Moneyball

Kinda thinkin' that if the A's hadn't been one of the worst teams in the AL for the past 3 seasons that there'd be more momentum behind this picture. This current season is pretty much the nail in the coffin for the Moneyball fallacy imo. I guess they could switch teams to the Red Sox and call it Fever Pitch 2: The Jamesian Prophecies.

of course, the A's current record has absolutlely fucking nothing to do with the validity of Beane's approach in the period the book covers, an approach that's generally embraced to some degree by nearly every MLB team.

Obv a Hollywood studio wants a feelgood Big Game sports movie for the droolers. Maybe one about Ryan Ludwick's current MVP season, right Steve?

I'm still trying to figure out the $50M price tag.

― Alex in SF, Monday, June 22, 2009 10:27 AM (2 hours ago) Bookmark

it's all a publicity stunt, now soderbergh will make it sex, lies, and videotape style for only $5 million

How to make $45M disappear from budget: scrap animated Bill James, replace with James Murphy in fat suit/beard.

What else?

Don't use MLB, but instead completely make up team names/jerseys/et all. Like the Philadelphia A's or the Boston Braves.

dont use MLB, but instead make it about a made-up sport

shoot it on-location in steven soderbergh's living room

Change it to badminton, call it Moneybirdie, and have Brad Pitt stop everything every few minutes to wink broadly at the camera.

i would love to see the dykstra footage tbh

just have Dykstra shoot the whole thing a la Jack Black in Be Kind Rewind.

pretty sure I couldn't bear to watch that tbh

so it wouldnt be that different from soderbergs last couple movies

http://www.icecoldservice.com/images/ics-jpeg.jpg

Heh

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/The-Moneyball-script-complete-with-Billy-Beane-;_ylt=AicSLxT7AbWq4uwuWmKz9UARvLYF?urn=mlb,172463

heh2

I hate anachronistic screenwriters...

You didn't have to take off your shoes at the Oakland airport until after the shoe bomber Richard Reid (sp?)... I want to say xmas 2001. Does anyone fact check scripts anymore?

fuck bitches

eat bloomin onions

from the comments:
Billy Beane once got busy in a Burger King bathroom.

I've been reading this screenplay on and off all day, and I can say with some certainty that the movie would've been boring as hell.

Well this was the non-doctored version. I'm sure Che-ized version would've rocked!

i think probly less boring than INKLORIUS BESTERDS

I'd rather skip both of them, honestly.

"i think probly less boring than INKLORIUS BESTERDS"

I think that looks fun enough, but I don't expect you to agree.

only if Cloris Leachman's role is a reprise of Frau Blucher.

It very well might be.

Oooh look three Spielberg films are in production/been announced. Better go anticipate the hell out of those pieces of shit.

take it to ILE ladies

aint sayin shit here.

anyway:

http://scriptshadow.blogspot.com/2009/06/what-happened-tomoneyball.html

"The biggest faux-pas is the handling of the all-important 'on-base percentage' stat. This is what the Oakland A's figured out that no one else did -- the hidden statistic which is the key to their success. It's what allows them to compete with half the salary of all the other teams. This is the movie. Yet here it's treated like an afterthought.

"In fact, I couldn't even tell you what the A's secret to success was in Soderbergh's draft. It's implied that there's a spreadsheet involved but the explanation stops there. A spreadsheet of never-explained numbers? That's how the team wins? That's your hook for the movie?"

Both of these sound awful.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dodgerthoughts/2009/07/moneyball-movie-is-back-on.html

so now the movie will be LAME

che was so fucken wack. with sorkin on board all they need to do now is ditch soderBOREgh and pitt and that's the movie right there.

Making Moneyball into a movie has got to be one of the worst ideas of all time.

Team 2009 payroll
New York Yankees $201,449,189
New York Mets $149,373,987
Chicago Cubs $134,809,000
Boston Red Sox $121,745,999
Detroit Tigers $115,085,145
Los Angeles Angels $113,709,00
Philadelphia Phillies $113,004,046
Houston Astros $102,996,414
Los Angeles Dodgers $100,414,592
Seattle Mariners $98,904,166
Atlanta Braves $96,726,166
Chicago White Sox $96,068,500
San Francisco Giants $82,616,450
Cleveland Indians $81,579,166
Toronto Blue Jays $80,538,300
Milwaukee Brewers $80,182,502
St. Louis Cardinals $77,605,109
Colorado Rockies $75,201,000
Cincinnati Reds $73,558,500
Arizona Diamondbacks $73,516,666
Kansas City Royals $70,519,333
Texas Rangers $68,178,798
Baltimore Orioles $67,101,666
Minnesota Twins $65,299,266
Tampa Bay Rays $63,313,034
Oakland Athletics $62,310,000
Washington Nationals $60,328,000
Pittsburgh Pirates $48,693,000
San Diego Padres $43,734,200
Florida Marlins $36,834,000

Moneyball II should be about the Marlins.

Astros holy shit. Drayton McLane needs a refund on his money.

imagine how much Dan will hate the A's next year, when they're good again.

shit got heated

I don't want to speak for Dan but you really think the A's are gonna have a good year next year?

Here is how Moneyball fits into the A's decade
Oakland A's win/loss/%/notes
2000 91W-70L .565 ALW Pennant - ALDS loss
2001 102W-60L .630 ALWC - ALDS loss
2002 103W-59L .636 ALW Pennant - ALDS loss
2003 96W-66L .593 ALW Pennant - ALDS loss
*** MONEY BALL PUBLISHED ***
2004 91W-71L .562 2nd in ALW
2005 88W- 74L .543 2nd in ALW
2006 93W-69L .574 ALW Pennant - ALCS loss
2007 76W- 86L .469 3rd in ALW
2008 75W- 86L .466 3rd in ALW
2009 75W-83L .475 4th in ALW

I think they'll have a good year next year, sure.

by good, do you mean better/improved (ie, 80-85 wins?)

or do you mean like, good/contending (90-95 wins?)

just curious... I mean Rajai Davis is their best player right?

they're about 2 or 3 good hitters away from that i'd say

chris carter could be one of them

"or do you mean like, good/contending (90-95 wins?)"

It's entirely possible. They've got a lot of good offensive young talent. Pretty sure the teams immediately prior 1999 weren't much worse than A's were this year and they managed to turn it around pretty quickly.

It's not like their R/RA was that bad this year actually. Their Pythag W/L was about .500.

"Shasta" expects the Marlins to win 102

Drunk posting again Morbs?

tbf, I see a hell of a lot more young talent on the Marlins than I do on the A's.

The A's have had six years of promising young, offensive talent that has been frankly, pretty fucking offensive. What was the last trade that went "right" for the A's? Jack Cust?

Uh the Haren trade still looks pretty good right now. As does the Swisher deal.

"The A's have had six years of promising young, offensive talent that has been frankly, pretty fucking offensive."

It's not been a good run, I'll admit.

When your best homegrown position has been Nick Swisher or Kurt Suzuki you def need a lot of help and the A's haven't gotten it.