Zito is seemingly ready to make his last appearance pitching in MLB. And Tim Hudson declaring he is ready to do the same. Mulder hung it up last year after a valiant attempt at a comeback.

It's probably time to settle the question.

What really ceated the success of the A’s of the early 2000s era?

The book Moneyball does a decent job of explaining how Beane optimized the team to get great aggregate performances at a minimum price. But on the other hand, the Big Three had an average WHIP of 1.146 in 2003.

Did Billy Beane and his Moneyball ways build a better mousetrap despite a tight budget? Or did the As just catch lightning in a bottle, landing the ultimate value in the best young pitchers making the league minimum?

It has to be the Big Three, right? To use 2003 again, the A’s were 2nd in the league in runs against (643, just behind the Mariners) while were below the league average in runs scored (768). The A's starters had a whopping 12.2 combined WAR (courtesy of Baseball Reference) well above the 2nd place Yankees at 9.5. While the A’s outfield was last or second last in WAR at all 3 positions.