Extra 2%

Review: Jonah Keri’s The Extra 2%: How Wall Street Strategies Took a Major League Baseball Team from Worst to First


You gotta love it when someone messes up an accepted narrative.  And there hasn’t been a narrative in Major League Baseball over the past several years that has been more widely accepted than “The Yankees and Red Sox have an unfair advantage.”  And, sure, structurally-speaking they do. They’re richer than Croesus and are run by the smartest men in the game.

And for two of the past three years they’ve been beat by the Tampa Bay Rays for the division crown. What gives?

The answer to that question is the major draw to Jonah Keri’s excellent new book The Extra 2%: How Wall Street Strategies Took a Major League Baseball Team from Worst to First.  He covers more ground than that, of course, and we’ll get to that in a minute, but really, no one would read a book about how the Yankees exploited all of the resources at their disposal to win. Er, to continue winning.  Keri’s book is about solving what may be the biggest problem in baseball: how to compete on an inherently unlevel playing field.

And there are no easy answers. This is not Moneyball. It’s not about some would-be genius figure thinking circles around the competition through some breakthrough involving esoteric baseball concepts. It’s about how a couple of former Goldman Sachs colleagues — team owner Stuart Sternberg and president Matthew Silverman — and their friend — former private equity whiz and current Rays GM Andrew Friedman — simply worked harder and smarter in incremental ways. How they have literally applied that “extra 2%” to every move they’ve made in order to grab whatever advantage they can.

And despite the investment banking background of the principals and the phrase “Wall Street Strategies” in the title, this isn’t a book about deceptively simple business theories and it’s not the kind of book that consultants will hand out at seminars in which they peddle the latest in management trends. Which may kind of suck for Keri because there’s a lot of money to be made in that racket, but it’s great for baseball fans because its lack of gimmickry is what makes The Extra 2% the best, most fulfilling look at what it takes to run a successful baseball team I have ever read.

And it’s the comprehensiveness that really sets this book apart. Turning the Rays around wasn’t a matter of some simple, Billy Beanian observation about the value of a handful of sabermetric concepts. It was a baseball challenge, a business challenge, a public relations challenge and a morale challenge. Keri explains the problems the former Devil Rays had in all of these areas and explains exactly how the Sternberg/Silverman/Friedman team dealt with them.

In this Keri eschews Michael Lewis’ tale-telling and character-sketching tendencies in the name of straight-forward reporting.  And while I loved Moneyball, I found –and I think most baseball fans will find — Keri’s approach to be more informative and intellectually fulfilling.  Lewis taught us a lot about the inner-workings of a baseball team, but it was always in service of his dramatic narrative, which wasn’t always easy to accept at the time and hasn’t been unequivocally vindicated in the past eight years. Keri, in contrast, plays things matter-of-factly and simply answers more questions all of us have about what it takes to beat the Yankees and the Red Sox at a fraction of the price.

Which isn’t to say that this is a clinical read.  To the contrary, the book is packed with fun, most particularly when dealing with the Rays’ previous owner Vincent Naimoli, who redefined the concepts of ego, greed, cheapness, pettiness and cluelessness when it comes to running a baseball team.  Those who rooted for the Rays between 1998 and 2005 may get sick to their stomaches reliving Naimoli’s follies, but for the rest of us it’s great theater. Deadspin ran an excerpt of all of this last week for those wanting a taste.  My favorite part is the stuff about Naimoli not allowing employees to have Internet access.  As late as 2003. Yikes.

One other thing that those of you who read a lot of non-fiction will appreciate is Keri’s writing style.  There seems to be a tendency these days for non-fiction writers to mess around a lot and get all cutesy in the name of stamping their work with their personal brand. I’m thinking of guys like Malcolm Gladwell and others who mistake sophistry for analysis and who try to infuse every other sentence with a “gee whiz!” tone that tells you that what you are reading Is Truly Important. Keri doesn’t do that. He’s engaging without drawing too much attention himself. He’s straightforward but doesn’t eschew flavor. It breezes along but never feels too light.

More generally speaking, it’s a book in which the subject — and not the author’s decision to tackle the subject — is the main point.  That may seem like an odd thing to say, but for most of the non-fiction I’ve read in the past five years, it seems like the majority of the effort was put in the book proposal and, once it was accepted and the advance paid, the rest was just filled out around it.  “See my neat nut of an idea!” the author seems to say. “Now let’s see how many anecdotes I can string together in order to show you just how neat an idea I had!”  To the contrary, Keri tells a story that teaches us stuff. He didn’t set out to make a point and then search for a story that supported it.

The Extra 2% is one of the best baseball books I’ve read in recent years and I recommend it highly.  If you care a lick about what it takes to run a baseball team — or if you care a lick about the inequalities between baseball’s haves and have-nots — you should definitely pick up a copy.

And stay tuned, because later this morning I’ll be running a Q&A with Jonah in which he (a) reveals the single most important move in the ascendancy of the Tampa Bay Rays; and (b) explains why — contrary to everyone who is sleeping on them — the Rays will most certainly be in the thick of things in the AL East this year.

Report: Yasiel Puig started a fight at a Miami nightclub

Yasiel Puig

When last we posted about Yasiel Puig it was to pass along a rumor that the best player on his team wants him off of it. If that was true — and if this report is true — then expect that sentiment to remain unchanged:

Obviously this report is vague and there has not been, say, a police report or other details to fill it in. Perhaps we’ll learn more, perhaps Puig was misbehaving perhaps he wasn’t.

As we wait for details, however, it’s probably worth reminding ourselves that Puig is coming off of a lost season in which he couldn’t stay healthy, so trading him for any sort of decent return at the moment isn’t super likely. Which leads us to some often overlooked but undeniable baseball wisdom: you can be a distraction if you’re effective and you can be ineffective if you’re a good guy. You really can’t be an ineffective distraction, however, and expect to hang around very long.

Are the Padres adding some yellow to their color scheme for 2016?

Tony Gwynn

We’ve written several times about how boring the Padres’ uniforms and color scheme is. And how that’s an even greater shame given how colorful they used to be. No, not all of their mustard and brown ensembles were great looking, but some were and at some point it’s better to miss boldly than to endure blandness.

Now comes a hint that the Padres may step a toe back into the world of bright colors. At least a little bit. A picture of a new Padres cap is making the rounds in which a new “sunshine yellow” color has been added to the blue and white:

This story from the Union-Tribune notes that the yellow also appears on the recently-unveiled 2016 All-Star Game logo, suggesting that the yellow in the cap could either be part of some  special All-Star-related gear or a new color to the normal Padres livery.

I still strongly advocate for the Padres to bring back the brown — and there are a multitude of design ideas which could do that in tasteful fashion — but for now any addition of some color would be a good thing.

Brett Lawrie “likely to be traded” by the A’s

Brett Lawrie

Oakland’s re-acquisition of infielder Jed Lowrie from Houston makes it “likely” that the A’s will now trade infielder Brett Lawrie, according to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Slusser says Lowrie’s arrival “all but ensures” both Lawrie and Danny Valencia are on the trading block, adding that Lawrie “is considered the better bet to be traded.”

Acquired last offseason from the Blue Jays in the Josh Donaldson trade, Lawrie hit .260 with 16 homers and a .706 OPS in 149 games while playing second base and third base. At age 25 he’s a solid player, but Lawrie has failed to live up to his perceived potential while hitting .263 with a .736 OPS in 494 career games.

At this point it sounds like the A’s plan to start Marcus Semien at shortstop and Lowrie at second base.

Gammons: The Red Sox could go $30-40 million higher on David Price than anyone else


Peter Gammons reports that the Red Sox are on a mission to sign David Price and that they will pay some serious money to get him. Gammons quotes one anonymous GM who says that he expects the Sox to “go $30-40 million above anyone else.”

The man calling the shots for the Sox is Dave Dombrowski and he knows Price well, of course, having traded for him in Detroit. But there is going to be serious competition for Price’s services with the Jays and Cubs, among many others, bidding for his services. It would be unusual for a team to outbid the competition by tens of millions as Gammons’ source suggests, but the dollars will be considerable regardless.