Moneyball’s Flaw: A’s Struggle to Find Identity
By Guy Cresson
Though the practice of “Moneyball” has helped the Oakland Athletics contend with a low payroll, it hurts the club’s ability to develop a brand.
We all know the story: Despite losing Giambi, Damon, and Isringhausen in the 2001 off season, the team won 103 games in 2002. The A’s dominated the AL West with one of the lowest payrolls in all of baseball.
The club has made eight playoff appearances in 17 years, thanks to “Moneyball” – the philosophy of acquiring players capable of the most production per dollar.
Although being developed 20 years ago, the practice is still at the heart of the A’s front office. Instituted by former-GM Billy Beane, “Moneyball” allows the A’s to go toe-to-toe with richer clubs.
Oakland A’s: The Process
Of course, the cheapest crack at talent is acquiring young players still on their rookie contracts. Since the late ‘90’s, the Oakland-based franchise has done just that.
The team has consistently avoided giving veterans fat contracts (with a few notable exceptions). Unlike richer clubs, the A’s can’t afford to make a mistake on a sizable deal. Such a blunder would financially cripple the front office for years.
Instead, the A’s aim to develop younger players capable of delivering solid production on the cheap.
With youth flowing through the farm system and at the Major League level, the A’s have molded somewhat of a cycle. Generally, as players approach the end of their arbitration years, the front office trades them for prospects.
Conversely, if the A’s are still in the hunt, the team allows players to sign elsewhere upon their contract’s expiration, netting the club compensation picks.
This method allows the front office to maximize its time with each player. The A’s get a good three or four years with a player for cheap. Once he departs Oakland, the club receives fair compensation via Minor Leaguers.
The constant cycle allows the A’s to always have talent within the organization. If the Big League team isn’t up to par, the future of the club is tearing up the Minors.
For the front office, the system provides a definitive timeline to be competitive — win now or win later.
The One Flaw of Moneyball
Though the strategy allows the A’s to compete with richer teams like the Angels and Rangers in the AL West, it hurts the organization in one aspect. The constant trading of players prevents the A’s from ever establishing an identity.
For a professional sports franchise, constructing a brand is no different from Nike’s selling basketball shoes. As a corporation, it aims to achieve familiarity among the public.
The Giants of the 2010’s
In the last six years, the Giants have managed to build a dynasty, making six consecutive postseason appearances and winning the World Series three times.
Though each team has contained a healthy amount of young talent, the core has been the same – Lincecum, Cain, Bumgarner, Posey. When one hears those names, they immediately think of the San Francisco Giants.
Baseball fans can’t say the same for the A’s. Despite making three postseason appearances over the same span, fans struggle to keep up with Oakland’s constant roster changes.
While much of the Giants’s familiarity has to do with their impressive postseason runs, the club has developed its brand by keeping the same core of players. Unlike the A’s, the Giants offer their players big-money extensions and sign free agents to large deals.
Though many of their deals have since gone south (Cain, Zito especially), the front office has established a long-term identity for the club. Stars like Madison Bumgarner, Brandon Belt, Buster Posey, and Brandon Crawford are all locked down for years to come.
A’s Remodeling Continues
On the flip side, Sonny Gray will likely be added to the list of Josh Reddick, Yoenis Cespedes, and Josh Donaldson as stars recently shipped out of Oakland. (Stephen Vogt’s departure doesn’t count, because he was DFA‘d due to a recent decline.)
The A’s will once again attempt a rebuild with promising young players Sean Manaea, Kendall Graveman, Chad Pinder, Ryon Healy, Matt Chapman, and Franklin Barreto.
Though they all have potential to reach stardom, they too will be one day be traded as part of the process.
Bottom Line:
The A’s lack of an identity is a small blemish to the club’s prized system. More than anything, it makes them a hard team for fans to follow.
That said, “Moneyball” still remains the club’s best chance at winning a World Series until revenue streams improve. Trust the process.