yes, soccer needs continuity above any other sport, but a dozen or so games together for last years final squad is not much to take apart…sure they looked like a quality bunch, but it was clearly lacking that top-notch finisher up top.

IF Doyle manages to secure that elusive top-notch finisher, then we will all forget about these tumultuous times. But if not, well then, it is truly a shame, but nonetheless a risk that was worth taking.

The problem is that while baseball is a sport with a million different statistics which can be endlessly analyzed, soccer is a sport that has traditionally been less easily quantified. This has been changing in recent years, an example being the distance covered statistic they flash sometimes. Beane has made some presentations to Premiership teams, outlining how Moneyball statistical analysis could be used in soccer to identify high value, low cost players.

My problem is that I am skeptical that statistical analysis can be as useful in identifying players in soccer as it has been in baseball. I believe that there are many aspects of a soccer player’s game that can’t be pinned down as statistics. I may be wrong, but that’s my feeling. I also feel that plugging players in an out of the lineup every years as the A’s seem to do will have a detrimental effect on the team. The top teams in the MLS are usually those with continuity (think Houston, New England, even Columbus was built up slowly). I may also be wrong in blaming Moneyball philosophy for the Quakes’ treatment of Cannon and O’Brien, but there has been a marked shift in this Quakes organization from the past Quakes organization as regards treatment of players. Your example of the 2001 team is correct in that that championship was not based on continuity, but the teams of the succeeding years were definitely built on a core group with a premium placed on teamwork, hard work, and discipline. Many players in those years credited the player-friendly atmosphere that Yallop creates with the team’s success. I worry that cutthroat cost-benefit analysis leaves much to be desired.

I am well aware that there is a book about Billy Beane’s approach to running the Oakland Athletics. Watching the phenomenon play out over the past few years, I have noticed how often people use the word “moneyball” as shorthand for whatever it is they want to criticize. Beane’s philosophies on running a franchise can not be reduced to “building from bargain parts.” I was hoping Ian would offer some details about his understanding of “Moneyball” with specifics. I said it would help if he defined “moneyball” because I felt he was being vague about the concept, and I looked forward to something more precise.

Finally, while I agree that continuity has advantages, I’m not sure the Earthquakes are the best example of this. The Quakes went from the laughing stock of MLS to the league champions when they hired a new coach taking on his first head coaching job (who then hired an inexperienced ex-player as his assistant), and added Ekelund, Donovan, Lagos, Agoos, and DeRosario to the roster. I don’t think you can credit continuity for that first MLS title.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyball

Lew Wolff also owns the Oakland As. Billy Beane is a “consultant” for the Quakes and a huge soccer fan who is actively working to convert his Moneyball tactics to professional soccer.

Oh lookie… at the bottom of that wikipedia entry. Brad Pitt is now attached to the upcoming movie so soon everyone will know what the eff Moneyball is. Hooray.