This article is simply misinformed in a way that is inconsistent with what I expect from Slate.

Jeremy Giambi, Adam Piatt and David Justice were marginal contributors, at best.

Jason Giambi (drafted '92), Jose Canseco (drafted '82) and Miguel Tejada (drafted '93) all precede Moneyball and Billy Beane's tenure as GM of the A's (hired '97). Canseco and Tejada hardly fit the 'Moneyball' profile, which stresses drafting college players (neither attended) and patience (which neither displayed).

As any baseball fan knows, the strength of the A's, even during the years when Giambi was at first, was the pitching. In fact, Beane's theories on pitching seem to hold much more water than his theories on hitting, which was Scocca's focus since not a single Athletic pitcher was implicated. With names like Hudson, Zito, Mulder and Harden coming through the farm system and saavy trades to boot (Haren), it's clear that the team strength and Beane's focus was on pitching.

The article also ignores the fact that many clubs were hit harder than Oakland. In particular, the clubhouse of the Baltimore Orioles much more resembles the 'open-air drug market' that Scocca ascribes to the A's, and without any of the stellar results the A's achieved.

Larger questions deserve more detailed examinations and more cautious authors. Before calling in to question the validity of 5 playoff trips between 2000 and 2006, the A's, Slate readers and baseball and it's fans deserve the full consideration of a real baseball historian.