Moneyball.

[livnixon9]

Great movie currently on Foxtel about building a baseball side through F.A.

Premise of the recruiting premise is seeking undervalued talent around the league and building 'an island of misfits'.

Know Sydney have gone close to this premise but is a rare ideal in AFL football. ?, could you go around the league and build a side of players outside a clubs best 22 and build a side that could contend?

 

[SirJimi05]

There's already a thread on this, bro.

 

[forwardflanker]

Won't work in AFL because the physical requirements to play the game limit the numbers of people playing the highest level to a number that every club is able to keep a handle on.

 

[kaiserchief13]

It's all about statistics. In baseball it's a lot more simple. You either get on base,home run or rbi or you go out. In AFL there are many more variables.

 

[chunkylover53]

Do yourself a favour and read the book, much more in-depth and informational. Movie is awesome too though.

 

[chunkylover53]

It's all about statistics. In baseball it's a lot more simple. You either get on base,home run or rbi or you go out. In AFL there are many more variables.

I thought the same until I saw Josh Kennedy start dominating. Wasn't everyones perception was that he was too slow to ever be an out and out gun? Sydney saw it as; who cares if he's too slow, he gets the ball in tight spaces and gets it closer to our goals.

 

[Chewy]

I've heard Sydney mentioned as the "Moneyball" team. This is nothing but complete horseshit. It's funny how in AFL circles, someone talks crap that "sounds good" so everyone else keeps repeating the same shit until it becomes fact. There is NO SIMILARITY between the Sydney Swans and Billy Beane & the Oakland A's.

Oakland made an art form of outperforming their rivals despite spending 1/3rd less than the Red Sox or Yankees on their player payments. They targeted players who had undervalued skills (a bit like Hawthorn recruiting average footballers who could kick really well on their left foot)

Hawthorn is actually a far better example of recruiting players with deficiencies because of their ability to play a certain role: Brent Guerra, David Hale, Josh Gibson, Paul Puopolo, Matthew Suckling, Stephen Gilham, Stuart Dew, etc

What Sydney has done well that gives rise to this Moneyball myth is to pick off a few decent fringe players in the trade market. Anyone who thinks this is Moneyball either hasn't read the book, or they read the book and failed to grasp it..

 

[OB1]

Once again, Sydney is not Moneyball because they have a bigger salary cap than other teams. In Moneyball Oakland didn't go out & buy a new FF every few years (Lockett, Hall - now Tippet) & they certainly weren't in a position to entice young talent out of clubs with bigger offers (Mumford for example). I know it sounds like a romantic story but reality is that the majority of Sydney's team were drafted & developed by the Swans just as every other club does. The only players who really fit the bill as misfits or discards are Morton & maybe Shaw.

 

[livnixon9]

The recruiting fellow at Richmond looks like he is a fan.

 

[chunkylover53]

I've heard Sydney mentioned as the "Moneyball" team. This is nothing but complete horseshit. It's funny how in AFL circles, someone talks crap that "sounds good" so everyone else keeps repeating the same shit until it becomes fact. There is NO SIMILARITY between the Sydney Swans and Billy Beane & the Oakland A's.

Oakland made an art form of outperforming their rivals despite spending 1/3rd less than the Red Sox or Yankees on their player payments. They targeted players who had undervalued skills (a bit like Hawthorn recruiting average footballers who could kick really well on their left foot)

What Sydney has done well is to pick off a few decent fringe players in the trade market. Anyone who thinks this is Moneyball either hasn't read the book, or they read the book and failed to grasp it..

In 2004 Swans chairman Richard Colless handed Michael Lewis' book Moneyball, later adapted into a movie, to Sydney's football department.

The book identified many of the faults then coach Paul Roos' had seen in the AFL draft.


"The concept of the draft is flawed," Roos said .

"How can you pick the 10th best kid in the under-18s?

"You're talking about 17 and 18-year-old kids. Would I have been drafted at that age? I don't know."

In his second full year as coach, Roos put his theory to the test and traded away his first pick (selection 15, Lynden Dunn) in the 2004

draft to Melbourne Demons and signed a second-string ruckman called Darren Jolly.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/tra...-movie-moneyball/story-fna8vsun-1226192182692

 

[MR]

The recruiting fellow at Richmond looks like he is a fan.

It's been mentioned a few times that we've adopted the 'Moneyball' policy.

 

[Turbocat]

The main fundamental in Moneyball is finding a way to build a competitive team when everyone else has more money , especially the NY Yankees's. Syd can fool themselves with this Moneyball wank if they want , they are the exact opposite.

For example Mumford was not a Moneyball selection as the hypocrite Roos proclaims , he was a Yankee selection. He was drawn to them by money , just like Tippet now. So , Sydney don't rely on Moneyball principles they rely on Yankee principles of having more money and thus create movement. Occasionally they might pick up scraps but generally thats because everyone else can not keep afford the talent. Hawthorn, Geelong , Crows etc.

Far closer to Moneyball is the allocation of wealth thru draft ie a team who finishes high continually get last picks for years on end and thus becomes poor in player stock. They must attempt to find a way to beat the evening system that the draft is by finding overlooked players ie Podsiadly. So a team like Geelong can find a way to remain competitive without dropping down to gain early draft picks (wealth) then that is AFL Moneyball.

 

[Maddhew]

Once again, Sydney is not Moneyball because they have a bigger salary cap than other teams. In Moneyball Oakland didn't go out & buy a new FF every few years (Lockett, Hall - now Tippet) & they certainly weren't in a position to entice young talent out of clubs with bigger offers (Mumford for example). I know it sounds like a romantic story but reality is that the majority of Sydney's team were drafted & developed by the Swans just as every other club does. The only players who really fit the bill as misfits or discards are Morton & maybe Shaw.

this is really catching on

 

[My Red Card Account]

I've heard Sydney mentioned as the "Moneyball" team. This is nothing but complete horseshit. It's funny how in AFL circles, someone talks crap that "sounds good" so everyone else keeps repeating the same shit until it becomes fact. There is NO SIMILARITY between the Sydney Swans and Billy Beane & the Oakland A's.

Oakland made an art form of outperforming their rivals despite spending 1/3rd less than the Red Sox or Yankees on their player payments. They targeted players who had undervalued skills (a bit like Hawthorn recruiting average footballers who could kick really well on their left foot)

Hawthorn is actually a far better example of recruiting players with deficiencies because of their ability to play a certain role: Brent Guerra, David Hale, Josh Gibson, Paul Puopolo, Matthew Suckling, Stephen Gilham, Stuart Dew, etc

What Sydney has done well that gives rise to this Moneyball myth is to pick off a few decent fringe players in the trade market. Anyone who thinks this is Moneyball either hasn't read the book, or they read the book and failed to grasp it..

Bollocks. Hawthorn had 11 Top20 draft picks in the GF, Sydney had 3.

heh heh, hawthorn - the moneyball team....you're funny.

 

[Chewy]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/tra...-movie-moneyball/story-fna8vsun-1226192182692

Is that it? Sydney traded their 1st pick a few times and it's Moneyball. Pfft. Sounds to me like Paul Roos is talking up his own genius again. He read a book and he thinks he is Billy Beane.

Teenage footballers who were drafted by Sydney: Adam Goodes, Jude Bolton, Jarrad McVeigh, Kieren Jack, Ryan O'Keefe, Lewis Roberts-Thomson, Nic Malceski, Heath Grundy, Craig Bird, Dan Hannebery, Alex Johnston, Nick Smith, Luke Parker, Sam Reid, Gary Rohan, Jesse White.

Lewis Jetta was 20.

Players recruited from other clubs: Ted Richards, Andrejs Everitt, Shane Mumford, Mitch Morton, Martin Mattner, Mark Seaby, Ben McGlynn, Josh Kennedy. (Half of these guys were traded for a first round pick)

Mike Pyke was from left field.

Who exactly are these Moneyball recruits?

 

[Maddhew]

Is that it? Sydney traded their 1st pick a few times and it's Moneyball. Pfft. Sounds to me like Paul Roos is talking up his own genius again. He read a book and he thinks he is Billy Beane.

Teenage footballers who were drafted by Sydney: Adam Goodes, Jude Bolton, Jarrad McVeigh, Kieren Jack, Ryan O'Keefe, Lewis Roberts-Thomson, Nic Malceski, Heath Grundy, Craig Bird, Dan Hannebery, Alex Johnston, Nick Smith, Luke Parker, Sam Reid, Gary Rohan, Jesse White.

Lewis Jetta was 20.

Players recruited from other clubs: Ted Richards, Andrejs Everitt, Shane Mumford, Mitch Morton, Martin Mattner, Mark Seaby, Ben McGlynn, Josh Kennedy. (Half of these guys were traded for a first round pick)

Mike Pyke was from left field.

Who exactly are these Moneyball recruits?

Arguably all of these guys

 

[Truetiger]

One of the most Boring films ever made.

 

[Marlowe]

I preferred 'Bailey Ball'.Talk about players with deficiencies!

 

[Morris Major]

The main fundamental in Moneyball is finding a way to build a competitive team when everyone else has more money , especially the NY Yankees's.

So a team like Geelong can find a way to remain competitive without dropping down to gain early draft picks (wealth) then that is AFL Moneyball.

It helps when you get talents like Scarlett, Ablett and Hawkins at pick 600. Bartel and Selwood are both top 10 picks, too. Not taking away from the way Geelong have developed their team over the last 10 years, but it's hardly AFL Moneyball.

 

[My Red Card Account]

The main fundamental in Moneyball is finding a way to build a competitive team when everyone else has more money , especially the NY Yankees's. Syd can fool themselves with this Moneyball wank if they want , they are the exact opposite.

For example Mumford was not a Moneyball selection as the hypocrite Roos proclaims , he was a Yankee selection. He was drawn to them by money , just like Tippet now. So , Sydney don't rely on Moneyball principles they rely on Yankee principles of having more money and thus create movement. Occasionally they might pick up scraps but generally thats because everyone else can not keep afford the talent. Hawthorn, Geelong , Crows etc.

Lol, havent quite figured out how that CoL allowance works have you?

Also Mumford left because he played rnds 4-21 of 2009 for the cats and then they dropped him for the finals. He was pissed-off at this, then Sydney offered him a long-term contract the cats couldnt match due to the future negotiations for expiring contracts for selwood/chapman amongst others - also they didnt see (and neither did Sydney) that Mumford would become the powerhouse he became (and now his knee is screwed anyway so it doesnt matter). The money was hardly the factor.

...yankee selection....pft

 

[chunkylover53]

I didn't say Hawthorn were the "Moneyball" team, you FLOG

I said some of Hawthorn's recruiting methods were a hell of a lot closer to the ideas espoused in Moneyball than any of Sydney's methods. Hawthorn recruited a number of players from outside the box - 'average' footballers who possessed the certain traits they deemed to be undervalued (eg. left footers who had the ability to kick well)

Have you even read Moneyball? Or are you simply parroting something you heard?

Oh god.

 

[My Red Card Account]

I didn't say Hawthorn were the "Moneyball" team, you FLOG

I said some of Hawthorn's recruiting methods were a hell of a lot closer to the ideas espoused in Moneyball than any of Sydney's methods. Hawthorn recruited a number of players from outside the box - 'average' footballers who possessed the certain traits they deemed to be undervalued (eg. left footers who had the ability to kick well)

Have you even read Moneyball? Or are you simply parroting something you heard?

lol, please tell me more about how hawthorn's recruitment is more similar to moneyball than sydney's recruitment....

try and do it without flogging....

 

[Chewy]

Oh god.

Have you actually read Moneyball?

If so, please list all the similarities between Sydney and Oakland

I'd be really interested to hear it.

 

[My Red Card Account]

Have you actually read Moneyball?

If so, please list all the similarities between Sydney and Oakland

I'd be really interested to hear it.

this is your story re hawthorn/moneyball, not ours...please continue....

....what is that fapping noise?

 

[Chewy]

lol, please tell me more about how hawthorn's recruitment is more similar to moneyball than sydney's recruitment....

try and do it without flogging....

Same goes for you too, mate

Instead of taking shit, how about you explain the similarities between the Sydney Swans and the Oakland A's

Please let me know why you think Sydney should be regarded as the Moneyball team.