Beef Jerky Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 I could be wrong but i thought that Moneyball had to do with a small market team trying to remain competitive with large market teams through stats because they couldn't compete strictly from a revenue/salary perspective. The idea was to find value in players where other teams weren't looking because those would be lower salaried players. That might not translate as well to the NFL due to the salary cap, but the Osweiler trade was an interesting twist in that the Browns recognized that they had excess value in having to spend up to the minimum spot and they exploited that for the draft picks. Yea and now where moneyball can't control like it can in baseball picking the right players in the draft. I hope they are wrong on every pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Moneyball in baseball means you never win anything but get a bestselling book and a movie made about you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beef Jerky Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) Remember when the Jets had 12 picks? https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2016/09/06/this-is-the-biggest-flop-of-john-idziks-awful-2014-jets-draft/amp/ This is what the Bills need, other teams to miss. Whaley needs 2 stars and a starter in this draft... Edited March 27, 2017 by Beef Jerky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 And then you claim Boston, who spent as much as the Yankees is using it when they win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 having an analytics department (or one guy) isn't analogous to using a Moneyball strategy. Browns are the only team to be lead by an executive who has used that (although in another sport), whereas every team uses analytics to some degree. What is the evidence that they are practicing "moneyball", or that it has any impact in their roster? Their treatment of the QB position the past 2 seasons has been totally whacked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardinalScotts Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) the Browns have 6 players with contracts of 50 million or more. They aren't playing moneyball browns are winning 1-2 games for the next 5 years, which leaves them trying to resign the draft picks that did pan out. The descent vets they had are gone by now. It will be a revolving door on the roster you can't keep guys under contract long enough to build that much from the draft. Currently players dont want to go there and when given a chance those who can leave ...do. It's a good thought but baseball has 40 rounds in which they draft and a rookie, A, High A, AA, AAA teams to put players as they develop and dont care of they win. That doesn't exist in football Edited March 27, 2017 by CardinalScotts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) browns are winning 1-2 games for the next 5 years Yeah, but they're rebuilding. Edited March 27, 2017 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) At this point it means spending big on the interior OL. Browns paid $46.7m in fully gtd $ to 2 guards and a Center this month. They couldn't get Tony Jefferson to take their huge contract and he went to Ravens for less. They let their best player from last season leave, and backed up the Brinks truck for Jamie Collins. They stroked a 16 mill check for a 6th rd pick and to swap a 4th for a 2nd, and a QB they don't want and won't admit they actually need. They have a crook, baseball exec and a lawyer running a NFL team. Their HC decided he doesn't need an OC. #thisismoneyball Edited March 27, 2017 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
major Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 I definitely see how this works in baseball, but have never seen definitive proof that it can be applied to all sports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilcoam Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Sorry Robot, but I'm not sure you can say the moves our Bills are making this off season are 'smart' Smart to me means signing players that get you those 2-3 extra wins than you got last season and actual playoff contenders not pretenders So if we win 10 games plus this season I'll grant you that these moves were smart, and quite successful If we only win 6-8, I;m not sure how you apply that word to the totality of the moves Middling, mediocre, sideways, IMO would apply more than 'smart' I mean looking back at all our moves this time last year, we're they really 'smart' they sure as hell were not successful Just saying... jc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elite Poster Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 The only moneyball that works is the Belichick moneyball. Recognize a players worth and take it or leave it. Of course doesn't hurt to have Tom Brady. Like paying Gilmore exactly what he wanted when the pro evolution football championship experts here claimed he was a bum? Nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD Only Rolle Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Like paying Gilmore exactly what he wanted when the pro evolution football championship experts here claimed he was a bum? Nice Exactly. But years of overpaying guys such as Dareus and Mario Williams is what gets us to the cap problems we have now. Or moving up in drafts and giving away future assets like the Watkins and Ragland moves. It's not that theses guys are bad players but in this draft that is loaded with talent we now only have 6 picks with plenty of holes to fill. Bills moves always seem shortsighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 And then you claim Boston, who spent as much as the Yankees is using it when they win. They used an extensive analytics department in the assembly of their roster, before and after Theo. Now it's hard to get ahead in the same way. They spent a ton on scouting non American players, and missed as much as they hit. Moneyball worked because billy beane had 3 deep beast starting pitching, and tejada/Chavez. He had a good team already so it was easy to look at unique ways to fill some holes. The browns have the worst team in the league, and with football it all comes down to qbs. They will be the worst team again and get their qb next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD Only Rolle Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 They used an extensive analytics department in the assembly of their roster, before and after Theo. Now it's hard to get ahead in the same way. They spent a ton on scouting non American players, and missed as much as they hit. Moneyball worked because billy beane had 3 deep beast starting pitching, and tejada/Chavez. He had a good team already so it was easy to look at unique ways to fill some holes. The browns have the worst team in the league, and with football it all comes down to qbs. They will be the worst team again and get their qb next year. Well said. This league does come down to the qbs. Teams with good qbs contend every year those that don't keep spinning their wheels trying to build a defense or good run game. We see how that works. Moneyball only works if you have that qb giving flexibility to make frugal moves at other positions. Just like having a great pitching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpleman Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) What the heck is a moneyball approach? I admit I have never read the book. I seriously don't know the philosophy behind it. Is "Moneyball" about actually seriously trying to win the whole thing, like the Superbowl or Series? Or is it about making "Money" as an owner, while doing just barely enough to not alienate the fans so much they don't buy the product? Are the analytics really about the players, or is it actually about learning just where the breaking point is between people buying your product or giving up on the team, so you can spend the absolute minimum on having a team, while making the maximum profit? Edited March 27, 2017 by simpleman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 (edited) So we are talking about a book. What's this book, fiction ? Even when it's a true life story book not everything is true in these books. So we're basing our theories on what the team and owners are doing based on some stupid book? makes a lot of sense to me. Come on season. Edited March 27, 2017 by mead107 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 I admit I have never read the book. I seriously don't know the philosophy behind it. Is "Moneyball" about actually seriously trying to win the whole thing, like the Superbowl or Series? Or is it about making "Money" as an owner, while doing just barely enough to not alienate the fans so much they don't buy the product? Are the analytics really about the players, or is it actually about learning just where the breaking point is between people buying your product or giving up on the team, so you can spend the absolute minimum on having a team, while making the maximum profit? I've read about and studied the so-called Moneyball approach. In a nutshell, setting the poor terminology aside, it is about exploiting market inefficiencies, and tapping into undervalued resources ignored by traditional measures. The term is now throw around I believe, to emcompass the use of big data to run a sports franchise. It means nothing about small vs. big market now. It has now become a maven of every academic who wants to be involved in pro sports and loves numbers. There is a problem in that this is old now. At one time you could exploit things in baseball like OBA being more important than BA in the big picture. How do you gain an advantage now when it is the status quo? It reminds me of people who think they have the latest stock tip except the market has already corrected. It appears to me that now all organizations use statistical data in decision making. The difference is that modern scouting is also integrated into the decision making process. And, we no longer have a scouts vs. stats dichotomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BarleyNY Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 I admit I have never read the book. I seriously don't know the philosophy behind it. Is "Moneyball" about actually seriously trying to win the whole thing, like the Superbowl or Series? Or is it about making "Money" as an owner, while doing just barely enough to not alienate the fans so much they don't buy the product? Are the analytics really about the players, or is it actually about learning just where the breaking point is between people buying your product or giving up on the team, so you can spend the absolute minimum on having a team, while making the maximum profit? It's about winning. It worked in baseball in that it made the A's competitive with large market teams. They got close several times. Then the large market team, Boston, implemented the same system and won the WS. Then pretty much every team copied them and uses its own variant of it. So now using "Moneyball" analytics is standard practice in baseball so you don't hear anything about teams gaining an advantage with it, but they're all doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 Why do the patriots win ? They do not go nuts paying players. They have Brady who makes all his receivers and his line look good . Checking out the book I do not see how it works in the NFL Sorry not a believer in it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 27, 2017 Share Posted March 27, 2017 At this point it means spending big on the interior OL. Browns paid $46.7m in fully gtd $ to 2 guards and a Center this month. They couldn't get Tony Jefferson to take their huge contract and he went to Ravens for less. They let their best player from last season leave, and backed up the Brinks truck for Jamie Collins. They stroked a 16 mill check for a 6th rd pick and to swap a 4th for a 2nd, and a QB they don't want and won't admit they actually need. They have a crook, baseball exec and a lawyer running a NFL team. Their HC decided he doesn't need an OC. #thisismoneyball The Tretter money for a man who has missed as many games injured as he has played was particularly baffling to me. I like the Zeitler pick up and the re-signing of Bitonio (who I as a fan of coming out). The Osweiler thing might be a clever cash dump to make sure that they hit this year's cap floor without it restricting their ability to make moves in FA next year. However, they need to prove it with an improved team on Sundays in the fall and that means using the draft picks they have this year wisely. If they suck badly again this year Jackson will almost certainly get the boot and they are left asking another new Head Coach to trust a front office that so far has been unconventional and unsuccessful. Hue seems, to some extent at least, bought in to this plan. Who knows if they can find another legitimate Head Coach willing to risk that experiment. Having a lot of picks in the next two drafts allows the Browns to sell hope..... eventually they need to sell wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts