So I've seen on a few posts, the MFC are going down the "money ball" tactic.

This kind of worries me. The reason being is the money ball tactic was used for a club that had far less resources and money to throw at players, and therefore could not compete.

If, in fact, we're going down this pathway when we're on an even playing field, it doesn't sit well.

The fact that we've been on an even playing field basically just shows how poor one or more of the following has been:

Recruitment

Development

Culture/Standards

I'd be keen to hear more from those that have heard it from somewhere that we're heading down the money ball tactic.

We should get Petropolous on first base.

wtf

No nothing about Moneyball even fell asleep watching the movie. lol

But The Newsroom I have been following, in fact just watched episode 9 and loving it each week.

Moneyball tactic? Seems like it'd be lazy to call it that but there are certainly aspects (from the movie anyway) I'd like to see implemented.

Seems like too many players on the list are happy with it being an occupation and losing is just a part of it. I want to see guys on the list who fully grasp the opportunity and treat every game like it's a final. Not to stop giving it your all when a hefty deficit gets put on the scoreboard against you.

Plenty of untried goers in the WAFL, in the VFL, in the SANFL that have been overlooked for whatever reasons. So many clubs have unearthed heaps of them since mature aged rookie selections came in and there are that many more out there it's not funny. Ready for a crack at AFL level and have that hunger a lot of players here seem to lack.

If giving a lot more opportunities to these guys is a part of Neeld's agenda then I can see things turning around for this side very quickly.

Moneyball is all about lateral thinking. Its about looking at things in a different light. Our past globes have been far from illuminating !!

Fabremetrics?

Does Travis Cloke have a good on base percentage?

So I've seen on a few posts, the MFC are going down the "money ball" tactic.

This kind of worries me. The reason being is the money ball tactic was used for a club that had far less resources and money to throw at players, and therefore could not compete.

If, in fact, we're going down this pathway when we're on an even playing field, it doesn't sit well.

The fact that we've been on an even playing field basically just shows how poor one or more of the following has been:

Recruitment

Development

Culture/Standards

I'd be keen to hear more from those that have heard it from somewhere that we're heading down the money ball tactic.

Didn't really think it was that hard to grasp recruiting a player who is performing, but is not on a high wage or getting an opportunity? The concept isn't that different to value investing or put simply shopping for a bargain. Makes perfect sense to do it. Sydney have recruited senior players that fit into their system of play via the draft after other clubs didn't value the players released / traded. If the price is right & they will add quality to your list the question is why wouldn't you? The club has to make immediate improvements to the list & drafting a whole heap of 18 year olds isn't going to have the immediate impact that recruiting good senior players will. As long as they don't give up any 1st & 2nd round picks to do it the club should benefit.

this 'moneyball' option is stupid and the last thing the MFC needs

We havent had a superstar since Robbie Flower.

SO please go out and get us a couple with all that cash we have.

Dont waste money on rejects from other clubs, until we have landed some more big fish, to add to the Mitch Clark coup.

Moneyball is all about lateral thinking. Its about looking at things in a different light. Our past globes have been far from illuminating !!

I guess if it means thinking outside the norm, then yes we should be doing that, not necessarily as the basis of our recruiting but as a part.

Presumably when we have had all these fantastic high picks over the past decayed decade we have been "conventional" with the metrics:

- U18 performances playing against boys;

- beep tests;

- other draft camp metrics like skin folds etc etc.

I dont know but is there any degree of psychometric assessment?:

- 'mongrel';

- passion;

- absolute desire to be the best.

So maybe, and our recent recruiting has demonstrated that fairly clearly, using the conventional criteria is not necessarily what is best long term for the club.

If that is what is meant by this post header then bring it on.

Podsiadly, Barlow, Magner, Saad - all have shown that there is hunger outside the conventional U18 pathway that can be tapped.

There are people posting about 'Moneyball' above who have little or limited understanding of what it entails.

As a system it doesn't preclude clubs from trying to sign star players.

Here are some references ...

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

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7328539/the-economics-moneyball

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

There are people posting about 'Moneyball' above who have little or limited understanding of what it entails.

As a system it doesn't preclude clubs from trying to sign star players.

Here are some references ...

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

http://www.grantland...omics-moneyball

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Sabermetrics

Exactly - it does involve or requires thinking in a wider sphere, and as I said not just on U18 and draft camp assesments.

I like the money ball tactic.

My interpretation on the theory is to say that recruters should look at the cold hard stats and outcomes rather than put faith into intangables like how good a players kicking style is or how much upside a player has.

I would have no issues with using picks 50ish in the draft on Players like Valenti and Blackwell - proven ball winners at WAFL / VFL level who have played at AFL level before.

I would have no issues with using picks 50ish in the draft on Players like Valenti and Blackwell - proven ball winners at WAFL / VFL level who have played at AFL level before.

We've already seen that Valenti is yet another NQR list-clogger.

Can't believe how short the memories of some here are.

Moneyball tactic? Seems like it'd be lazy to call it that but there are certainly aspects (from the movie anyway) I'd like to see implemented.

Moneyball as applied in the movie is a concept that doesn't hold up quite as well in a sport reliant on team players working together as opposed to the more unique individual aspects of Baseball (which is not to say Baseball isn't a team sport, just that it is a very different one than football field team sports).

I agree with the idea of thinking in a wider sphere as outlined by some above, but really it seems like this is a term that gets trotted out with little to no relevance to the way our game is played. What next? Are we going to draft a 'Rudy' type to inspire the boys?

I'm more in favor of 'Dawn of the Dead' list kill off.

I loved the movie, but I'll just offer the gentle reminder that since Beane took over in 1998 the A's haven't been to the World Series, and since Daryl Morey became the GM of the Houston Rockets in 2007, Houston has won one playoff series. I'm not dismissing their methods and I think Melbourne should be proactive about scouring every possible angle to improve ourselves, but "Moneyball" is not going to be a magic potion for rocketing up the ladder. We need to get the absolute basics right - drafting well, developing our talent, fostering a great football environment etc and we'll start to improve.

I think the club simply has an attitude of leaving no stone unturned to improve the list. I don't think they'll be adopting any approach lock stock and barrel, but more making sure they're advanced with knowledge of all players at their disposal. I believe they've employed someone full-time to ensure they're in the best position to make decisions and increase our awareness and thus expand our opportunities.

Mitch Clark wasn't a money ball approach, but an example of a club making sure they're in the game. There are going to be heaps of players to target this off-season. They'll include Otten/McKernan (Adelaide), Strijk/Stevens (West Coast), Russell (Carlton), Greenwood (North), Byrnes (Geelong), Toy (Suns), Banfield (Lions), maybe Ellis from Hawthorn, as well as others. Callinan, Saad, Ballantyne, and Barlow are others that have come from local competitions.

There will be a heap of opportunities, some may involve 'moneyball' thinking and plenty won't. Some will be good choices and others poor. Hopefully we'll be in a position to make the right decisions and get players into our club that will make a difference. Our best opportunities will come via the national draft. But if we can supplement that talent with even just one nugget elsewhere then we're making inroads.

I apologise whole-heartedly for belittling people who wish to talk about Moneyball tactics being used in football by the MFC.

It is a fantastically relevant topic of discussion that requires little understanding of the topic itself for good conversation and review.

Can I offer my Moneyball offerings?

Recruit players who get lots of kicks in the state leagues around the country. The levels of football are easily transferable.

Recruit players at other clubs who have played games where they have scored lots of goals in a game or got lots of touches. They can obviously play if they did that - even once in their career.

Only get players that are 'value' for money. Don't overpay young players.

Trade young players before they come out of contract so that you get the best value and don't have to 'overpay' them.

I do hope that we have a Moneyball Christmas this summer! Oh what a wonderful time of the year...

AFL is a contact sport and baseball isn't. I think AFL teams might take inspiration from it...but AFL clubs are slow learners. I'm glad they are finally taking mature aged players rather than pimple faced youth.

Moneyball as applied in the movie is a concept that doesn't hold up quite as well in a sport reliant on team players working together as opposed to the more unique individual aspects of Baseball (which is not to say Baseball isn't a team sport, just that it is a very different one than football field team sports).

I agree with the idea of thinking in a wider sphere as outlined by some above, but really it seems like this is a term that gets trotted out with little to no relevance to the way our game is played. What next? Are we going to draft a 'Rudy' type to inspire the boys?

I'm more in favor of 'Dawn of the Dead' list kill off.

At least it'd be better than the 'League of Their Own' list management style we're currently going with.........

Mitch Clark wasn't a money ball approach.

It wasn't if you don't understand the environment that Billy Beane is working under.

Clark was a proven pro playing behind bigger names and wasn't given the chance to 'own' a forward line.

We wanted our money to go to someone who would earn that money and we went through means to get him that is rare for us - we traded in.

A fifth of the Oakland As salary goes to one player - A Cuban exile that was seen at the Baseball World Cup a few years ago and that's about it. He's an absolute monster with the bat.

Moneyball doesn't preclude paying money for gold, it just goes about getting that gold in various different ways and getting bang for scarce buck.

If people want to talk about MB - let's do it.

"Moneyball" for the MFC will entail drafting delisted duds and battlers who can't get games at current clubs then crossing fingers and hoping that they will improve at our club. I see no reason to believe any player will improve in our environment. We will end up with a whole heap of battlers that couldn't hit a target to save their lives. So pretty much what we have now really.

"Moneyball" for the MFC will entail drafting delisted duds and battlers who can't get games at current clubs then crossing fingers and hoping that they will improve at our club. I see no reason to believe any player will improve in our environment. We will end up with a whole heap of battlers that couldn't hit a target to save their lives. So pretty much what we have now really.

Agreed. James Sellar and Joel MacDonald are the proof in our half baked pudding.

"Moneyball" for the MFC will entail drafting delisted duds and battlers who can't get games at current clubs then crossing fingers and hoping that they will improve at our club. I see no reason to believe any player will improve in our environment. We will end up with a whole heap of battlers that couldn't hit a target to save their lives. So pretty much what we have now really.

How refreshingly positive you are - not!!!

How many "delisted duds and battlers who can't get games at current clubs" have we traded for in the Neeld era? Clark??? Yeah - a dud because he broke his foot!

Even the much maligned Sellar has shown some positives later in the season, as a depth player.