Micheal Lewis’ Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair game is a story about Billy Beane. General manager of the Oakland Athletics (A’s) who used statistical analysis to win the baseball league. Beane was once a great baseball player during high school. Judging from his potential and skill, many baseball scouts wanted him in the team. However, he struggled in the minor league and never made it to the major league. Due to his unsuccessful career as a player, he retired as he was no longer passionate about playing baseball anymore. After that, he began working as a scout and became the general manager of the Oakland A’s in 1997.
Oakland A’s has the league’s lowest payrolls. Therefore, they could not afford to buy high-paying athletes in order to create a winning team. Beane thought that it was an unfair game since they had to compete with other teams that has high payrolls, such as New York Yankees and Texas Rangers. The wealthier team definitely has higher chances of winning with a stack of skillful players in their team while “the poor team was forced to find bargains: young players and whatever older guys the market had undervalued” (Lewis 250). Despite of the unfair situation, the A’s had an amazing regular season in 2002. With the help of Paul DePodesta, a Harvard graduate …show more content…
Coming from a country where baseball is not a major sport, I literally know nothing about it prior of reading this book. Also, I did not know that this book was very popular until they produced a film based on it. The film helps me to understand the book and the baseball jargon better. About the difference between the film and the book, the film is much more dramatic than the book. Especially the part when Oakland A won their 20th straight regular season game. Also, the film also included many scenes on Beane and his daughter whereas the book is more concentrated about baseball and statistics. To me the movie is less dry compared to the
Oakland A’s has the league’s lowest payrolls. Therefore, they could not afford to buy high-paying athletes in order to create a winning team. Beane thought that it was an unfair game since they had to compete with other teams that has high payrolls, such as New York Yankees and Texas Rangers. The wealthier team definitely has higher chances of winning with a stack of skillful players in their team while “the poor team was forced to find bargains: young players and whatever older guys the market had undervalued” (Lewis 250). Despite of the unfair situation, the A’s had an amazing regular season in 2002. With the help of Paul DePodesta, a Harvard graduate …show more content…
Coming from a country where baseball is not a major sport, I literally know nothing about it prior of reading this book. Also, I did not know that this book was very popular until they produced a film based on it. The film helps me to understand the book and the baseball jargon better. About the difference between the film and the book, the film is much more dramatic than the book. Especially the part when Oakland A won their 20th straight regular season game. Also, the film also included many scenes on Beane and his daughter whereas the book is more concentrated about baseball and statistics. To me the movie is less dry compared to the