• Moneyball DVD

    Posted by on January 8th, 2012 · Comments (7)

    The Moneyball DVD is being released next Tuesday.  If you saw the movie and liked it, here’s your chance to own it.  And, if you read the book and have yet to see the movie, here’s your chance to check it out at home.  Lastly, of course, if you haven’t read the book or seen the movie, here’s your chance to see what everyone is talking about…

    I’ve seen the movie – and have read the book – and I thought the film was an interesting look at the inner-workings of a major league baseball team.  My wife saw the movie with me – and knew nothing about the story prior to that – and found the film to be an effective depiction of a team that was supposed to be terrible and who went on to win 20 games in a row (and advance to the post-season) using unconventional means.

    Hey, just for fun, watch the movie and see where you can spot this item.

    Of course, the DVD and Blu-ray come with extras.  They’re listed below.  Again, the Moneyball DVD is being released on January 12th.

    MONEYBALL DVD Special Features include:

    • Deleted Scenes
    • Blooper with Brad Pitt and Jonah Hill
    • Billy Beane: Re-Inventing the Game  (In this featurette we introduce the real Billy Beane, ex-professional baseball player and current General Manager of the Oakland A’s and reveal the history behind the story of “Moneyball”. Billy Beane explains his struggles being a small market GM and how having a third of the payroll of the Yankees or Red Sox forced him to think differently in drafting the 2002 team and to find value in players using On Base Percentage and Sabermetrics. We will also look at how the “Moneyball” concept is still influencing players and teams today. Director Bennett Miller, screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and author Michael Lewis round out the story of “Moneyball” and how Billy Beane took on an institution and beat the odds of an unfair game.)
    • Moneyball: Playing The Game

    Exclusive to Blu-ray:

    • Drafting The Team
    • Adapting Moneyball  (No book adaptation is without its challenges and “Moneyball” was no exception. Author Michael Lewis, Screenwriters Aaron Sorkin and Steve Zaillian and director Bennett Miller discuss the themes of the book; being an underdog, taking on an institution and re-thinking tradition as well as what drew them to the project and why this story has meaning beyond the world of baseball. Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill and Philip Seymour Hoffman introduce us to their characters and tell us why this was a project they wanted to be a part of.)
    • Exclusive MLB® 12 The Show Preview Trailer

    Comments on Moneyball DVD

    1. clintfsu813
      January 8th, 2012 | 9:02 am

      Great movie. Quite anti-Yankees tho, lol. I was decked out in NYY gear. Thought I might get tarred and feathered afterwards. Was awesome seeing The Flip on the big screen!

    2. Kamieniecki
      August 19th, 2013 | 1:46 pm

      “Columbia Pictures has purchased the rights to the story of N.Y. Yankees general manager Brian Cashman; an account of a former Division III college baseball player’s unsuccessful attempts to assemble pennant-winning baseball teams with the largest annual budgets in Major League Baseball history by employing sophisticated approaches to scouting and player analysis to direct the organization’s baseball operations…

      Plot
      Brian Cashman is upset with his reputation as an executive promoted to his position through his father’s close friendship with George M. Steinbrenner, principal owner of the N.Y. Yankees, and as a G.M. whose championships and success are more appropriately assigned to his predecessors in the organization – Harding Peterson, Gene Michael, and Bob Watson, and others…

      With the impending departure of star players, Cashman attempts to devise a strategy for assembling more competitive teams, but struggles to overcome limited intelligence and an inability to evaluate talent at any level. During a visit to the Boston Red Sox, Cashman becomes acquainted with Theo Epstein, a young Harvard graduate with more than limited intelligence and an ability to evaluate talent at every level…

      Cashman meets Louise Meanwell, a British citizen with a long history of stalking and harassment. While her mother is out of town for the weekend, Cashman begins an affair with Louise; months later Cashman tries to end the affair, and she begins to show up at various places unannounced to see him. She waits at his office at Yankees Stadium one day to invite him to the opera, but he turns her down. She continues to telephone his office until he tells his secretary that he will no longer take her calls. She then confronts him saying that she is pregnant; although he wants nothing to do with her, she argues that he must take responsibility. He goes to her apartment to confront her about her actions which results in a violent scuffle. In response, she replies, ‘I will not be ignored’…”

      The biographical sports drama is currently under development. A release date for the film has not yet been decided, but according to sources with industry knowledge the title of the film is expected to be ‘Meanwell Ball,’ ‘Balling Miss Meanwell,’ or ‘Fatal Administration’…

      http://movies.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/movies/meanwell-ball-by-bennett-miller.html

      @ FakeGeneMichaels:
      @ Mr. October:

    3. Mr. October
      August 19th, 2013 | 5:29 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      “Columbia Pictures has purchased the rights to the story of N.Y. Yankees general manager Brian Cashman…

      The biographical sports drama is currently under development. A release date for the film has not yet been decided, but according to sources with industry knowledge the title of the film is expected to be ‘Meanwell Ball,’ ‘Balling Miss Meanwell,’ or ‘Fatal Administration’…

      LOL…

    4. Kamieniecki
      August 30th, 2013 | 7:54 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      I had not read the book Moneyball, nor seen the film, until today:

      The film opens with Game 5 of the 2001 ALDS between the Yankees and A’s or “$114,457,786 vs. $39,722,689,” and the A’s down 2-0 when Bernie Williams strikes out but reaches first base on an errant throw by the catcher (Myers); this play is followed by a cut to a slow ground ball mishandled by the third baseman (Chavez), and an announcer noting, “…the A’s are taking it and throwing it all over the field, and it might lead to their elimination.” The A’s lose, with Mulder (2.45) looking on having pitched better than Clemens (5.40).

      Beane implores ownership for help; “… It just didn’t fall our way… I can’t compete with a $120 million payroll with $38 million… I’m asking for just a little bit of help, just get me a little closer and I will get you a championship team.” Ownership balks, and after Cleveland’s GM, Shapiro, jokes Beane should ask Giambi for some money, Beane comes to the conclusion a new approach is required to field teams that can build bigger leads and thus a greater margin for error in a future elimination game. “This is the new direction of the Oakland A’s. We are card counters at the black jack table, and we’re gonna turn the odds on the casino.” Counting cards at a black jack table – not rolling dice at a craps table.

      The casino in this case was Yankee Stadium, or The House. “It’s an unfair game… If we try to play like the Yankees in [our strategy sessions], we will lose to the Yankees out [on the field].” Beane attempted to turn the odds on the casino, but still lost in 2002. Brand and Henry remind Beane that while the A’s lost, he didn’t fail. He didn’t fail because he did his job in getting the A’s to the playoffs without Giambi or Damon, and with only $38 million; failure is getting to the playoffs with a Giambi and a Damon, or with $120 million, and not winning.

      The film closes in 2002, with Henry noting, “… for $41 million you built a playoff team… you lost Giambi, Damon, Isringhausen, Pena… you won the exact same number of games [Cashman] won, but [Cashman] spent $1.4 million per win, and you paid $260,000…” If anyone failed, it was Cashman, not Beane; Henry doesn’t offer to make Cashman the highest-paid GM in professional sports when both GMs won the same number of games and both GMs were eliminated in the ALDS. Henry’s Red Sox win in 2004 “embracing [Beane's] philosophy,” and spending $1.3 million per win. “Everything else is {bleeping) luck” refers to Beane: he has no control over the postseason in an “unfair game.”

      The name of the film is Moneyball: it’s not LuckBall, UnpredictableBall, or CrapshootBall. The words luck, unpredictable, and crapshoot are not used in the film once. There’s nothing, in the film at least, to suggest Cashman’s .490 postseason winning pct. since 2005 with the highest payrolls in baseball is considered success in Beane’s opinion, the filmmakers’s opinion, or anyone’s opinion.

    5. Evan3457
      August 30th, 2013 | 8:52 pm

      Kamieniecki wrote:

      @ Evan3457:
      I had not read the book Moneyball, nor seen the film, until today:

      filmmakers’s opinion, or anyone’s opinion.

      Continuing to miss the point.

    6. Kamieniecki
      August 31st, 2013 | 9:53 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      Interestingly, Beane’s not superstitious, as the film seemed to imply (Pitt):

      “There was a reason behind that, which we didn’t explain. Billy said that he gets so emotional watching the game that he makes emotional decisions from it. He didn’t want that to cloud his judgment. He’s only interested in the outcome, not as the game is unfolding… He calls himself a danger to baseball if he watches the games… I’d imagine that chairs and radios would have suffered at his hands, too.”

      Evan3457 wrote:

      Continuing to miss the point.

      The point is very clear:

      “‘…My (stuff) doesn’t work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is (bleeping) luck;’” translation:

      “Beane’s (stuff) works for Beane in the regular season with less payroll disparity. Beane’s (stuff) doesn’t work for Beane in the playoffs with more payroll disparity. Beane’s job as a small-market GM is to get the team to the playoffs. It’s not impossible for Beane’s team to win three straight series when there’s more payroll disparity, but he does need luck.”

      Or: “‘…My (stuff) does work in the playoffs with a big-market payroll. A big-market GM’s job is to get the team to the playoffs and to win. What happens in the playoffs for a big-market team is not (bleeping) luck. Cashman has a .490 WPCT in the playoffs since 2005 because he didn’t do his job, not because of (bleeping) luck.’”

      As in the film, the Red Sox didn’t need Beane to get to the playoffs, the Red Sox needed Beane to win in the playoffs with less money than the Yankees – and they did in 2004 and 2007. Beane’s (stuff) worked in the playoffs for a big market team because there was less payroll parity.

      When the 2002 A’s won 20 straight games, were any of those wins against New York, Boston, Texas, or Seattle – the teams with the highest payrolls in the AL? No.
      Wins 13-20 came against teams with payrolls less than $50 million. 11 of those 20 wins came against teams with payrolls less than $60 million – his (bleep) works in the regular season, but not in the postseason against the top starters of a $100-30 million teams playing at 100% for two or three consecutive series – not without luck.

      Pretty simple point.

    7. Sweet Lou
      September 1st, 2013 | 3:54 pm

      @ Evan3457:
      @ Kamieniecki:
      Funny how in the film, when the A’s get off to a poor start in the first half of the 2002 season, the fans blame Beane, or the GM – not the owner for an arbitrary payroll cap.

      “A point of contention during… Moneyball is Carlos Pena. Manager Art Howe wanted to play Pena because he claimed that he was a better first baseman, while Beane wanted Hatteberg to play because he “got on base”… Beane ends up trading Pena away so Howe couldn’t play him anymore.

      In reality, the Athletics sent Pena, Bonderman, and German to the Tigers, and got Ted Lilly, John-Ford Griffin and Jason Arnold from the Yankees, and much needed cash from the Tigers…

      Lilly played a year and a half with the A’s, pitching 201.2 innings. He earned a 2.3 WAR while making just $453,575 (and part of that could be offset with the money the A’s got in the trade), giving him a phenomenal WASP of 197.2… Lilly alone seems to tilt this trade to the Athletics. The Tigers got better overall WAR in the trade, but the Athletics got much more value [courtesy of Brian Cashman].”

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.