Beane's detractors hope he fails this season

[A's Baby Girl]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...ight&type=lgns

Detractors of A's General Manager Billy Beane, and there are plenty, have their trumpets at the ready for 2005. They are poised to celebrate if the A's tumble in their first season without the Big Three.


The reason the A's have thrived, say the skeptics, is not because of Beane's offensive wizardry but because Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder and Barry Zito kept an otherwise ordinary team afloat. As a San Diego Padres executive put it in "Moneyball," the best-selling book about Beane's methods: "The reason the A's win so many games with so little money is that Billy got lucky with those pitchers."

That argument will soon be toast, though, because Beane traded Hudson and Mulder in off-season deals that promise to keep the G.M.'s reputation in the familiar bask of the spotlight. And it's no secret that some old-school types are rooting for Beane to fall on his famous face.


"Everybody in baseball is watching to see what happens, and I mean everybody," said one executive of an American League team.

[Providence A's]

lucky? he drafted them...so are they saying the draft is a crapshoot?

[A's Baby Girl]

They're just jealous...seriously. I really hope this team can step up and prove those people wrong..

[Steak]

I am sure Taylor is one of them.

[Taylor]

lucky? he drafted them...so are they saying the draft is a crapshoot?

No Fuson did, with the exception of Zito (Fuson wanted Sheets instead - and at this point of time who would you prefer on your team?), Hudson, Mulder and Harden were Fuson picks. Case in point - the "Expensive Disaster" that Michael Lewis claimed the 2001 draft became...BTW - It also produced Jeremy Bonderman, Crosby, Wood, Cotts, much better than 2002's draft. Fuson's 2003 draft was rated 2nd best, and last year's class is looking very nice so long as Hart doesn't screw it up.

And Beane said the draft was a crapshoot claiming that you're lucky if you get "2 good players out of the draft"

My beef with Moneyball (Don't get me wrong, it was a good book, just overrated) is Beane blasted other teams, general managers, etc. So noone there should be shocked that they're backfiring against him. Beane fired the first shot, not the other way around.

BTW - Does anyone find it odd that Fuson was removed in Oakland because he went after hard throwing high schooler instead of a painting college guy, then was removed in Texas for drafting painting college guys over a hard throwing high schoolers?

[Providence A's]

ahh, interesting...but Beane did hire Fuson, right?

I'd always be leary of high schoolers because they don't have as long and as proven a track record as college players.

Case in point: Rocco Baldelli played high school baseball here in RI...we play 18 game seasons in RI and it's not like every team and every player is even average, nevermind good...I fell out of my chair when he was picked 6th overall or whatever...how can you pick a guy who's only played high school ball in the smallest state with the shortest schedule? He's facing mostly crap for competition...I'd draft guys who have played longer and against much better competition than RI high schoolers...

[Taylor]

ahh, interesting...but Beane did hire Fuson, right?

Who ran the drafts? Tom Hicks hired Fuson, was he a genious in 02-04?

I'd always be leary of high schoolers because they don't have as long and as proven a track record as college players.

Case in point: Rocco Baldelli played high school baseball here in RI...we play 18 game seasons in RI and it's not like every team and every player is even average, nevermind good...I fell out of my chair when he was picked 6th overall or whatever...how can you pick a guy who's only played high school ball in the smallest state with the shortest schedule? He's facing mostly crap for competition...I'd draft guys who have played longer and against much better competition than RI high schoolers...

Case in point - Lewis' book compared high schoolers in the 80s - early 90s as compared to college guys. I forgot the numbers but since then it's somewhere around 55%-48% college guys to high schoolers making the league, even if just for a cup of coffee. College guys are safer risks however they are also limited potentially as compared to high schoolers. While it's best to not go wild on gambling with HSers any GM who ignores them had better hope their safe picks all pan out, else they'll be out of a job.

And your argument above - statheads would wonder about the evaluation of a Baldelli due to competition, traditionalists go for the attributes and potential. Once a player is drafted it's up to the team to properly develop him and keep him out of trouble field-wise and off, Oakland does a nice job there, Fuson literally babied them, if he had any faults its that he waited too long to promote guys, which is why I'm afraid of Hart - this dude puts the heat on quickly bounces them up and will dump them if they struggle.