Oakland ranks 13th in the AL for team obp.

The A's are 29th in MLB obp just beating out the Royals by .001.

They're also dead last in all of baseball in team slugging, dead last once again in all of baseball in team OPS, and as if all of that isn't enough, to add insult to injury it appears they've now passed the Marlins and slipped into dead last in all of baseball in attendance.

Trade deadline, here we come!

If Moneyball was all about identifying assets in any given field that are chronically overvalued and undervalued, then it appears Billy Beane now believes the ability to hit, pitch, and field are overvalued, and sucking is undervalued...

The current A's are like a HS shop teacher with a couple of fingers missing getting you ready for the real world.

Sadly, making great baseball movies seems to have become nearly an impossibility with callow, recession-panicked film executives apparently wanting to keep right on dumbing down Hollywood fare until we have nothing left but loud action movies with wooden acting (coming soon to a theater near you: "The Return of the Governator: He's Baaack!") or fizzy-cute romantic comedies that can safely be exported to Asia and Europe. (And yes, Sony may have shot itself in the foot by throwing "Moneyball: The Movie" into some sort of turnaround, but apparently they have what's being dubbed as a "romantic baseball comedy" in the works, Owen Wilson hard at it again, this time with Reese Witherspoon.)

(1) "The <insert plural noun here> of my youth were so much better than <insert same noun here> today," is just as annoying and wrong when it's describing movies as when it's describing athletes. We remember the great movies, sure, but there was plenty of crap back then too. (2) The best way to get Hollywood to stop making crappy movies is to not go to crappy movies and support the heck out of good ones. Why on earth should Hollywood stop pumping tons of money into crappy movies when Transformers 2 makes over 200 million dollars in one weekend? Transformers 2 will probably outdraw the ten best movies of this year combined. (Heck, you could pull it from the theaters now and it still might accomplish that). Why invest money in, I dunno, Terry Gilliam, with whom you likely have less than a 50-50 shot of making your money back, when you could invest money in Michael Bay and his Hypnotoad and be guaranteed to see a profit?

(2) The best way to get Hollywood to stop making crappy movies is to not go to crappy movies and support the heck out of good ones. Why on earth should Hollywood stop pumping tons of money into crappy movies when Transformers 2 makes over 200 million dollars in one weekend?

Because the economics of Hollywood mean 200 million does not mean what it used to. An article yesterday in EWeekly puts Transformers' take at $268. $17 MM of that was Friday. 9 days after it released, the Friday before a holiday weekend. You can basically bank on $300 MM being the number. That is the highest grosser of the year, but it's only $7 million in front of something I've never heard of, "Up" from Pixar. But let's say it does equal overseas, add some in for sprinkle, and call it 700 at the box, total.

Do you have any idea how much tentpole pics cost these days? Pam McClintock of Variety on 6/28 says Paramount execs peg the production budget at $200 MM, and the marketing campaign at another 150. So there's half. Now, I don't know the deals surrounding this movie, and with the CGI the star there'll be a lot less people participating in the gross, but studios can give away 1/4-1/3 of the gross for tentpole sequels like a Lethal Weapon 4.

There's a whole bunch of other things, but basically, T2 *had* to do what it did. Sure, there's long tail of TV, not to mention DVD/licensing, etc. But the point is that studios are owned/overseen by people who are not in the movie making business, unlike the days of old. And $350 MM up front is a ton of capital to tie up in something, much less something where the only real potential for really notable variation is on the downside.

but it's only $7 million in front of something I've never heard of, "Up" from Pixar.
.
.
.
But the point is that studios are owned/overseen by people who are not in the movie making business,

That movie that you've never heard of, is an argument that some people in the studios are still interested in making good movies, and that some viewers will support those good movies.

Does Kettman still write from Germany? I know he was there a couple of years ago -- like, living there long term. I exchanged an email or two with him at the time and he made a point of talking about how out of touch he is with current American cultural crap. If he's still in Germany, it makes sense that he wouldn't know what "Up" is.

If he's still in Germany, it makes sense that he wouldn't know what "Up" is.

Isn't it Austin-based Jeff K who'd never heard of Up?

I hope the fact that Steve "Jeff" Ketman has never heard of Up doesn't discredit his explanations of Hollywood economics.

...you've never heard of "Up"? The best movie of the year (so far), and you've never heard of it?

That movie that you've never heard of, is an argument that some people in the studios are still interested in making good movies, and that some viewers will support those good movies.

In case I wasn't clear, which it seems I wasn't, I'm not bagging on Up. I literally just hadn't heard of it. I enjoy Pixar's movies even if they're overrated somewhat. TS 1 and 2 are both good solid flicks, The Incredibles is a notch above, Monsters Inc. was meh but watchable. I'd rather watch it again than Transformers 1, or either of those Fantastic 4 movies. I never saw Cars or Finding Nemo or the one that came out last year...Wall-E?

If he's still in Germany, it makes sense that he wouldn't know what "Up" is.

Isn't it Austin-based Jeff K who'd never heard of Up?

Indeed. I will note that the two TVs in my apartment have been on, combined, for less than 10 hours since the beginning of March. I've also allowed my perusal of Variety and other rags to crater.

I never saw Cars or Finding Nemo or the one that came out last year...Wall-E?

Holy mother of crap. You haven't watched THE GREATEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME?

I did not like Cars, and am surprised that it gets marks as high as it does. Nemo and Wall-E were both really really good.

I never saw Cars or Finding Nemo or the one that came out last year...Wall-E?

Jesus f**king Christ, you haven't seen WALL-E? That's pathetic. Like saying "I haven't seen Casablanca" or something similarly perverse. The first 40 minutes of that film might just be the greatest animated cinema in the history of filmmaking.

Well, I've had the DVD rip on my computer for probably a year, but it's not often I'm in the mood to sit and stare at a movie not making noise. Same thing with Castaway. I've never seen the whole thing at once, because i can't take it after 20 minutes or so. I've seen 80% of it over 4-5 viewings.

No need to only compare WALL-E to animated cinema--it should've won Best Picture last year.

Th Pixar stuff is generally solid, but add me to the list of people of the opinion that WALL-E and Up were both on a significantly higher level than the other Pixar efforts. Both are legitimately excellent films.

Alamo South, you say...if I was still in my old place, I'd almost certainly go tonight, as I lived 200 yards from it. As it is, I may end up watching Wall-E while I do some work. Though I'm wary, because the last "omgwtfbbq you haven't seen that" movie was Shrek, and that was above average, nowhere in the vicinity of what I heard people raving about. That's the last wtfbbq from people I trust, I should note, because I am pretending that the debacle of Boondock Saints did not appear on my tv screen. If the worst I get from Wall-E is Shrek, I can live with that.

For the record, I personally was being a little sarcastic. I didn't think WALL-E was anything special.

This is the first I'm hearing of it this glowingly. I had heard it was good, very different...I had not heard "animated Casablanca".

I saw it while visiting my girlfriend in D.C. last summer. Had no idea what to expect. But as others have said,I found it to be a fantastic movie. The first 30-40 minutes are seriously classic. No dialogue. Just the little robot all by his lonesome carrying out his tasks but it is truly remarkable. Probably the best work Pixar has done. That said the rest of the movie (basically once they get to space) is merely entertaining. But yeah overall that movie was definitely one of last year's best.

I second the first 30-40 minutes comments.
But once the humans show up I thought it became a little too familiar and kind of boring.

I've never really known how to rate it. How do you rate a movie where you really enjoyed the first half, and kind of napped through the second part?

The twitter is that the A's have acquired Scott Hairston for two minor league pitchers (Ryan Webb, Craig Italiano) and a PTBNL.

How do you rate a movie where you really enjoyed the first half, and kind of napped through the second part?

Two to four times better than you rate Saving Private Ryan (depending on how long the opening sequence of that movie was), although I think the stuff after the opening forty minutes of Wall-E is considerably better than the stuff after the opening sequence of Saving Private Ryan, so your mileage may vary.

How do you rate a movie where you really enjoyed the first half, and kind of napped through the second part?

Or even worse, a movie that had you on the edge of your seat right up to the final scene, and then was ruined by one of the dumbest and most pretentious endings in the history of Hollywood?

Saving Private Ryan is Shel Silverstein's The Missing Piece, but with gunfights and a clumsy frame device.

Anyway, getting back to the economics thing, the general rule is that a movie has to make 3x its production costs to turn a profit. Studio accounting, of course, will bend over backwards to show that no movie is in profit no matter what.

Or even worse, a movie that had you on the edge of your seat right up to the final scene, and then was ruined by one of the dumbest and most pretentious endings in the history of Hollywood?

There was nothing dumb about the ending. Pretentious, maybe, but I despise that term on general principles.

/resists urge to argue with Andy

The twitter is that the A's have acquired Scott Hairston for two minor league pitchers (Ryan Webb, Craig Italiano) and a PTBNL.

Ignoring the PTBNL, seems like a good deal to me. Which probably means I shouldn't ignore the PTBNL...