Why Bagwell considers 2002 ‘Moneyball’ A’s a ‘farce’ originally appeared on NBC Sports Bayarea
Former Houston Astros slugger Jeff Bagwell isn’t a fan of the movie “Moneyball.”
And it’s not because he has any issue with Brad Pitt’s nomination for an Academy Award for Best Actor.
During the Houston Astros broadcast on AT&T SportsNet on Tuesday, a social media poll was proposed for fans to vote on their favorite recent historically-based baseball movie. The four options were “42,” “Million Dollar Arm,” “The Rookie” and “Moneyball” — the 2011 film that tells the story of general manager Billy Beane changing the game of baseball on his analytic-based assembly of the 2002 Athletics.
The plot of “Moneyball” focuses on Beane guiding Oakland to 103 wins and a first-place finish in the AL West despite operating on a low budget, finding under-the-radar players like first baseman Scott Hatteberg and relief pitcher Chad Bradford and relying on statistics like on-base percentage and OPS.
“I think even the concept [is a farce],” Bagwell said. “They had the three best pitchers in baseball. You could’ve stick anybody out there. My son’s little league team could have been out there with those three pitchers. And they get all this hype.”
The three pitchers Bagwell is referring to are Tim Hudson, Barry Zito and Mark Mulder.
Zito won the AL Cy Young Award that year by logging a 23-5 record and 2.75 ERA while Hudson (2.98 ERA) and Mulder (3.47 ERA) also starred in manager Art Howe’s rotation.
“The [Atlanta] Braves won for 15 years with [Greg] Maddux, [John] Smoltz and [Tom] Glavine,” Bagwell continued. “They had to score three runs a game. And won 15 years in a row. Why aren’t they called the ‘Moneyball’ team?”
Bagwell might be missing the entire point of the movie. The A’s had a payroll of just over $40 million that season, which ranked 28th out of 30 MLB teams. The 1995 Braves, who won the World Series with that trio in their rotation, had the…