While your point is well taken, I still believe that certain traits, such as high OBA and high K rates for pitchers will still be of more importance than the other stats. This is not only because they have been traditionally undervalued, but because they are actually more valuable than other stats. A batter with a .360 OBA will be more productive than a batter with a .290 Avg and a .320 OBA. The same is true for K rate, SLG, etc. You can't change the nature of the game (well, you can, but let's assume that they won't). If every team was correctly evaluating players based on ranking of the best statistics, then the teams with the most money will win. It's not like all of a sudden speed will magically become MORE valuable, simply because other teams may overvalue the "right" stats.

Moneyball isn't really about acquiring undervalued talent. It is about that in the context of the A's, because that's what they had to do to win. What Moneyball is REALLY about is running a business that uses better, objective measures in player evaluation, and in instilling these values from the top all the way down. For over 100 years, teams weren't doing this, (well, ok maybe Branch Rickey was) and now smart people have realized that you can't just do it the way that things have always been done.

1. Beane should never have let Moneyball get written.
2. Oakland should have let Beane go and kept DePodesta.

As of July 22, none of the teams who currently use Moneyball are in first place. Moneyball dehumanizes the sport, managers are rendered uselass and unnecessary (1.e. Terry Francona ). To run a baseball team, all you need to do is plug numbers into a computer and a winning team will be generated on the field. What about team chemistry ? Players will to win. The Red Sox have higher OBA and Slugging%, and ERA than the Yankees !! But the damn Yankees are 8 games in first place. The Yankees are run like a successful corporation, while the Red Sox is a frat house.

Having just finished reading Moneyball, the point that contradicts Cal's note above is looking at the A's - and the Sox - as tremendous second-half teams. Hmm, who's on a holy tear right now? Oakland and the Red Sox. Boston may collapse, as they inevitably are cursed to do, but in the mean time they have both become second-half power houses. And as a Seattle fan (not that it matters this year), Oakland has done this every ##@$#%!!!@ year to us. Even the year we had 116 wins - they were the only team to win more than two games in a row off the M's, in the last month of the season.

Hey Cal, looked at the standings lately? Obviously, there must be other considerations beside the numbers, all of the factors you mentioned before must be taken into consideration, or else you have what the Dodgers did, breaking apart the nucleus of their team, giving away LoDuca and Mota. But you can't argue with results, just look at where your "Moneyball" teams are when the chips are on the table.