Moneyball question: What were the real motivations behind the Carlos Pena trade and its treatment in the movie?
Initiially I planned to post this only as a fanshot, but I figured the site's been quiet enough lately that perhaps a random stab at discussion might be post-worthy these days.
So I finally saw Moneyball tonight. Old news I guess. Perhaps this entire discussion has already taken place, but the movie left me craving a more realistic view of what really went on behind the scenes in the 2002 shake-up, and the Pena trade in particular. I get it that the movie wanted to build Hatty's character and the Beane/Howe tension, but the depicition of the Pena trade can't be realistic. According to baseball-reference.com, Pena was riding pine (or hurt?) when he was traded. He wasn't taking playing time from anyone, and he could have been sent down anyway (was he?). So why was he traded? Did the A's really see him as a bust, or want Lilly that badly (we gave up Bonderman too in that trade), or need the cash that badly (sodas?), or what?
At the same time, I can totally imagine Beane trading a player to stop Howe from playing him. Do any of you think that really happened? And if so, which of the many 2002 trades might it have been? I absolutely believe that Jeremy "No-Slide" Giambi got traded for table dancing to Funkadelic after a loss, but maybe one or some of those moves (Beane's, not Jeremy's) were about an internal power struggle. Any thoughts?
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
what I remember at the time was that Peña was not impressing at the plate
and he was riding the pine alot.
It was more about Lilly than anything.
At the time of the trade, the A’s rotation was in a bit of a mess. Lidle had an ERA around 5.60, and Erik Hiljus was being Erik Hiljus. Aaron Harang made his first few MLB starts but he was bad as well. Even Mulder had an ERA around 4.00. The A’s rotation was far from the dominance they exhibited in August and September of that year.
Lilly was a 26 year old pitcher with about 5 years of team control left. He was already putting up good results for NY in his second full big league season. It was a pretty equitable trade even considering that Pena was a top prospect.
It should also be noted that the A’s were quite flush with top prospects at the time; as they were in win now mode, the thinking was that they could spare a Pena.
"We were shit, pathetic," Guillen growled early in spring training. "We hit too many home runs."
Didn't we have the mighty "Dan Johnson" waiting to come up?
"Trying not to rec a "F**k the Giants" post is like trying not to look at boobs."
not yet, not at that time
there was another “mighty 1Ber” in AAA at the time. I don’t even remember his name now, but he never came up.
Graham Koonce, right?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=koonce001gra
i think he has the very dubious distinction of winning the pcl player of the year 2 years in a row, or something like that. in my mind he was perhaps the iconic AAAA player.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
I don't know if it's because he saw me mention Koonce and Clark Twitter or not, but check this out
Johnny Doskow:
Graham Koonce, the 2003 PCL MVP and legendary River Cats, now a firefighter in San Diego and a darn good one i might add
http://twitter.com/JDoskow/status/142694066574995456
Last of the Ninth - Photography
We did draft him in the 7th round of 2001
"Trying not to rec a "F**k the Giants" post is like trying not to look at boobs."
Yeah it was, simply, a good trade to make
The A’s recognized Lilly as a very good starting pitcher who could be gotten for less than you’d normally have to give up to get a very good starting pitcher. What’s harder to understand is why the A’s would trade Lilly just because he was arbitration eligible and figured to get about $3M (IIRC) — still a steal.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Particularly since that money (and quite a bit more, too) was then used to sign Mark Redman and Arthur Rhodes...
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
Yeah, that pissed me off...
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
by the_rozeboom on Dec 3, 2011 10:01 PM PST up reply actions
arthur rhodes
is perhaps my all-time least favorite a.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
by mendelbob on Dec 4, 2011 7:40 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
eric hiljus
dude had a really good stats in MLB2k2 or 2k1 i think
used to strike out albert pujols and manny ramirez with him a lot
good times
Win or lose, we'll always be there for you.
by johnjahafanclub on Dec 2, 2011 9:08 PM PST up reply actions
Peña was very highly regarded when we traded for him.
Baseball America ranked him #5 prospect in MLB that year. He had looked good in Texas in September call-ups the prior year, and was widely viewed as ready to step right in and start in the majors. Texas was in rebuilding mode then, and we gave up a strong package of younger prospects for him*.
For all the fuss about training Hatteberg to be a 1B, the plan at the start of the 2002 season was for Peña to be the 1B. He started every game in April. For most of those games Hatteberg was the DH, though he had some days off with others rotated through the DH slot.
Peña got off to a good start, but after a few weeks started to struggle, and then continued to decline. The A’s stuck with him and persisted in starting him regularly, but toward the end of April he would occasionally be pulled at the end of a game for a PH, either Saenz or Hatteberg. I believe the first game Hatteberg actually started at 1B was May 11. A week later, Peña was sent down to AAA. The idea of Peña spending a lot of time on the bench is incorrect. He played in almost every game when he was in the bigs. There were only three or four days where he was on the bench. The reason he was sent down was precisely because he was still a good prospect and they didn’t want him wasting away not playing. Once it became clear he wasn’t going to be starting regularly for Oakland they promptly moved him to Sacramento.
The impetus for trading Peña, I think, was not any animosity toward him. It was that he was a strong trade chip. At the trade deadline the A’s were buyers. They wanted to win this year, and the needed another good starting pitcher. Peña’s value had dropped a little with his struggles in May, but he was still a young guy with a stellar record as a prospect. He still had value, but he wasn’t going to do the A’s any good in the current year, now that Hatteberg was settled in as the regular 1B. That made him a top trade chip for the A’s, so when they went out to get Lilly, he was what they had to give up**.
*We gave Jason Hart, Mario Ramos, Ryan Ludwick, and Gerald Laird for Peña and Mike Venafro. Hart and Ramos were better known at the time. Hart was our erstwhile heir apparent for 1B, and Ramos was seen as a likely addition to the starting rotation soon. Venafro was a veteran LOOGY.
**We gave Peña, Franklyn German, and Jeremy Bonderman (as a PTBNL) for Lilly, Jason Arnold, and John-Ford Griffin. Arnold was later swapped for Erubiel Durazo. Griffin was traded for Jason Perry, who was traded for Jack Hannahan.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
by iglew on Dec 2, 2011 12:02 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
So, you could say we gave up Pena for Hannahan-anan...
"Trying not to rec a "F**k the Giants" post is like trying not to look at boobs."
Well, you could.
But of Pena+German+Bonderman for Lilly+Durazo+Hannahan, that’s not the pair I’d line up.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
heh
"Minutes from the last save opportunity...Balfour got 3 outs..."- Nico
by stranahanahan on Dec 3, 2011 11:43 AM PST up reply actions
Also, does anyone else remember Peña's
cute little diary he was writing in 2002? That was before everyone had a Twitter feed and a blog, but Peña had some arrangement where every couple days he’d write a few paragraphs about what it’s like being the new kid on the team, and it would show up with the mlb.com news stories.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
I also remember a CSN spot about his life rooming with Chavy and Mulder...
Or does my memory totally suck?
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
by the_rozeboom on Dec 3, 2011 10:08 PM PST up reply actions
either you’re mixing up the terms “real” and “reality” or you’re confusing moneyball with rochelle, rochelle: a young girl’s strange, erotic journey from milan to minsk…
by AV on Dec 2, 2011 2:42 PM PST up reply actions
actually, i do think the movie is a pretty faithful depiction of the book (sort of)
clearly they had to squeeze a lot in, so events that didn’t actually happen in 2002 are portrayed as happening in 2002, but if you consider that the goal was to rewrite a single year of history so that it summarized several years, i’d say yes, i think the movie is fairly real. it’s for this reason that i’m asking others if they think beane ever traded away a player to stop howe from playing him. clearly that was not the case with peña, as the movie depicts, but i think it’s reasonable to ask if that sort of incident happened.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
Except the book wasn't at all about the 2002 season --
wasn’t most of the book written before that season even began? It was about the draft as the centerpiece for “a new way of looking at undervalued talent.”
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
from what i remember rebuilding for 2002 was a major component of the book
for example, i’m pretty sure that the chapter that dicussed UZR was in the context of moving long to cf to replace damon. and certainly the chapter on converting hatty to 1b was in relation to losing giambi.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
actually, i think nico may be right
the book was not about the 2002 season the way the movie was. the book was more about preparing for the 2002 season, right?
then again, the book does make it all the way to beane’s boston offer, doesn’t it? my copy of the book is in storage in spain. no help to me now.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
Storage in Spain... likely excuse. C'mon, you can do better.
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
by the_rozeboom on Dec 3, 2011 10:10 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly
the book was not about the 2002 season the way the movie was. the book was more about preparing for the 2002 season, right?
That’s my recollection. Granted, it’s been years since I read it so I could be remembering it wrong.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
Could someone please dictate this to me?
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
I haven't seen the movie yet, but in real life
Carlos Peña was playing for the Sacramento Rivercats when he was traded. Howe couldn’t have played him even if he wanted to. If the movie implies that Peña was traded to stop Howe from playing him, that’s just pure fiction.
The notion that Beane (or any GM) would trade a player just to prevent the manager from playing him seems bizarre to me. If there’s some good reason not to play a guy, I would think the GM would just instruct the manager outright (which it is rumored Beane did indeed do at times). But if there’s a player you really don’t want to play, then what the hell is he doing on the roster in the first place? If you really don’t want a guy to play, then yeah, you should trade him. Not to undermine the manager, but because he’s a player you don’t want any more. Beane has traded plenty of guys because he didn’t want them on the team any more. Jeremy Giambi, for example.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
just my 2 cents, but the movie is worth seeing
as you can tell from the discussion, the movie is not accurate in terms of the specific details of 2002, but does do a great job of telling the overall story. i was fully entertained, although reliving the losses always sucks.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
I intend to watch it some day.
I’m not much of a movie guy. I’ll catch it some time after it’s available on my girlfriend’s Netflix.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
i hear you
this was the first non-kids movie i saw in a theatre in perhaps 10 years.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
I don't know, I'm guessing there's a pretty solid case that Jeff Mathis was just traded for the specific purpose of preventing Mike Scoscia from playing him
"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.
by PaulThomas on Dec 3, 2011 6:55 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Good point.
At one point in my life I liked Dave Kingman more than Rickey Henderson. I was stupid.
by the_rozeboom on Dec 3, 2011 10:12 PM PST up reply actions
any thoughts on the second question in my post? did beane ever trade someone just to get howe to stop playing them?
and fantastic summary from iglew regarding peña.
Zito: You ever think about the space time continuum?
Huddy: Uh... no.
I really want to believe Billy traded someone to spite or one-up Art Howe
but probably not. I do remember being delighted by the May Massacre purging of mini-G, Menechino and Jeff Tam in what felt like a great stir shit up Billy move.
Everybody's got a little light under the sun.
by FreeSeatUpgrade on Dec 2, 2011 10:46 PM PST up reply actions
I think you could make the argument for Jeremy Giambi.
Strictly speaking, as long as Jeremy was on the roster Howe was going to play him, so Beane got him off the roster.
But that wasn’t about Howe. That was about Giambi.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
In the movie, it's suggested that "behind the scenes / clubhouse" reasons
are what really drove the J. Giambi trade, and in real life that was indeed the case. It wasn’t a question of whether Beane wanted J. Giambi in the lineup and in LF but rather whether he wanted J. Giambi around, period, so it wouldn’t even have helped if Howe had benched him because the “team on the field” wasn’t the issue anyway.
I like Cindi. A. She never pretends to know more than she does. B. She has unbridled enthusiasm for her "Hotties," and isn't afraid to show it. -IM4Oakgal
one could argue that the A's showed very little patience with Peña
since he very quickly was demoted back to AAA. But as we’ve seen, it was years before Peña did much with the bat to make the decision to trade him away look like a bad one.
Besides, the bigger issue at the time was reports that Pena was "uncoachable"
Last of the Ninth - Photography
And here's a link on that
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/playoffs2008/columns/story?columnist=bryant_howard&id=3663156
After two stops, the word around the batting cage was that Pena would not waver from the lessons his dad, Felipe, taught him about hitting, that Felipe’s teaching carried more value than the words of hitting coaches who had spent their entire lives in the game. He clashed with Thad Bosley, then the stern Oakland hitting coach, who bristled when Pena refused to alter his mechanics. Words like “uncoachable” and “difficult” are not simply labels that stick; in baseball, they become a second skin, impossible from which to molt, baseball poison fatal to a career.
“I would say he was strong-willed. That’s the right word for it,” recalled Ken Macha, who was the bench coach for Art Howe when Pena was in Oakland. “He had his way of doing things and it didn’t always go that well. I always liked him. He worked his tail off. Carlos was a very hard worker, and sometimes I guess you have to go through those kinds of struggles before it all comes together. But in the end, he made it.”
Last of the Ninth - Photography
One could, but I think the numbers argue against that.
Baseball Reference shows Peña’s 2002 game logs. First of all, he started every game in April, which is showing a great deal of confidence in a rookie. Second, look at his OPS in May. It went down every single game for 15 games. That’s a pretty serious slump. I don’t think it’s “very little patience” to demote a rookie with a streak like that.
I think they showed the appropriate amount of patience with Peña. They stuck with him for a while, sent him to AAA when he needed it, and then when they needed a mid-season trade they made use of him.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
I think the numbers argue for that
simply allowing a rookie to play for one month, and then demote and trade him away when he begins to struggle, sounds to me like a lack of patience. Of course there may have been other factors, among them a perception of “uncoachability” and the presence of Hatteberg.
I don't see a trade as a sign of impatience.
I see that as recognizing he has more value to another team than he has to ours. A trade goes two ways: it’s not just letting a guy go, it’s exchanging value for value.
I don’t see the demotion as impatience either. AAA was the best place for him at that time.
To me both moves make sense regardless of any perception of “uncoachability”.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
I meant sending him back to AAA so quickly
If the A’s really believed in Peña you’d think they would have had a bit more patience with him.
And on top of that, Hatteberg was the full-time DH while Pena was playing 1B. Once Pena was demoted, Hatteberg moved to 1B.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
Sure, but the A's traded for Pena 1/14/02
They signed Hatteberg 1/2/02 after he was traded to the Rockies and granted free agency in Dec. of 2001.
I’m sure if Pena hit well for the A’s they’d have all been happy leaving him at 1B and Hatteberg at DH.
Last of the Ninth - Photography
Also, if Hatteberg had sucked defensively at 1B,
the team would have been more reluctant to give up Peña.
Baseball is a stupid-making enterprise in that nobody wants to be singled out or say something dumb. —Michael Lewis
Word was, they didn't think he was trainable
I seem to remember quite distinctly that they the A’s did not feel that Pena was trainable – not an attitude thing – by all accounts he was and is one of the nicest guys in MLB – but they just didn’t think he had the capacity to get corrected as quickly as they want.
Am I alone in remembering this?

by 


























