What do you think?
Rate this book
Intangiball: The Subtle Things That Win Baseball Games
A unique and refreshing ode to the “little things” that represent baseball’s heartbeat—the player who, in countless ways, makes other players better.
Intangiball tracks the progress of the Cincinnati Reds through five years of culture change, beginning with the trades of decorated veterans Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey, Jr. It also draws liberally from such character-conscious clubs as the Atlanta Braves, St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, New York Yankees, and Tampa Bay Rays. Author, sportswriter, and eternal fan of the game, Lonnie Wheeler systematically identifies the performance-enhancing qualities (PEQs) that together comprise the “communicable competitiveness” that he calls “teamship.”
Intangiball is not designed to debunk Moneyball , but rather to sketch in what it left “What order is there to a baseball world in which a struggling rookie benefits not a bit from the encouraging words of the veteran who drapes his arm around the kid’s shoulders; in which Derek Jeter’s professionalism serves none but him; in which there is no reward for hustle, no edge for enthusiasm, no payoff for sacrifice; in which there is no place for the ambient contributions of David Eckstein, Marco Scutaro, or the aging, battered Scott Rolen; in which shared purpose serves no purpose?”
Intangibles, as it turns out, not only ennoble the game; they help win it. And this is the book every fan must read.
Intangiball tracks the progress of the Cincinnati Reds through five years of culture change, beginning with the trades of decorated veterans Adam Dunn and Ken Griffey, Jr. It also draws liberally from such character-conscious clubs as the Atlanta Braves, St. Louis Cardinals, San Francisco Giants, New York Yankees, and Tampa Bay Rays. Author, sportswriter, and eternal fan of the game, Lonnie Wheeler systematically identifies the performance-enhancing qualities (PEQs) that together comprise the “communicable competitiveness” that he calls “teamship.”
Intangiball is not designed to debunk Moneyball , but rather to sketch in what it left “What order is there to a baseball world in which a struggling rookie benefits not a bit from the encouraging words of the veteran who drapes his arm around the kid’s shoulders; in which Derek Jeter’s professionalism serves none but him; in which there is no reward for hustle, no edge for enthusiasm, no payoff for sacrifice; in which there is no place for the ambient contributions of David Eckstein, Marco Scutaro, or the aging, battered Scott Rolen; in which shared purpose serves no purpose?”
Intangibles, as it turns out, not only ennoble the game; they help win it. And this is the book every fan must read.
- GenresBaseballSportsNonfiction
288 pages, Hardcover
First published August 11, 2015
6 people are currently reading
160 people want to read
About the author
Lonnie Wheeler
16 books1 followerLonnie Wheeler was an American sportswriter and author known for his work on baseball. He wrote for The Cincinnati Enquirer, The Cincinnati Post, and USA Today and was the author of twelve books. He co-wrote the autobiographies of Baseball Hall of Famers Henry Aaron (I Had a Hammer: The Hank Aaron Story) and Bob Gibson (Stranger to the Game: The Autobiography of Bob Gibson), as well as a biography of Negro league legend Cool Papa Bell. His work extended beyond baseball, including a co-written autobiography of Detroit Mayor Coleman Young and books on college sports.
Wheeler's books received multiple Casey Award nominations, and in 2022, he was posthumously inducted into the Greater Cincinnati Journalism Hall of Fame.
Wheeler's books received multiple Casey Award nominations, and in 2022, he was posthumously inducted into the Greater Cincinnati Journalism Hall of Fame.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
May 23, 2020
This is the "get off my lawn" of baseball books. Written as a response to the encroachment of statistics on the game, it instead touts good, old-fashioned virtues like hustle and teamwork. So what's the problem?
First, Wheeler admits early on that his virtues are not quantifiable and rest instead on anecdotal evidence, so he provides anecdotes. More, exceedingly similar anecdotes. Another anecdote ... wait, haven't we heard that one already? It gets really old, really fast, but there's nowhere else to go because his entire theory is based on what somebody said once, over and over.
Second, he constantly contradicts himself. In the chapter It Really Is a Team Sport, he argues that baseball is not an individual game (despite the one-on-one nature of the batter-pitcher duel). But then in trying to disparage the importance of on-base percentage as a stat, he notes that regardless of how many guys are on base, it all comes down to the (presumably team-oriented) batter. An, um, individual. I don't care what side you want to argue, but at least try to be coherent.
More importantly, the writing is ... well. Maybe I should let you decide:
A more statistically minded reviewer might note a 5.0 comma per sentence average is higher than the league norm. I'll just point out, quietly, if sarcastically, that, however you look at it, it's hard to read, what with so many frickin' commas, all over the place. It's hard to believe that anybody who writes this badly has made a career of it; it certainly doesn't speak well of the standards of American newspaper sportswriting.
I couldn't bring myself to finish.
First, Wheeler admits early on that his virtues are not quantifiable and rest instead on anecdotal evidence, so he provides anecdotes. More, exceedingly similar anecdotes. Another anecdote ... wait, haven't we heard that one already? It gets really old, really fast, but there's nowhere else to go because his entire theory is based on what somebody said once, over and over.
Second, he constantly contradicts himself. In the chapter It Really Is a Team Sport, he argues that baseball is not an individual game (despite the one-on-one nature of the batter-pitcher duel). But then in trying to disparage the importance of on-base percentage as a stat, he notes that regardless of how many guys are on base, it all comes down to the (presumably team-oriented) batter. An, um, individual. I don't care what side you want to argue, but at least try to be coherent.
More importantly, the writing is ... well. Maybe I should let you decide:
No doubt, Branch Rickey, the groundbreaking executive who, almost a half-century since his passing, remains the game's guiding light, would show a high regard for the sabermetric beast now crashing about the industry.
A more statistically minded reviewer might note a 5.0 comma per sentence average is higher than the league norm. I'll just point out, quietly, if sarcastically, that, however you look at it, it's hard to read, what with so many frickin' commas, all over the place. It's hard to believe that anybody who writes this badly has made a career of it; it certainly doesn't speak well of the standards of American newspaper sportswriting.
I couldn't bring myself to finish.
February 15, 2016
The short summary of the book “Moneyball” is that you can build a high performance baseball team by understanding the statistics behind what players provide to enable the team to win – the objectively measurable actions, or in a broader sense, the objectively measurable results. The “Moneyball” way was the yin to the yang of trusting the gut instincts of scouts and coaches. In this book, “Intangiball”, the more objective judgements of baseball men, like scouts, managers, and the players themselves, are brought forward as an alternative to the pure statistical way to build a high performance ball team. If I were to give this one a different name, it’d be something like “Moneyball 2: Revenge of the Scout”. The book really is a lengthy listing of anecdotal evidence that stats aren't everything. These are stories about leadership, management, culture, and more from the perspective of players, coaches, and the back-office baseball men. Examples discussed in some depth include Derrick Jeeter, Joe Madden, and the Orioles. They all put together or added value to teams that ended up going beyond their statistically expected performance.
I liked that the examples occurred throughout the past 50 years with many being recent - more recent examples are always better in light reading like this. I got a little overwhelmed with the sheer number of names mentioned in this book. I suspect on average every line had a name. The anecdotes were interesting, like one team buying a fake trophy to represent winning 2 of 3 against a rival, or the bit about how a team’s mohawks were noticed by an opponent. I think more of those kinds of anecdotes would have counteracted the subjective analysis that required dropping all those names, and that made this occasionally come across as lifeless as a legal notice. In the end, you get overwhelming anecdotal evidence that “character” can impact how individuals and teams play, but I don’t know if that was really being doubted by anyone. Even at the end of Moneyball, as quoted twice in this book, Billy Beane says that his statistical team building .”…doesn’t work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is fucking luck.” Well, luck and other things the statistics don’t, and maybe can't, capture.
I liked that the examples occurred throughout the past 50 years with many being recent - more recent examples are always better in light reading like this. I got a little overwhelmed with the sheer number of names mentioned in this book. I suspect on average every line had a name. The anecdotes were interesting, like one team buying a fake trophy to represent winning 2 of 3 against a rival, or the bit about how a team’s mohawks were noticed by an opponent. I think more of those kinds of anecdotes would have counteracted the subjective analysis that required dropping all those names, and that made this occasionally come across as lifeless as a legal notice. In the end, you get overwhelming anecdotal evidence that “character” can impact how individuals and teams play, but I don’t know if that was really being doubted by anyone. Even at the end of Moneyball, as quoted twice in this book, Billy Beane says that his statistical team building .”…doesn’t work in the playoffs. My job is to get us to the playoffs. What happens after that is fucking luck.” Well, luck and other things the statistics don’t, and maybe can't, capture.
February 3, 2022
I’m not really sure what the point of this book is. Maybe the author just wanted an excuse to write about (what he thinks is) a couple of interesting years in the history of his beloved Cincinnati Reds. And to fawn over Derek Jeter.
The premise is that there are some parts of baseball that are difficult to measure. Clubhouse chemistry and such. He has plentiful quotes, from Bill James to Bob Gibson supporting this premise. And then… well, what more can you do? Make up some claptrap about what might be part of this chemistry? Tell random anecdotes about this team or that team (mostly the Reds, of course) suddenly did much better after trading for some random, seemingly over-the-hill, backup. Ah, but that veteran has “teamship”! In spades! Of course, since you can’t measure it (which the author readily admits), you can make up whatever you want. And somehow this went on for 200+ pages. Might have been an interesting magazine article, I guess.
I came to the book on a recommendation from Rob Neyer---I went back to read that again, and Neyer doesn’t claim that he settles anything, but does appreciate the attempt to start to develop a language for discussing it. I’m less convinced that there’s anything useful.
The premise is that there are some parts of baseball that are difficult to measure. Clubhouse chemistry and such. He has plentiful quotes, from Bill James to Bob Gibson supporting this premise. And then… well, what more can you do? Make up some claptrap about what might be part of this chemistry? Tell random anecdotes about this team or that team (mostly the Reds, of course) suddenly did much better after trading for some random, seemingly over-the-hill, backup. Ah, but that veteran has “teamship”! In spades! Of course, since you can’t measure it (which the author readily admits), you can make up whatever you want. And somehow this went on for 200+ pages. Might have been an interesting magazine article, I guess.
I came to the book on a recommendation from Rob Neyer---I went back to read that again, and Neyer doesn’t claim that he settles anything, but does appreciate the attempt to start to develop a language for discussing it. I’m less convinced that there’s anything useful.
January 4, 2019
I guess this is a response or counterpoint to MoneyBall, a play on intangibles and baseball.
Likely the worst baseball book I've read (out of dozens); had to stop 1/3 of the way through. Wheeler tries to explain the unmeasured things like clubhouse impact that cause teams to win but all he has is a series of anecdotes and no actual data. Two stars because the stores themselves aren't bad.
There are many books that have come out recently that do explain how teams win or how teams work. If you want a non-analytical book on winning baseball, try The Best Team Money Can Buy instead.
Likely the worst baseball book I've read (out of dozens); had to stop 1/3 of the way through. Wheeler tries to explain the unmeasured things like clubhouse impact that cause teams to win but all he has is a series of anecdotes and no actual data. Two stars because the stores themselves aren't bad.
There are many books that have come out recently that do explain how teams win or how teams work. If you want a non-analytical book on winning baseball, try The Best Team Money Can Buy instead.
December 16, 2015
Lonnie Wheeler has excellent baseball writer credentials, collaborating on several biographies (including Hank Aaron) and some extended essay collections. His 2015 Intangiball draws on a lot of that history to examine how unmeasurable qualities influence the play of baseball players and teams. Players, managers and writers throw around words like "character" and "grit," but what do they mean when they say those things? How do they influence play and game outcomes? Can they be developed, or does a player have to start out with them? If so, can they be nurtured and passed on?
Wheeler loosely relies on the Cincinnati Reds' history and player development since roughly 2010 as the main framework for his exploration, but he also brings in stories of other well-known players who were said to embody the kinds of qualities he's talking about: The two mentioned above, as well as professionalism and chemistry.
He explains how these qualities are not necessarily as unmeasurable as people might think, and that when you start digging into them you might find they are labels for other things that are more easily quantified -- but not entirely. "Professionalism," for example, may be a way of referring to a player who shows up for practice and games on time, plays hard during the game, looks for ways to improve his skills, play and other abilities, and hopes, by example, to bring others to his level. That last bit is the key, because while time on task and efforts to improve can be clearly observed, "inspiration" is a lot harder to pin down. Some hard workers inspire other players to emulate them, but some do not.
Wheeler does offer some interesting things to think about among those "subtle things that win baseball games," as his subtitle calls them. That Intangiball falls short of being a full exploration of the qualities under consideration speaks more towards their inability to be pinned down than to Wheeler's inability to corral them.
Original available here.
Wheeler loosely relies on the Cincinnati Reds' history and player development since roughly 2010 as the main framework for his exploration, but he also brings in stories of other well-known players who were said to embody the kinds of qualities he's talking about: The two mentioned above, as well as professionalism and chemistry.
He explains how these qualities are not necessarily as unmeasurable as people might think, and that when you start digging into them you might find they are labels for other things that are more easily quantified -- but not entirely. "Professionalism," for example, may be a way of referring to a player who shows up for practice and games on time, plays hard during the game, looks for ways to improve his skills, play and other abilities, and hopes, by example, to bring others to his level. That last bit is the key, because while time on task and efforts to improve can be clearly observed, "inspiration" is a lot harder to pin down. Some hard workers inspire other players to emulate them, but some do not.
Wheeler does offer some interesting things to think about among those "subtle things that win baseball games," as his subtitle calls them. That Intangiball falls short of being a full exploration of the qualities under consideration speaks more towards their inability to be pinned down than to Wheeler's inability to corral them.
Original available here.
May 6, 2018
I appreciate and understand the author’s intention in writing this. He easily makes his case for intangibles in a sport dominated by statistics and formulas for determining a player’s worth. He strengthens his credibility by acknowledging the value of saber metrics and money ball. The problem with the book is it seems to be redundant in explaining the same ideas over and over again. Unlike Moneyball by Lewis which is a great analysis and story, this book feels like it’s running in place while bouncing from example to example. He really could have used a co-writer.
November 8, 2015
Wheeler's book deals with the real inner workings of who is a high value player and why. There is great insight here, although I think it is hard for the average fan to apply these principles. Still you get to learn how managers and general managers identify players that will make significant contributions to a team's success. It could be argued that this is too inside baseball but that is where the heart of the game is. A wonderful addition!
October 14, 2015
Audio - interesting counter position to the "Moneyball" on purely using statistics to assemble a baseball team. The author's use of the Cincinnati Reds gets tiring unless one is a fan of that ballclub.
September 23, 2015
Some interesting thoughts in this book, on the intangible aspect of the most statistic-driven of sports. I enjoyed the read but it was pretty dry in places. You have to be a pretty big baseball fan to get through it, but then, who else would be picking up this book?
January 21, 2016
I read a lot of baseball books, but simply did not like this one.
February 9, 2022
First, I listened to this as an audio book so my examples might not be the exact wording, but given how subjectively anecdotally this book was written, my review is consistent with the book.
The author tries to give us some examples of “intangibles” that can’t be measured as a statistic. Except a lot of his examples are in fact measurable. He talks about good defensive IQ and hustle that might allow a player to get to more balls, which is tracked as defensive range. He mentions David Eckstein’s ability to understand the situation and hit behind the runner and advance him from 2nd to 3rd, this is clearly tracked in the uber-traditional stat “Sacrifice Hit” and in more modern stats as “runs produced”. He then even tries to talk about the “intangibles” that Aroldis Chapman’s 103 mph fastball brings to the game. It’s a 103-mph fastball…you don’t need to try to add intangibles to enhance its benefits.
And on the topic of Chapman…a huge part of this book is about the type of player that people want in the Clubhouse…and yet Chapman still plays a prominent in this book?!?!
Did the Braves draft Chipper Jones because he would be a strong professional calm presence in the locker room, or because he briefly lost his temper in a college game and punched a competitor and subsequently broke his hand?
And I am tired of stories from managers looking back on a Championship season and saying things like “I knew in spring training that this group was special”, or “it was clear from opening day that this group was different and would go out and play for each other”. Let’s start asking managers after spring training / before opening day to rate these intangibles: “heart”, “will to win”, “teamship”, “hunger”, “desire”, or anything else about their teams, and then evaluate these assessments against the end of year win/loss records. I think you would quickly see every manger rate this year’s team as a 9 out of 10 in these categories and obviously most teams don’t even reach playoffs.
I gave it 2 stars only because some of the stories were interesting, even if they did nothing to support the book’s premise.
The author tries to give us some examples of “intangibles” that can’t be measured as a statistic. Except a lot of his examples are in fact measurable. He talks about good defensive IQ and hustle that might allow a player to get to more balls, which is tracked as defensive range. He mentions David Eckstein’s ability to understand the situation and hit behind the runner and advance him from 2nd to 3rd, this is clearly tracked in the uber-traditional stat “Sacrifice Hit” and in more modern stats as “runs produced”. He then even tries to talk about the “intangibles” that Aroldis Chapman’s 103 mph fastball brings to the game. It’s a 103-mph fastball…you don’t need to try to add intangibles to enhance its benefits.
And on the topic of Chapman…a huge part of this book is about the type of player that people want in the Clubhouse…and yet Chapman still plays a prominent in this book?!?!
Did the Braves draft Chipper Jones because he would be a strong professional calm presence in the locker room, or because he briefly lost his temper in a college game and punched a competitor and subsequently broke his hand?
And I am tired of stories from managers looking back on a Championship season and saying things like “I knew in spring training that this group was special”, or “it was clear from opening day that this group was different and would go out and play for each other”. Let’s start asking managers after spring training / before opening day to rate these intangibles: “heart”, “will to win”, “teamship”, “hunger”, “desire”, or anything else about their teams, and then evaluate these assessments against the end of year win/loss records. I think you would quickly see every manger rate this year’s team as a 9 out of 10 in these categories and obviously most teams don’t even reach playoffs.
I gave it 2 stars only because some of the stories were interesting, even if they did nothing to support the book’s premise.
April 19, 2019
This felt like a well-premised book that just left me feeling like it came up a little short. Wheeler is an excellent writer. I loved his book on Kentucky basketball (Big Blue Yonder, I think is the title). This book is his anti-Moneyball. It tries to focus on the difficult-to-define and much lauded "intangibles" that make somebody a good teammate and presence on a roster ultimately feels a little short on definition. I've never perceived the baseball divide as entirely analytics versus subjective feels. Most teams are going to rely on both... but analytics are numbers. A .300 hitter is a .300 hitter. A guy who you project into being a positive attribute in the clubhouse might be a positive attribute. Or you might be projecting. By choosing the second entirely over the first, Wheeler (and his myriad examples of a mediocre Cincinnati Reds team) comes off as a little too "darn kids get off my lawn." It's not boring, and there are times when I found it enjoyable. But there were more times when it felt like a well struck fly ball that's just destined to land in the center fielder's glove. There's something here, but it felt kind of overblown and vague.
July 4, 2021
Interesting thesis, but that's where the interest ends. Chapter after chapter of the same stories and anecdotes to help prop up a theory that can never be measured accurately. Of course I believe that some players being good "clubhouse guys" helps a team. How Mr. Wheeler squeezed 200 pages of juice from that orange I'll never know. Additionally, I'm a huge Reds fan, but use a more successful team in baseball than the 2008-2012 Cincinnati Reds to be your star witness. 2 playoff appearances, no series wins.
November 17, 2022
A little dated at this point, and the strike out a lot but at least have high exit velocity and good launch angle on the rare instances of contact revolution has, I fear, made these salient points rather moot. I still like to think that some character guys make a difference and that it shows up in the playoffs, but anymore we also get huffy about 88 win teams that go deep into the playoffs. I guess we'll have to see how the new first round bye thing plays out - could be disaster for good regular season teams. Like it was this year...
March 23, 2023
With wistful reminiscing,"Intangiball" tries to defend the idea of an "x-factor", that intangible quality that helps players lift both themselves and their teammates above what the statistics say should be their station.
It's by no means convincing, providing anecdotal evidence and not much else, but it was still a nice stroll down memory lane as Wheeler often references players who aren't household names.
It's by no means convincing, providing anecdotal evidence and not much else, but it was still a nice stroll down memory lane as Wheeler often references players who aren't household names.
April 13, 2019
A collection of stories about players and members of management whose skills enable baseball teams to win some games. Occasionally insightful, occasionally skimable. Swearing. Adventures in namedropping.
Want to Read
April 8, 2023to-read
April 15, 2025
Baseball is full of characters. At least is was. Nolan Ryan would throw at your head. Pete Rose would body slam you to the ground. Albert Belle would crush your soul. Apparently, there is a right way to play baseball, and you learn to play major league baseball from the veterans on your team. There’s no doubt that veterans in baseball have a unique, intangible value. They help rookies focus and defend their honor.
Why don’t we see these veterans like this anymore? Well, that is up for debate. Veterans blame sabermetrics. They suggest that modern baseball does not value chemistry and professionalism, instead it values on-base percentages and wins above replacement.
Intangiball by Lonnie Wheeler attempts to address these “subtle things that win baseball games,” but it simply fails.
I can comment several different ways, but in the end, I did not find this book interesting at all. If you love the Cincinnati Reds you will like this book. The author, Lonnie Wheeler, is from Ohio and constantly uses the ball club from southern Ohio as an example of winning intangibles, though they haven’t won playoff series since the early 90’s. (To be fair to Moneyball, the Oakland Athletics have not seen much success either).
If you have romantic feelings towards Derek Jeter then you will adore this book. I fully agree Derek Jeter was a leader in New York and that his presence probably added runs and wins to the team that cannot be listed in any advanced stat. Nonetheless, you can argue that this work ethic made him valuable and that showed up in his wins above replacement.
If you are looking for a complement to the rise of sabermetrics, you will not like this book. If you are looking for a researched work on indefinable qualities of ballplayers, you will not like this book. It is popular for rugged veterans to rip sabermetrics as Ivy League nerds running a team with fancy computers, but that is simply an inaccurate view. I know this book is not an argument against moneyball, but it definitely feels like it does not understand it.
If you want to find a proper balance between old school baseball and modern day statistics, read up on manager Tony La Russa. He understood that winning teams needed peer leadership in the clubhouse, however, he also knew that preparation was key. He knew shifting defenses, adjusting lineups, knowing pitchers, and so on were essential to winning. Valuing intangibles over data or vice versa is dangerous and foolish.
This book does not give you any interesting stories or provide any remarkable theories. It offers boring stories – many lifted from old baseball books – and not much else.
Why don’t we see these veterans like this anymore? Well, that is up for debate. Veterans blame sabermetrics. They suggest that modern baseball does not value chemistry and professionalism, instead it values on-base percentages and wins above replacement.
Intangiball by Lonnie Wheeler attempts to address these “subtle things that win baseball games,” but it simply fails.
I can comment several different ways, but in the end, I did not find this book interesting at all. If you love the Cincinnati Reds you will like this book. The author, Lonnie Wheeler, is from Ohio and constantly uses the ball club from southern Ohio as an example of winning intangibles, though they haven’t won playoff series since the early 90’s. (To be fair to Moneyball, the Oakland Athletics have not seen much success either).
If you have romantic feelings towards Derek Jeter then you will adore this book. I fully agree Derek Jeter was a leader in New York and that his presence probably added runs and wins to the team that cannot be listed in any advanced stat. Nonetheless, you can argue that this work ethic made him valuable and that showed up in his wins above replacement.
If you are looking for a complement to the rise of sabermetrics, you will not like this book. If you are looking for a researched work on indefinable qualities of ballplayers, you will not like this book. It is popular for rugged veterans to rip sabermetrics as Ivy League nerds running a team with fancy computers, but that is simply an inaccurate view. I know this book is not an argument against moneyball, but it definitely feels like it does not understand it.
If you want to find a proper balance between old school baseball and modern day statistics, read up on manager Tony La Russa. He understood that winning teams needed peer leadership in the clubhouse, however, he also knew that preparation was key. He knew shifting defenses, adjusting lineups, knowing pitchers, and so on were essential to winning. Valuing intangibles over data or vice versa is dangerous and foolish.
This book does not give you any interesting stories or provide any remarkable theories. It offers boring stories – many lifted from old baseball books – and not much else.
December 31, 2021
Intangiball had some interesting ideas, but the focus on the Cincinnati Reds was not the most compelling example. Plus it strayed to other areas and felt like it was a little all over the place. Just okay.
January 8, 2017
finished reading the intro....
September 3, 2015
Just quickly, I loved this book! I'll write more later, but it's well worth the read.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews