John Patrick O'Donnell

Honors UWRT 1103

11/10/15
Professor Malcolm Campbell

Moneyball: How the Runt of the Litter Survives

Its an age old problem. Those with the most money are typically more successful in most
situations such as politics or business. The world of professional sports world isnt immune to
the influence of money either. The teams with the most money usually perform the best, simply
because they have the funds to buy the most talented players. For example, the most winningest
team in baseball history has been the New York Yankees. Theyre total salary for the 2015 season
was $217,758,571, and they usually have the highest total salary in all of baseball. If we look at
soccer, the same rules apply, even though their wealth is based more on the transfer budget, or
acquiring players. In the Barclays Premier League, the team at the top of the table right now is
Manchester City. They also happen to have the highest transfer budget in the premier league at
the moment. So, with this kind of dominance in both sports, how are the poorer teams able to
compete?
In the movie Moneyball, Billy Beane, the General Manager for the Oakland Athletics,
tasked himself with explaining the problem to his scouts, asking over and over again, Whats
the problem?. The scouts thought that the problem was that they couldnt replace the three key
players that they had lost: Jason Isringhausen, Johnny Damon, and Jason Giambi. The fact of the
matter was, that they had drafted and developed these players for much cheaper than they sold
them for, so, although they made a profit, they couldnt afford anyone that was as talented for as
cheap as they were. Beane makes the argument as follows, There are rich teams and there are

John Patrick O'Donnell

Honors UWRT 1103
11/10/15
Professor Malcolm Campbell
poor teams; then theres fifty feet of crap, and then theres us. We are the last dog to the bowl.
What happens to the runt of the litter? He dies. If we try to play like the Yankees in here, we will
lose to the Yankees out there. The scouts dont think that thats the best course of action overall,
they say that there are intangibles that only baseball people can understand. They think that they
should rely on intuition and experience, or a more subjective approach as opposed to a more
objective approach based in numbers, using the principle known as Sabermetrics.
Sabermetrics was a concept developed by a man named Bill James. It was a theory, to put
simply, that gave players a qualitative value for scouting purposes instead of a qualitative one.
However, his theories were not accepted by most of the baseball community because he wasnt a
part of their society of sorts. He wasnt a baseball guy, he was a security guard, so they deemed
his information unreliable. Professional baseball scouts typically look for a few different
qualitative values on each player they sign. For example, they try to look at the potential of a
player, but the fact of the matter is, you cannot predict how talented a player is going to be based
upon how good his swing looks, or if he fields well in a practice situation. Signing new players
right out of high school without a proof of concept or evidence that he can play in the big
leagues. Once he plays minor-league baseball and gets some at-bats under his belt, an evaluation
of the players talent can be made. At that point, the potential argument shouldnt hold as much
weight, so a more logical approach should be taken. He shouldnt be looked at as nothing but a
number, but he also shouldnt be able to be condemned because of the way he looks. Players are
constantly being undervalued simply because of how they look, or if big names in baseball
labeled them as lazy, or a problem in the clubhouse, or perhaps even just flat-out untalented. For

John Patrick O'Donnell

Honors UWRT 1103
11/10/15
Professor Malcolm Campbell
example, Sam Bradford was a relief pitcher that was picked up by the Athletics for a negligible
$336,000, but compared to the other pitchers in bullpens across the MLB he was far and away
the most effective given his price, and the reason he was at such a low price? He threw
submarine style, which is very rare for a pitcher to do as opposed to the normal overarm or threequarter style. Regardless of this, he was one of the most cost-effective players in baseball, for the
most cost-effective team in baseball.
The cost effectiveness of a team is measured by the amount of money spent per win. A
theory behind Moneyball is that teams shouldnt be buying in terms of players, but they should
be buying in terms of wins. In order to buy wins, a team needs to buy runs. These runs can be
derived from statistics that have a more lasting impact than Homeruns and Runs Batted In
(RBIs). For example, On-Base-Percentage is a far more accurate statistic to base a decision on.
There are only a handful of players that hit more than 30 Homeruns and 100 RBIs in Major
League Baseball, and those players are going to cost more than a player who would have the
same On-Base-Percentage, and effectively does the same job. The average amount of At-bats for
a starting player per season is about 600, so if someone had 30 homeruns, and 100 RBIs, they
would have 130 guaranteed runs, but that player would most likely be in the range of 15-20
million dollars. If someone had an On-Base-Percentage of .375 which means that out of 600 at
bats, the player got on base 225 times, so that is a potential 225 runs, but given that most teams
under value this statistic, the players that are only boasting the On-Base Percentage plus 8
homeruns and 40 RBIs will be a much cheaper acquisition and would be much more costeffective.

John Patrick O'Donnell

Honors UWRT 1103
11/10/15
Professor Malcolm Campbell
Sabermetrics focuses on important statistics that managers undervalue, and causes them
to undervalue the players themselves. OBP covers several statistics under its umbrella, such as
walks, pitches per at-bat, hits, et cetera. However, teams really shouldnt be looking at a players
batting average when it comes to acquiring players, they should be looking at slugging
percentage. The theory behind it is that slugging percentages reveal that although some hitters
will hit a line drive into the outfield, the outfielder could make a good play, and he would be out.
That would cause him to be 0-1 for the night at that point, but he still made good contact with
solid power. If another player hit a blooper into the outfield that dropped in for a single, that
wouldnt be an accurate representation of the players actual hitting capability, but he would be
counted as a misleading 1-1. Sabermetrics is used to cut through all subjective points of view,
and strip it down the base numbers. Given that it has worked extremely well when executed
properly, such as when the Oakland As won 20 games in a row to break the record for a single
season winning streak. Or, after the As amazing season, the Boston Red Sox hired Bill James as
a consultant because at that point they were just thinking, enough is enough, we just want our
championship. With all of this success in baseball, it begs the question of not only whether or not
the theory of Sabermetrics is applicable to other sports, but how effective the theory would hold
up to be against the standard practices of scouting that are seen today.
There is the debate of whether or not the principles of Moneyball can be used for other
sports such as soccer or basketball. Basketball wouldnt make sense, given that they have a
salary cap of a certain amount, so the teams are put under the same constraints. Also, basketball
teams have half of the amount of players that baseball has to worry about, given the 25 baseball

John Patrick O'Donnell

Honors UWRT 1103
11/10/15
Professor Malcolm Campbell
players on a roster and the 12 basketball players on a roster. Consequentially, irrelevant bench
players make much more money in basketball. Soccer, on the other hand, is very similar to
baseball in the way that there is not a cap in the amount of money a team can spend in acquiring
players. Even in the Barclays Premier League, you have budgets that are somewhere from 5-10
million dollars, and then you have Man City, a team thats transfer budget sums up to about 120
million dollars. The need for Moneyball in soccer is much greater in the way that they do have
youth academies that play with the club, but they also dont have a draft in any other country
besides the United States. The need is there, but the only question is if the possibility of
Moneyball in soccer today is an applicable one.
Soccer is not a stop-and-go sport like baseball, so there are other variables to take into
account when selecting a player, such as opportunities created per game, pass accuracy, average
match rating, et cetera. However, the two most important statistics to base a decision off of are
the distance the player has ran, and the amount of intensive runs the player has made. This is
derived from the theory that, generally speaking, if a team works harder than another team and
are about even on the talent spectrum, then they are going to win that game. People are much too
concerned with being flashy for their own good, so it causes them to undervalue the not as flashy
players.