Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    69,729
    vCash
    1500

    Age/Prime/Decline

    Not sure if this was posted but I found this to be an interesting read.

    http://joeposnanski.si.com/2012/02/10/aging-with-chart/

    What was meant for me will be Mine once again... THE CHAMP OF CHAMPS IS BACK

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Waterloo
    Posts
    9,076
    vCash
    1500
    I find this flawed. The chart gives the number of 6+ WAR seasons by players at age each age, and then he uses it to argue why players like anyone expecting Chone Figgins or Manny to be effective players is an idiot. No one is expecting these guys to be 6 WAR players. I mean, he is probably right- especially about Figgins- but not because this little graph he made said so. With the numbers he used on this chart, it mathematically gives the impression that anything under a 6.0 WAR is irrelevant.

    I think a more effective way to do this would be to chart the average WAR pt wOBA or whatever stat you like put up by a player at each age.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Waterloo
    Posts
    9,076
    vCash
    1500
    Also, at the end he sayd:
    But I think it can be useful. What are the chances that Albert Pujols will still be a great player at ages 37, 38, 39, 40? Will Prince Fielder be a great player at 33? How smart is it to sign a player for big money into his mid-to-upper 30s?
    If you want to know the chances, a more effective thing would be to present these as proportions. Obviously there is going to have been a lot less 6.0 WAR seasons by 36 year olds than 28 year olds because there are a lot less 36 year olds in the league. He should be dividing the number of 6.0 WAR season at each age cohort by the total number of players in that age cohort.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    14,447
    vCash
    1500
    Right, it's completely flawed because the chart assumes that every player's peak is 6 WAR. It's like he only cares about MVP and HOF candidates. There is nothing wrong with having a 4 WAR peak and Prince Fielder definitely has the capabilities of posting 4 WAR into his 32 year old season. His argument against guys like 'MannyBManny' and Chone Figgins are literally so irrelevant to the article. People aren't paying Manny and Chone to perform like they did in their prime years when they hit 40 years old. They are paying them for what they think they are worth, and that is a minor league contract. They hardly have to be serviceable to give the club an adequate return on that contract. The guy's right, he knows nothing about 'making charts'. You can't just assume that a dropoff after 6 WAR suddenly makes the player useless.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Amidst A Giants Dynasty: 3in5
    Posts
    33,063
    vCash
    1279
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Then-Most View Post
    Not sure if this was posted but I found this to be an interesting read.

    http://joeposnanski.si.com/2012/02/10/aging-with-chart/
    How interesting? barely interesting, sort-of interesting, or very interesting?


    Barry Lamar Bonds. .393/.967/1.054....on 3-0 counts.

    lol, Please' top 10 p4p: Mayweather/Marquez/Pacquiao/Bradley/Cotto/Wlad/Rigondeaux/Froch/Canelo/Maidana


    Boxing Fan? Come Discuss Boxing!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,064
    vCash
    1500
    These long-term contracts to players in their prime don't really seem like that much of a mystery. Obviously, if you're paying top-dollar for 10 years for a player currently in their prime, you're not expecting them to be a freak of nature and somehow sidestep the aging process. Instead, you're hoping within the first 4-5 years of the contract they make your team a true contender, by helping your team to secure multiple playoff births and a legitimate chance of making the World Series.

    People point to the AJ Burnett contract and say what a disaster it is, and no one hates Burnett more than me, but if you look at the life of the contract is it really that awful considering he was an integral part of winning a World Series title for New York in the first year of it? Most people would say yes because they have short memories, but at the time of signing the contract I'm sure that would have been an acceptable goal to those who don't live in a sabrmetric bubble.
    Last edited by mtf; 03-16-2012 at 05:34 PM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    BX, New York
    Posts
    6,095
    vCash
    1500
    I always thought 32 years of age was your last prime year....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New York, New York, USA
    Posts
    390
    vCash
    1500
    Not all men are created equal. Comparing players is apples to oranges, some are done by 18, some by 30, some by 40. Some peak early, some peak late.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,943
    vCash
    1000
    There is still a typical age curve for most pro baseball players, defense declines, power declines, etc all at different rates, but as a whole pro ball players all decline at a specific rate, and you can look for the abnormalities as they occur.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,943
    vCash
    1000
    Quote Originally Posted by DJYankee View Post
    I always thought 32 years of age was your last prime year....
    Can depend on what kind of player you are, or if you are an elite type of player or not.

    Speed players tend to decline more quickly, while good discipline players decline more slowly. It just depends. But as a whole, the typical position player peak ages are usually 27-32, with defense declining at about 25 years old (but most players learn positioning well enough, and better routes to make up for it)

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    2,108
    vCash
    1500
    Article sucks
    New York Yankees
    Los Angeles Lakers (Jimbaco)
    Detroit Lions

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    69,729
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffy25 View Post
    Can depend on what kind of player you are, or if you are an elite type of player or not.

    Speed players tend to decline more quickly, while good discipline players decline more slowly. It just depends. But as a whole, the typical position player peak ages are usually 27-32, with defense declining at about 25 years old (but most players learn positioning well enough, and better routes to make up for it)
    That actually shocks me a little bit

    What was meant for me will be Mine once again... THE CHAMP OF CHAMPS IS BACK

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    39,943
    vCash
    1000
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Then-Most View Post
    That actually shocks me a little bit
    Did me too, but it makes sense.

    Most of your defensive abilities are speed, arm, reaction. All of those are skills that peak relatively early. Being a smart player though, positioning well, getting good jumps, reads, etc, all come later. Most players peak defensively at around age 24-26, but they don't usually decline until they are closer to 33-35 though.

    If you want to have a defensive back up, you like to have young players.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •