games.
In this century, this is the highest number of straight wins by a MLB team.
Start-ups and existing businesses will experience constraints and resistance - often
excessive amounts of each. But all is not lost because of a few obstacles - success will
happen. In fact, many start-ups develop into a great companies because of obstacles
that the founders experienced early on. Examples include Dell focusing on getting
orders before shippingcomputers. Microsoft facing unprecedented challenges in recent
years.
Many of the obstacles that companies encounter will be similar to what Billy Beane
and the Oakland A's experienced:


Constraints imposed by Owners
Team members who won't change the systems they use


Managers who won't use resources assigned to them
And employees who aren't serious about helping the company
Solutions to these challenges aren't simple but often a solution can be found. Often the
solution is changing the system, changing the team, changing managers and changing
the reason why people are employed.
If you get a chance, watch Moneyball again. Look at the movie from the point of view
of a manager and see if you see the same obstacles that I did. Enjoy.
https://www.mx3metrics.com/blog/2016/12/14/moneyball-overcoming-resistance