Flaws in Eagles 'dream' scenario
The offseason acquisitions were sound, but evidence shows some overrated moves
This week will finally see the release of the much anticipated movie "Moneyball," based on the classic book by Michael Lewis.
As rightfully celebrated as the book is, one easy but somewhat justifiable criticism of the movement it spawned in baseball is that the progenitors of the approach (Billy Beane's Oakland Athletics) have yet to win, or even make it to, a World Series.
That may illustrate one weakness of leaning too heavily on the low-cost/high-value personnel approach. It can make a team quite competitive during the regular season, but when the postseason comes around, a team has to have some heavier hitters if it wants to claim the ultimate victory in a sport. When the sample size shrinks, dominant talent matters a little more.
This is something the Philadelphia Eagles may have had in mind when they put together their 2011 offseason player acquisition plan. The Eagles may not have pinched pennies quite as hard as the A's over the years, but they did have similar results. Their cost-conscious, build-mostly-through-the-draft ways have led to plenty of success but have also thus far not produced a title.
The recurring postseason disappointments meant Philadelphia needed more elite talent than its current methods were producing, so the team went about acquiring a slew of players that eventually became known, for better or worse, as the "Dream Team."
To read the full story on why the stats don't match the hype with the Eagles, sign up for ESPN Insider.