Michael Lewis’ Moneyball … describes how the Oakland Athletics exploited an imperfection in the way player productivity was being evaluated pre-2003. On-base percentage appeared to be more important in determining team success compared to more popular statistics. We test the hypothesis that in a competitive market, other teams will increase the weight given on-base percentage in the reward structure for their players. Our results show that in the post-Moneyball (MB) era, the return to on-base percentage has indeed increased for free agents, the group whose salaries we expect to be most affected by the MB philosophy.
BradburyJ. C. (2007). The baseball economist: The real game exposed. New York, NY: Plume.
3.
DeliD. (2013). Assessing the relative importance of inputs to a production function: Getting on base versus hitting for power. Journal of Sports Economics, 14, 203–217.
4.
HakesJ. K.SauerR. D. (2006). An economic evaluation of the Moneyball hypothesis. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 173–185.
5.
HakesJ. K.SauerR. D. (2007). The Moneyball anomaly and payroll efficiency: A further investigation. International Journal of Sport Finance, 2, 177–189.
6.
JamesB. (1977). The Bill James baseball abstract 1977. Publisher: Author.
