Billy Beane Should Be Fired - Page 3

theblemishedone · 10-01-2014, 05:01 PM

No, you deserve the rewards. To be able to hang in a tough AL west is a testament to a well-run organization.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LincecumPC

We had no business beating the Angels and Rangers these past few years, but were able to pull it off. Gotta be thankful for that as an A's fan.

brewcrew8 · 10-01-2014, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

The A's did not make the playoffs this year...they tied for the last spot and lost...its just a game 163...as a tigers fan if the tigers were in that game and lost i would not consider it a playoff appearance...

i think its a joke that ppl consider a these wild card losers as "playoff teams"...

In that case all losers in the NFL playoffs are not playoff teams.

The A's made the playoff, it may have been super short and unsatisfying, but i'd count it as a playoff appearance.

jstasyk1121 · 10-01-2014, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewcrew8

In that case all losers in the NFL playoffs are not playoff teams.

The A's made the playoff, it may have been super short and unsatisfying, but i'd count it as a playoff appearance.

thats not even remotely a good comparison...the NFL wild card teams are IN the bracket...i didnt say every team that doesnt win the WS isnt a playoff team?? i said the loser of a dumb 1gm tie breaker is not a playoff team...which is basically what the WC games are now...

the Oak/KC game was basically a play-in game like march madness...they are not in the playoffs until they win that game...lose that game and you are just the first team out....

duwal · 10-01-2014, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

The A's did not make the playoffs this year...they tied for the last spot and lost...its just a game 163...as a tigers fan if the tigers were in that game and lost i would not consider it a playoff appearance...

i think its a joke that ppl consider a these wild card losers as "playoff teams"...

Its not game 163, it was Game 1 of the playoffs and all of the stats from yesterday and tonight's game go towards their career Playoff totals. While you might not "consider it", it is still a fact that the game last night was a playoff game and appearance

jstasyk1121 · 10-01-2014, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duwal

Its not game 163, it was Game 1 of the playoffs and all of the stats from yesterday and tonight's game go towards their career Playoff totals. While you might not "consider it", it is still a fact that the game last night was a playoff game and appearance

i just disagree...its a media thing to make it seem more important and make more money...but still...it was a game to get in to the bracket....oakland lost so to me they are not a playoff team

no10pin · 10-01-2014, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

i just disagree...its a media thing to make it seem more important and make more money...but still...it was a game to get in to the bracket....oakland lost so to me they are not a playoff team

Well, it wasn't a regular season game, so what was it? MLB will count it in playoff stats, so it's more than just a media thing. If you watched the teams or the fans last night, it wasn't the media convincing them that it was important.

brewcrew8 · 10-01-2014, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

thats not even remotely a good comparison...the NFL wild card teams are IN the bracket...i didnt say every team that doesnt win the WS isnt a playoff team?? i said the loser of a dumb 1gm tie breaker is not a playoff team...which is basically what the WC games are now...

the Oak/KC game was basically a play-in game like march madness...they are not in the playoffs until they win that game...lose that game and you are just the first team out....

Why not? NFL has four wild card games and MLB only has two. Therefore it seems to me the MLB wild-card losers are more playoff teams than the NFL wild card losers.

thescout · 10-01-2014, 09:14 PM

Did anyone read moneyball? The entire process was a failure. His big years were when he still had the big names like Giambi, Tejada and Chavez, etc and his system refused to pay guys like that leading to a structure that can't win. He took a winning team and made them worse on purpose.

Tom Oates · 10-01-2014, 09:39 PM

I've got to believe he is among the highest rated GM's in terms of producing the most wins per $ spent and the most playoff appearances per $ spent. He made a play and traded his big bat for a big arm in an era when starting pitching commands big bucks and home run totals are down, can't fault the logic. It didn't pay off this time. Hardly worth firing him.

gabballplayer14 · 10-01-2014, 09:47 PM

I know a certain East Coast team I would love for him to take over.

death2redemptions · 10-01-2014, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gabballplayer14

I know a certain East Coast team I would love for him to take over.

Man, I'd be so happy if the Braves got him! But he turned down what would have been the biggest contract in history from the Red Sox so why would he decide to come work for the Braves for a small contract?

duwal · 10-01-2014, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thescout

Did anyone read moneyball? The entire process was a failure. His big years were when he still had the big names like Giambi, Tejada and Chavez, etc and his system refused to pay guys like that leading to a structure that can't win. He took a winning team and made them worse on purpose.

actually the process worked very well. Moneyball was all about competing, not necessarily being a dominant championship team, at a high level while not drastically overpaying a player for their performance

gabballplayer14 · 10-01-2014, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by death2redemptions

Man, I'd be so happy if the Braves got him! But he turned down what would have been the biggest contract in history from the Red Sox so why would he decide to come work for the Braves for a small contract?

I'm just saying I wish it would happen, I know it is nowhere near possible.

ucLAkers · 10-02-2014, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wingin98

You know.... Jake from StateFarm

At 2am...? Yea Right! What are you wearing "Jake"?

jstasyk1121 · 10-02-2014, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewcrew8

Why not? NFL has four wild card games and MLB only has two. Therefore it seems to me the MLB wild-card losers are more playoff teams than the NFL wild card losers.

the NFL WC teams are not playing each other for the right to play teams that are actually in the bracket already....MLB is....there is two WC teams that play each other to earn the chance to win the world series....

i understand that technically it goes down as a playoff game and MadBum has a CGSO on his playoff record now....but all im saying is that if im OAK/PITT fans in NO WAY am i considering 2014 a playoff season....no shot...

brewcrew8 · 10-02-2014, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

the NFL WC teams are not playing each other for the right to play teams that are actually in the bracket already....MLB is....there is two WC teams that play each other to earn the chance to win the world series....

i understand that technically it goes down as a playoff game and MadBum has a CGSO on his playoff record now....but all im saying is that if im OAK/PITT fans in NO WAY am i considering 2014 a playoff season....no shot...

So if NFL only had 10 teams make the playoffs instead of 12, so they only had two games in the wild card first round, would you not consider the losing teams in that first round playoff teams then?

texgator · 10-02-2014, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewcrew8

So if NFL only had 10 teams make the playoffs instead of 12, so they only had two games in the wild card first round, would you not consider the losing teams in that first round playoff teams then?

I think you are missing the point, to some degree. In baseball the playoffs have traditionally been in a series format. 5-7-9 game series. Not a one-off. Everything in football is one game playoffs....so the wildcard round fits perfectly in with the rest of the playoff format.

brewcrew8 · 10-02-2014, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by texgator

I think you are missing the point, to some degree. In baseball the playoffs have traditionally been in a series format. 5-7-9 game series. Not a one-off. Everything in football is one game playoffs....so the wildcard round fits perfectly in with the rest of the playoff format.

Maybe we are looking at it different.

To me I think the fact that a team fought all year to be top five in their respective league makes them worthy of being called a playoff team.

But even if it is one game I don't get the not part of the bracket thing. It's 10 teams that make it, that's the lowest number of all the major four sports leagues. NCAA tourney with 68 teams yes those are play-in games. This wild-card game is not. I don't see how it's any different than NFL teams that don't get a first round bye.

fritzfreddie · 10-02-2014, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

the NFL WC teams are not playing each other for the right to play teams that are actually in the bracket already....MLB is....there is two WC teams that play each other to earn the chance to win the world series....

i understand that technically it goes down as a playoff game and MadBum has a CGSO on his playoff record now....but all im saying is that if im OAK/PITT fans in NO WAY am i considering 2014 a playoff season....no shot...

Postseason Picture | MLB.com: Standings

Looks like they are in the bracket

Just because you want to ignore them doesn't mean they aren't in the bracket, just means you ignore them. They are there.

no10pin · 10-02-2014, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstasyk1121

the NFL WC teams are not playing each other for the right to play teams that are actually in the bracket already....MLB is....there is two WC teams that play each other to earn the chance to win the world series....

i understand that technically it goes down as a playoff game and MadBum has a CGSO on his playoff record now....but all im saying is that if im OAK/PITT fans in NO WAY am i considering 2014 a playoff season....no shot...

The top 2 division winners in the NFL have byes in the Wild Card round. The division winners in MLB have byes in the Wild Card round.

You can continue to not consider them playoff teams if you'd like, but you'd be wrong.

mwheeler27 · 10-03-2014, 01:08 AM

Aren't there only 2 types of official games in the MLB? Regular season games and playoff games?

If it's not a regular season game, (a game EVERY TEAM plays), is it not a playoff game?

Pretty simple concept that the wild card games are "playoff" games if you ask me. Heck, by definition, wild card games are playoff games. Not really any sense denying it. It's not even a gray area.

Lionsman81 · 10-03-2014, 08:24 AM

At the same rate by your standards shouldn't the Tigers fire Dombrowski? After all he gave Verlander a ridiculous contract, signed Joe Nathan to big money and he's had no trouble becoming the most hated Tiger, Trade Jake Thompson your top pitching prospect who has been pegged as a future ace for Soria who hasn't done anything besides pitch poorly and be injured, makes a blockbuster trade that destroys team chemistry and David Price turns out to not be the real thing. Vs. trading away a top prospect to acquire two decent pitches and trading away a bright young star for a star pitcher. Not defending Beane but from what your saying Dombrowski should be fired.

texgator · 10-03-2014, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lionsman81

Trade Jake Thompson your top pitching prospect who has been pegged as a future ace.....

,.....by no one.

I like Jake, but his ceiling is #3 starter. Here is BP's scouting report on him from May of this year, before the trade.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pr...hp?reportid=68

55 OFP (meaning slightly better than average MLB player).

thescout · 10-04-2014, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yanksfan1

Correlation does not mean causation. Just because they played bad after the trade doesnt mean it was the trade that sunk them.

Wtf?!?! Lester was a freaking beast for them, how on earth can you say that was a bad trade?

10-03-2014, 08:24 AM	#72
Lionsman81 Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Directly North of South Carolina Posts: 6,265	At the same rate by your standards shouldn't the Tigers fire Dombrowski? After all he gave Verlander a ridiculous contract, signed Joe Nathan to big money and he's had no trouble becoming the most hated Tiger, Trade Jake Thompson your top pitching prospect who has been pegged as a future ace for Soria who hasn't done anything besides pitch poorly and be injured, makes a blockbuster trade that destroys team chemistry and David Price turns out to not be the real thing. Vs. trading away a top prospect to acquire two decent pitches and trading away a bright young star for a star pitcher. Not defending Beane but from what your saying Dombrowski should be fired. __________________ ALWAYS LOOKING FOR DETROIT LIONS, TIGERS, RED WINGS, AND MSU SPARTANS "The agony of victory and the thrill of......well, losing just sucks"- Charles Barkley

10-01-2014, 09:14 PM	#58
thescout Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Little Rock, AR Posts: 3,472 JLhowe02 thescout	Did anyone read moneyball? The entire process was a failure. His big years were when he still had the big names like Giambi, Tejada and Chavez, etc and his system refused to pay guys like that leading to a structure that can't win. He took a winning team and made them worse on purpose.

10-01-2014, 09:39 PM	#59
Tom Oates Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,967 OATES	I've got to believe he is among the highest rated GM's in terms of producing the most wins per $ spent and the most playoff appearances per $ spent. He made a play and traded his big bat for a big arm in an era when starting pitching commands big bucks and home run totals are down, can't fault the logic. It didn't pay off this time. Hardly worth firing him.

10-01-2014, 09:47 PM	#60
gabballplayer14 Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 5,598	I know a certain East Coast team I would love for him to take over.

10-03-2014, 01:08 AM	#71
mwheeler27 Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: NorthEast Kansas Posts: 18,419 mwheeler27 mwheeler27	Aren't there only 2 types of official games in the MLB? Regular season games and playoff games? If it's not a regular season game, (a game EVERY TEAM plays), is it not a playoff game? Pretty simple concept that the wild card games are "playoff" games if you ask me. Heck, by definition, wild card games are playoff games. Not really any sense denying it. It's not even a gray area.