In the past 12 months, when anyone asked me to describe the state of the Mets fan base, my reply would always be this:

So color me surprised when I came across some of the comments made by general manager Sandy Alderson yesterday, in an interview on MLB.com.

“I kind of have a sense of what they’re thinking, and that’s motivation in itself,” Alderson said. “My goal ultimately is for a lot of Mets fans to be happy with where we are — not where we’re going, but where we are.”

Close enough, right? Who knew we were so alike…

The great thing about MMO is that both those of those sides frequent the site and defend their positions quite passionately – and for an unlucky bakers dozen – too passionately.

Alderson fully understands the resentment many fans have for him and the way he’s gone about it. He knows his offbeat, off-the-cuff style doesn’t resonate with many of the fans. But here’s another interesting quote from the same article regarding that very thing, and it came from newly appointed captain, David Wright:

“It’s obviously a difficult position when you’re trading Carlos Beltran, when you’re trading R.A. Dickey,” Wright said. “Sometimes it’s not the most popular thing to do. Fans are very expressive about how they feel. But in the grand scheme of things, he has a vision and a plan, and he stuck to that, whether it’s been a popular move. That’s what you want out of a general manager.”

Somewhere in Bayonne, I can sense someone is seething upon reading that.

In a way, the captain is correct. You do want a GM who isn’t swayed by the whims of fans as I told another blogger last week about him needing to see Travis d’Arnaud in the Opening Day lineup.

The way I see it, what’s the point of having a general manager if all he did was coddle to a vocal majority? We can get any sheep to do that. I can certainly tell you that Frank Cashen never did that. Whether Bing Devine or Johnny Murphy ever did, you would have to ask our Mets historian Barry Duchan. But I’ve never heard that was their style either.

Alderson acknowledges mistakes and does not run from the tough questions. Whenever I get the chance to speak with him, I like to needle him with those types of questions. But I think he understands that someone has to speak for the half that hates where we are – and I do hate where we are – make no mistake about it.

But I also know that sometimes it takes patience to build a winner, so I sit and wait like the rest of you, hoping that the other half are right about the future.

We’re putting a lot of our eggs in one basket, and I’ve seen this before – actually many times before and dozens upon dozens of times before if I were to include other teams.

Many of Frank Cashen’s prospects all came through for him. 50% of his top picks struck gold. Usually, as Billy Beane famously said, if you strike gold with just one out of fifty you’ve done a great job.

For Sandy Alderson’s sake, and of course the Mets’ sake too, I hope he strikes gold with his prospects, none of which have arrived yet.

“Are there things I would have done differently? Absolutely,” Alderson said. “In this business, you have to keep in mind that you’re not going to be right every time. But you have to be right often enough so that the team is successful. We haven’t been right often enough.”

Honesty is a good attribute to have if you wan’t to connect with ALL the fans in this town. We’re seeing more of that from him in the last few months.

Like him or not, Sandy Alderson is ours and the future of this team is in his hands. If you are not rooting for his success, I don’t think too highly of your Mets fandom.

Obviously, we can’t expect much from this current Mets team this season. I’ve yet to see anyone say the Mets are going to win the World Series this year – at least not on the record. But as for our future Mets team (2015?), I’ll leave you all with this quote from one of John Lennon’s songs,

“Let’s hope it’s a good one, without any tears.”

Once upon a time, baseball was a simple game. The goal is to score more runs than your opponent. Each team is given 27 outs to score as many runs as they can. In order to score runs, a team’s players have to get on base. Once a player gets on base it was the other players’ jobs to drive them home to score runs. On the other hand, the defense’s job is to get 27 outs allowing the opposition to score the fewest amount of runs. Whoever scores more runs in 9 innings of play wins – simple.

Now let’s fast forward to the 1980s. The 1980s were famous for Nintendo, big hair bands, Reaganomics, and the invention of rotisserie baseball.

Fantasy baseball exploded onto the scene in the 80s, and the men that played this game were looking for ways to build better teams. They wanted to build better teams in order to take home the lucrative prize money that came along with winning their rotisserie league. They used different combinations of stats to form equations, which in return would spew out which players they should select on their team.

Yes, the advanced stats that the game uses today were ultimately developed by men that maybe never even played the game. They were simply looking to build better fantasy teams. It leads the people with advanced knowledge of how the game is played on the field to butt heads with those that sat at their desk and computer doing all the math.

Photo Credit: bronxbanterblog.com

Bill James, the father of advanced statistics and sabermetrics, didn’t start to gather a serious following until the mid to late 1990s. Until then, he published his yearly baseball reviews and would sell 500 copies per year if he was lucky.

The game wasn’t ready for the story he was trying to tell. James was basically telling everyone in the game that they have been looking at the game improperly for nearly 100 years. Advanced statistics were born. He broke down nearly every single aspect of the game, except defense, which he was never able to develop an accurate statistical rating for.

But did the game really need the advanced statistics?

The game had survived over 100 years just fine without advanced statistics. But now, in every team’s organization, there are mathematicians working in this area. The question is, is it really necessary?

The reason why sabermetrics and advanced statistics took over the game in the 90s is because that is the when player salaries started to get to the point where some sort of projection and analysis was needed. Owners wanted to know if it was really worth it to spend the money on player X.

Baseball had officially become a full-fledged business.

In every MBA program across America, students are often required to take a course dedicated to statistics and spreadsheet analysis. The students are taught how to use Excel spreadsheets and programs like Risk Solver to make business decisions. If you are under the assumption that the CEO of a big company makes decisions based on his/her gut you are mistaken.

More often than not, the decisions are made by a computer than runs simulations based on the data that the decision maker inputs. The program takes all the data and then it gives you the most logical decision after running all the simulations.

It’s actually pretty cool. You could build a model that can tell you the best location to build an ice cream shop, based on three different locations, with three different average yearly temperatures, three different traffic patterns, and three different populations in the towns they’re in. Not only will it tell you the best location to build your ice cream shop, but the expected revenue at each location.

The same thing can be done with baseball players – in theory that is.

Everyone knows that Billy Beane and Paul DePodesta’s use of advanced statistics and sabermetrics officially put them on the map. Their use was chronicled in the book Moneyball by Michael Lewis.

The book that exposed Billy Beane’s strategies.

Beane used the advanced statistics to remain competitive with a team that had the lowest payroll in the league. Once he started winning, people started to question how the heck the Athletics could be winning when they were only spending one-third of the money of the other teams. At that point, every Tom, Dick and Harry fell in love with sabermetrics.

Sabermetrics became the key to unlocking hidden baseball talent.

But here is the fundamental flaw with peoples’ understanding of what Billy Beane actually did – Beane wasn’t intentionally trying to win by spending the least amount of money he could. Beane wanted to spend money. He wasn’t trying to do his owner a favor by spending the least amount of money on building a team. He was simply in a situation where his hands were tied. He had to think outside of the box. He had to get more efficient with spending what little money he had. That’s it.

Somehow Beane’s strategy became an excuse for teams to spend less money, and try to build teams using a philosophy that Beane only developed because he had to and not because he wanted to.

Players are now investments, plain and simple. If a team is going to make an investment, the projections, spreadsheets, models and simulations have to all tell the same story – that the player is worth the investment.

However, there is a problem with advanced statistics – the game is still ultimately played on the field. You cannot remove the human element from the game, and no statistic can factor that in. And while past performance is a good indicator of future performance, there is only so much weight that advanced statistics should carry.

Advanced statistics paint an imperfect picture of the game when used improperly. Here is why:

Advanced statistics use inputs which are plugged into an equation and are determined by the person developing the statistics in order to arrive at a desired outcome. They often have to finagle with different stats until they get an answer that makes sense. What also comes into play is the developer’s bias.

If someone is playing with stats in order to make their equation work, how is that more accurate in telling me which player is better than if I used the old school statistics (OBP, AVG, ERA, etc.) which have been used for the past 100-plus years, and my eyes, used to watch the players play?

Let’s take a look at the Holy Bible. There is a show on TV that comes on one of the learning channels every once in awhile which basically alludes to the fact that the bible has a hidden code in it, which not only predicted things that happened in the past, but also can predict future events. Now on the surface, they did prove that there was a code in the bible. But is there really a code in the bible, or was it manipulation by the developer to come to a desired goal/outcome?

Odds are there isn’t a code in the bible, but this just shows how the manipulation of data can get to a desired outcome when played with long enough. One of the major issues with scientists to this day is trying to conduct scientific studies and not have their bias come into play. Bias alters outcomes.

The bottom line is that baseball is still a game where there is still a lot of luck involved. For instance, if a player is half a step to the left or right, a ball drops in that maybe shouldn’t have been a hit. Which stat factors any of these things in? The argument is the law of averages balances everything out. In the end, the math is the constant.

However, there are internal and external factors affecting the game constantly. These factors cannot be built into models. These factors cannot be accounted for statistically.

Where a card counter at the black jack table can turn the odds against the Casino by using probability and a system of advanced mathematical equations to gain an advantage, there is a set number of cards in the deck, and only a certain number of things can occur to account for. You can’t do that in baseball. In baseball, there are an infinite number of things all taking place simultaneously which affect the outcome of every pitch.

The problem at large is that the game has changed significantly since the introduction of advanced statistics. There are too many statistics which are complicating the game. They cause managers to over-manage situations.

For example, is a lefty specialist really necessary in a team’s bullpen? According to advanced statistics they are. But when it’s all said and done a bullpen pitcher is simply a pitcher who could not make it as a starting pitcher. Very few pitchers are groomed to be in the bullpen. In other words, why would I bring a pitcher into a game, and take out my better pitcher, simply because statistics show that one guy is better at getting left-handed batters out?

It doesn’t make sense. The best players should be on the field.

Statistics tell front offices they need lefty specialists. They tell the manager that they better go against their gut which tells them to leave their better pitcher in the game. It sounds crazy when you think about it. I’m going to take out my better pitcher because statistics show that over time, a pitcher of lesser quality has done a better job of getting left-handed hitters out? It doesn’t sound logical.

Now I have decided to take my best pitcher available out of the game to bring in a lefty specialist in order to get one hitter out. After he gets that batter out, I have to take him out of the game to put in an even lesser quality pitcher? Why not just leave my best pitcher in to get the lefty out. Now I have changed the odds of getting the remaining hitters out, all because stats have told me to take my best pitcher out of the game.

The entire landscape of the game changed because of a single stat.

Is there a stat that shows the odds of getting the remaining hitters out in a game after I made that decision? There is a stat that shows me that I should bring a lefty specialist into the game, but not a stat that shows the odds that I will get the remainder of hitters out now that I made that pitching change.

That is just one example of how stats have changed the game, but the question that still remains is – are all of these advanced statistics helping or hurting the game?

Cases can be made for both sides, but the truth of the matter is that all these stats are really good when looked at from the surface. It’s how the people behind the scenes use them that will ultimately determine whether they are good or bad for the game.

My daughter preparing for a front office job someday – you can never start them too early.

Advanced baseball statistics is very similar to the app market for smart phones. App developers are always looking to develop the next Angry Birds, and stat developers are looking to develop the next stat which proves that they have the secret formula to determine who the best player in the league is.

There is no secret formula. Baseball is played on the field, not in a laboratory, and not in a computer program. There isn’t a single stat or mathematical equation that can determine the outcomes on the field.

Nothing will ever change that.

Follow Mitch Petanick on Twitter.

Paging the New York Mets Front Office…Grady Sizemore is still available.

Ken Rosenthal of Fox Sports has reported that Grady Sizemore could be ready as soon as opening day (most likely mid-season), but he is likely to hold off signing until whenever he is fully recovered.

This could be bad news for the Mets fans who hope that Sizemore will once again regain his All-Star form in a New York Mets uniform.

If Sizemore is waiting until he is fully recovered to sign, it is telling the baseball clubs that he is not interested in being low-balled by teams looking to take advantage of his unfortunate situation. He’s trying to tell teams that he is still the player he once was, aside from all the injury issues.

This all but eliminates the Mets, since it sounds as if there is no chance that Sizemore agrees to a minor league deal, and it seems like that is all the Mets are willing to offer players these days.

All kidding aside, the Mets should definitely be keeping a very close eye on Sizemore’s recovery.

Sizemore may be holding off signing to try and build his market price, but the fact is he will still have to sign a team friendly deal and then prove he is still the player he once was. After a full season off, he should come back fully rested and recovered. That makes him a very tantalizing option for the Mets.

Original Post – 10/16/12

This is not breaking news – the Mets are in need of a lead off hitter and outfielders as we move towards the 2013 season. Some people may be ready to close the door on Grady Sizemore’s career, but there is still value there. We are still talking about a player that was on his way to super stardom before some injuries side tracked his career.

After missing the entire 2012 season, Sizemore should be fully healed, rested, and ready to finish what he started a few seasons ago. There isn’t a team in a better position to take a risk on Sizemore than the New York Mets.

Many people will scoff at my last statement and argue that the reward isn’t worth the risk in Sizemore’s case. They will argue he’s too injury prone. Seriously…who cares at this point? Beggars can’t be choosers. With the outlook of the Mets outfield in 2013, adding Sizemore would bring Mets fans a glimmer of hope, and add another player with superstar potential to help David Wright out (pending him re-upping with the team).

The bottom line is the Mets are going to have to take some risks if they want to be able to get competitive again, and fast. The Mets are a Moneyball team now, right? Well, if my memory serves me correctly, one of the main story lines in Moneyball was that they went after a player in Scott Hatteberg, who other teams were avoiding due to injury risk, because they saw value there. Even Billy Beane, lord Moneyball himself, understood that there has to be some sort of risk involved if you are ever going to achieve greatness.

Signing Sizemore on the cheap screams Moneyball.

When you think about it, how much risk is really involved with Sizemore anyway? Sign him to a one year deal for $1.5MM or $2.0MM, and there isn’t much risk involved. Get creative with incentives and bring him to Flushing. We aren’t talking a long-term investment here until he proves that he is worth a long-term investment. But at this point, it seems logical that the Mets would take a flier on Sizemore. If healthy, he solves two problems for the Mets – a lead off hitter, and a centerfielder. If not healthy, they cut ties with him at a minimal cost to the team.

Signing Sizemore is a no-brainer at this point.

It’s time for the Mets to start taking a some calculated risks. Sizemore may be a risk, but oh the reward the Mets would receive for taking that risk if Sizemore is even 2/3 the player he was in 2008. Cleveland seems ready to finally part ways with Sizemore who is a free-agent this off-season. MLBTradeRumors.com reported in August that two scouts said that Sizemore is worth signing if there isn’t much guaranteed money at stake. Hopefully one of those scouts was from the New York Mets.

Let’s Go Mets…sign Sizemore…play some Moneyball.

You can Follow Mitch Petanick on Twitter clicking here.

Wild Card winner getting first two games at home in Divison Series

When the Marlins won the World Series in 1997 they had the same first two games at home, which gave them an added advantage. Going up against the San Francisco Giants in the Divison Series, they won the first two games at home, and then the first game back in San Fran to complete the sweep. They later went on to win the World Series. If that series started in San Fran, who knows how it would have turned out. Expect similar upsets this year.

Not having Mariano Rivera will hurt the Yankees chances

This is a given. Mariano is the greatest closer in the history of the game, and post-season play. Aside from a hiccup in the 2001 World Series, Rivera has been flawless. When the Yankees made it to the 8^th inning with a lead in previous years, it was a lock they would walk away with a win. Don’t expect similar results this year.

The Rangers will go as far as Josh Hamilton takes them

If Josh Hamilton catches fire, the Rangers will be playing in the World Series. If he continues to slump, the Rangers will make an early playoff exit. During a contract year, if Hamilton wants to really cash in, now is the time to really step up. I think he will.

Oakland’s weaknesses will be exposed

Like Billy Beane’s great moneyball teams of the early 2000s, the Athletics will ultimately be exposed in the playoffs against the Tigers, and eliminated in the ALDS. Maybe if they continue to shock everyone, and go on to win the World Series, Brad Pitt will play Beane in the Moneyball sequel. In other news, the comedic spoof of Moneyball, The Moneyball Mets, is slated for release in 2013.

Bryce Harper

Rookie Mike Trout has been all the talk of 2012, but Harper has been lurking in the shadows waiting to get his chance to steal back the rookie spotlight. This is his opportunity to show the world that he is still the best young talent in the game. Bryce Harper doesn’t sink back into the crowd, and is going to lift his play to another level with all the national attention. He will prove why Sports Illustrated dubbed him as “the chosen one.” I wonder if he will give us a few more memorable quotes along the way – That’s a clown question ‘bro.

These were just a few things that will make for a very interesting playoff season. There are a slew of other story lines that will impact this year’s playoff picture, and I’m looking forward to seeing them all unfold.

Everyone has a clean slate starting today. Team records are reset to 0-0. Everything that happened over the course of the season is in the past. Everything is on the line, and the glory is there for the taking. Who wants it more? God I love this game…

Before you call me crazy, sit and think about it. The strategies that Beane developed and ultimately used do exist, but moneyball doesn’t. If it did ever exist, it ended once large market teams also started to implement Beane’s strategies once they saw how successful Beane’s Oakland A’s were. The Red Sox started implementing the small market strategies made famous by Beane, and what did it lead to? They finally broke the curse of the Bambino. But that wasn’t moneyball, because moneyball doesn’t exist.

There are basically two schools of thought in baseball – the old school scout mentality, and the moneyball school of thought. The old school thinkers say “wow that guy has all the tools,” but moneyballers ask “can he play ball?” Old school thinkers look for potential, while moneyballers look for performance. The old school mentality has driven me crazy for years. Year after year I watch teams draft players based on the coveted five tools, and then pay them upwards of $1 million just for signing a contract. They don’t even know if this guy can play, and simply because the guy can hit a baseball a country mile during batting practice, they invest millions. It doesn’t make sense to pass up on a guy that has shown he can play the game at a high level, for a guy who is visually or physically more impressive. That’s a stupid strategy even if you have a lot of money to spend. I guess that means my beliefs would make me a moneyballer, that is, if moneyball existed.

Remove the word moneyball from your vocabulary. Instead, call it performance based evaluation of players. Rather than looking at what this guy might be able to do for your team, you look at what this player can do for your team. You do that through evaluation of statistics, but also based on what you see on the field. You can not evaluate a player on statistics alone. The two schools of thought really should work hand in hand, not against each other. If you combine the schools of thought, you really have a total of six tools that players should be evaluated on (not the traditional five) – running speed, arm strength, hitting ability, quickness, mental acuity (patience at the plate), and ability to get on base. I firmly believe that teams should always value proven players over guys who have an array of tools but can’t apply them in game situations. I guess that would make me a moneyballer, that is, if moneyball existed.

One team that I think has been doing this well the past few years is the San Francisco Giants. They tend to draft guys that they can get through the minor leagues as quickly as possible to start helping the big league club. You can’t do that by drafting guys based on talent alone, so there has to be skill there. If a guy has tons of talent, but has to spend six years in the minor leagues developing the skill, then what’s the point? Just draft the guys with skill, and save yourself time and money developing them in the minors. That’s why Beane focused his draft on more polished college players – there is less development needed, and they can help the team in a shorter period of time (in most cases). Then you don’t have to spend big money in free-agency to address your needs. I completely agree with Beane’s drafting strategy. I guess that would make me a moneyballer, that is, if moneyball existed.

Moneyball doesn’t exist. There isn’t some magic formula, or mathematical equations, that a team can use to evaluate players and uncover undervalued players. If that’s what you think, get it out of your head. Teams can’t expect to win without spending money, unless they have a well developed minor league factory that is spitting out skilled players like Ford spits out Mustangs. This is an area the Mets are lacking. Every team uses the same analyses now, so those days of Beane’s A’s are all but over. But the Mets have a distinct advantage over those early 2000′s Oakland A’s – they aren’t a small market team. Those small market team rules don’t apply.

The New York Mets should focus on what the San Francisco Giants have done the past few years. They have to find a way to get guys to the major leagues, as fast as possible, because the team is in a complete state of disarray right now. There are guys playing out of position in order to plug holes. The problem is there are more holes than plugs, and we all know what happens when there are more holes than plugs – the ship sinks. The fix is simple enough – start drafting more polished players that will be able to help the team now, rather than later. Either that, or they have to pony up some cash and address their needs.

The Mets can turn this around, but they have to get their hands dirty, and re-evaluate their organization from the ground up. They better do it fast, because this is starting to remind me of the Mets teams of the early 1990s…and I don’t know how many of us can go through that again.

Does that mean the Mets are on pace to have the success the A’s had ten years ago that was chronicled in the book and movie Moneyball? Not likely.

For those of you who haven’t read the book (or watched the movie), Moneyball is based on a form of analysis called sabermetrics. Simply stated, moneyball theorizes that in order to win games, a team has to score more runs than their opponent by getting on base more frequently. It goes further to analyze which players actually help you score more runs using a series of mathematical equations called sabermetrics. This is obviously a very rudimentary explanation of moneyball, but it inevitably goes against everything the traditional scouts have been saying for over 100 years. Scouts search far and wide for the coveted five tool players which are as rare as unicorns and leprechauns. The search takes them around the globe with one goal in mind: to build the best teams they can by seeking out the best talent.

Sabermetrics allowed Beane to take advantage of players often ignored by other teams in order to build his historic 2002 team. They were ignored since teams didn’t understand their true value. This misunderstanding was due to not using sabermetrics to evaluate players. At least that is what we are led to believe. We will return to this later.

The movie alludes to the idea that Beane was looking for a way to analyze talent that was different from the traditional scouts. This was supposedly due to the fact that he was once considered a “can’t miss” five tool player. He was selected in the first round of the 1980 MLB draft (by the Mets coincidentally), but never lived up to expectations. The Mets had three first round picks that year, and held the number one pick. They used that number one pick on Daryl Strawberry after Beane signed on to play football and baseball with Stanford, even though scouts thought Beane was as close to a “sure thing” as you can get from a prospect. No teams wanted to risk a first round pick on a kid that was going to be John Elway’s heir at Stanford. The only team who could afford to take that risk was the New York Mets since they had two other first round picks.

To this day, scouts say Beane was the most gifted athlete in the 1980 draft class. But if Beane learned anything from his playing career, it’s that there is no such thing as a “sure thing.” This has him at odds with scouts who wanted to try and put the best overall players on the field, the way big market teams do.

Back to Beane’s 2002 Oakland Athletics team which was the basis of the book and movie Moneyball. First, let me say that the movie was entertaining. Unfortunately, it paints a picture of Beane building the entire 2002 A’s from a bunch of players that no other team wanted. It reminded me of the scene in the movie Major League when they are trying to build a team bad enough that will help the Indians move out of Cleveland. Nobody was previously playing in the California Penal League, and the team was actually stacked before Beane added the final few pieces of the puzzle using sabermetrics.

The movie fails to mention the fact that the pitching staff consisted of Barry Zito (2002 Cy Young Winner), Mark Mulder, and Tim Hudson who were affectionately known as the “Big 3.” Let’s put it this way, if Beane didn’t win the division with those three guys he should’ve lost his job. By the way, the closer was Billy Koch, and it gets even better. The A’s had Miguel Tejada (2002 AL MVP), Eric Chavez, Jermaine Dye, Ray Durham, and David Justice all in their lineup. So was the success of the A’s due to sabermetrics being used to add a few players that nobody even remembers from the team, or the fact that everything came together for the A’s due to great player development? And if you thought the 2002 pitching staff was scary, the 2003 & 2004 A’s added a young Rich Harden to the mix. How did the Athletics manage to never win a World Series with those guys on their pitching staff?

Now let’s get back to the Mets. I think everyone will agree the Mets don’t have the talent the A’s had in the early 2000s. Not only that, but the A’s are a small market team, so they had to come up with creative ways to compete with big market teams. Look at it this way - when a person with a lower income goes to buy a car, they look for different attributes in that car than a person with a higher income would. The person with lower income goes to buy a Honda. It will get you back and forth to work, it’s reliable and good on gas, but you aren’t winning any races. The person with higher income goes to buy a Corvette, and the license plate reads “eat my dust.”

The Mets are a large market team. They shouldn’t be shopping for Hondas. Their license plate should read “eat my dust.” It doesn’t make sense for them to use the strategies of the small market teams. Their strategy should be to use their revenue stream to crush their opponents. The Mets can certainly learn a thing or two about player development from the Athletics of the early 2000s, but I’m still not sold on the fact that sabermetrics had anything to do with the success of those teams after looking at the players on that roster.

Can the Mets build a winning team using sabermetrics and moneyball? I know one thing for certain – no small market teams have won the World Series using sabermetrics alone in the past ten years. So if the Mets want to start winning again, they better start taking the money out of Moneyball, and start spending it.

But from the moment the opening scene began with the highlights of the 2001 ALDS, my questions were answered and my skepticism disappeared. I thought that director Bennett Miller captured the true meaning of Moneyball on several levels throughout the movie. From touching on Beane’s underwhelming playing career to the great deal of opposition the A’s GM faced in and out of the organization, Miller managed to include almost everything into the movie. Although if you did not read the book I think some aspects may be lost on the general public, but for those of us who did so, there are obviously many tips-of-the-hat to the novel.

Brad Pitt was absolutely phenomenal in playing Billy Beane in this film. Originally I could not picture Pitt playing a loose-cannon baseball general manager like Beane, but he pulled it off and then some. Pitt was the perfect actor for this role, playing the character of an unconventional, temperamental executive who uses a “bull-in-a-china-shop” approach to get what he wants be it Scott Hatteburg, Jeremy Brown or John Mabry. Whether it is chucking a television across the hallway or taking a baseball bat to the clubhouse stereo, Pitt seamlessly played the borderline-insane, yet lovable protagonist.

Jonah Hill, normally a drunk teenager in most of his films, played Peter Brand (Paul DePodesta) very well for being out of his element. He performed as Beane’s side-kick and offered some comedic moments throughout the film.

I was glad to see that the “Rudy moment”, if you will, of this film was not an altered world championship, as speculated by many, but instead focused on the record 20-game win streak that the A’s put together in their 103-win season.

I thought the film was well made, and stuck to the actual story Michael Lewis meant to tell when he wrote the novel. It was nice to see for once that a director did a book justice instead of taking poetic license.

No matter how accurately you valued past performance, it was still an uncertain guide to future performance. If it were perfect by design then the players would be digital representations of themselves and seasons would be played out on a computer, with Las Vegas putting Johnny’s college fund on the line as to whether David Ortiz would ever regain his pre-performance enhanced game or not. But the game is played on the field and not in some cyberspace vacuum.

Actually I feel sorry for guys like Podesta and Beane. The purest of the Sabermetricians seem to take no joy from the game, for that is subjective emotion and clouds ones’ judgment. I suppose in their positions I can understand their reluctance, but I still find that to be a profoundly sad and lonely place to be. To not allow yourself to enjoy what you want to enjoy so badly is borderline Greek tragedy.

I happen to be someone who appreciates the value of finding…value, especially where it is least apparent. For years I would argue with friends and family about why the mid to late 90′s Yankees were better then any of their later teams.

To me it was obvious that players like Scott Brosius, Paul O’Neill, Tino Martinez and even Chuck Knoblauch shared a similar trait among them; plate patience with the ability to get on base. They would work the count deeper and battle the opposing pitcher so much that in little time their opponent’s weakness was exposed – their bullpens.

Lets face it if relievers were all that great they’d be starters so to me, it made sense to wear the starter down. Those particular Yankee teams embodied that premise. That’s part of the core of Saber and never once did that dawn on me at the time.

I don’t fully agree with all of Sabermetrics rationale, such as the idea that there is no such thing as a “clutch hitter”, that luck is simply the answer. Some players do well under pressure. Some don’t. Is it any different to see someone like Derek Jeter elevate his game in the postseason as it was when Michael Jordan would at times will the Chicago Bulls into dominance during the NBA Finals or perhaps Joe Montana in the Super Bowl?

Now can it be scientifically dissected and explained? Of course not, if it could I’m sure Alex Rodriguez would be one of the first to feast on the knowledge. Luck certainly plays a part in every game as I’m sure a player like Bucky Dent would admit, but talent tends to rise when need be, exceptional talent that is.

To quantify a player who excels in the spotlight – consistently – by saying his success is pure luck does a disservice to the game. Just like trying to prove the existence of God; in the end you either have faith or you don’t. And to those who argue that it’s simply luck – who would you rather have hitting with two outs, the bases loaded and down by a run in the post season – Derek Jeter or A-Rod?

When you look at the 2010 New York Mets and do a comparison to Team X – we’ll call them Team X for now – you may be surprised to say the least. First off the Mets scored 656 runs, 13th in the NL. Team X scored 697 9th in the NL. The Mets had a .314 OBP raking 14th in the NL and Team X had a .321 OBP for 9th in the NL. The Mets walked 502 times with Team X walking 487 times. Ranking both 12th and 13th in the NL.  Comparitively, their pitching were both outstanding.  The Mets allowed 652 runs, 11th best in the NL while Team X just 583 which was second best in the NL.  Considering the Mets pitching staff from 2010, it’s remarkable.

Which leads me back to the glaring difference being the 41 runs scored differential between the two. If you don’t know by now Team X happens to be the World Champion San Francisco Giants. Just take into account if the Mets had full, average seasons from Beltran, Reyes and Bay, that run differential might be a bit different, no?

The need going into the 2011 season for the Mets will be to acquire a starting pitcher, especially since Johan Santana will be out optimistically until the All Star break. How much are the Mets willing to spend and on whom happens to be the key question. We’ve seen Jon Garland go the Dodgers for a one year $5 million dollar deal and Javier Vasquez go the Marlins for a one year $7 million dollar deal.

I just don’t see the Mets spending that kind of money, period. One of the hallmarks of Saber is finding hidden value in players that others cannot or have not seen. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Alderson go after a player like Justin Duchscherer.

The former Oakland Athletic has had a barrage of injuries the past few years and has dealt with clinical depression. When healthy he’s one of the better arms in the game – when healthy – and since he’s coming off of an injury he may be willing to accept a lower end deal that’s incentive laden.

Another pitcher coming off an injury that may be affordable is Chris Young formerly of the Padres. Sandy Alderson certainly knows everything there is to know about Young and as long as he’s healthy, he too may be of interest. The bottom line, the Mets are not going to spend their way to a championship, at least not in a flashy Omar Minaya-esque kind of way.

The Mets are going to be in the market for Rick Reed type pitchers and that is more than fine with me. I’m sure we’ll hear names that we’ve hardly heard of before being bantered around to fill out the rotation. That’s where having a front office of executives schooled in the art of finding value in players becomes irreplaceable.

I know MMO has touched on Sabermetrics a few weeks back so many of you might think I’m a bit late on the subject. Maybe so but in all honesty I wanted to read Moneyball for myself before going on the record. Sabermetrics isn’t some new age alchemy, it’s taking existing statistics but looking at them in a different way.

Do I believe that a team of Scott Hattebergs would be good for the Mets? Probably not. But, plate discipline is the foundation to greater success offensively. I wonder what Ted Williams would’ve said about Sabermetrics? I have a feeling he’d actually agree on many of the principles especially when it comes to hitting as I have come to as well.