A Realistic View at 2019: Part I

[Kimmi]

'Wise decision' can be kind of difficult to define in terms of MLB economics and the chasing of rings.

 

If Price's contract was unwise, I would argue that the one Theo gave Jon Lester was just about the same. But Lester helped the Cubs finally win a ring, so was it a good move? I would say hell yes to that.

 

At the time of the Lester signing, I stated that the Sox were right not to try to outbid Theo. In other words, I thought Lester's contract was unwise.

 

If it works out, then of course it looks brilliant. If it works out, then the moves are worth it. But you really have no way of knowing that when you're making the move.

[Bellhorn04]

At the time of the Lester signing, I stated that the Sox were right not to try to outbid Theo. In other words, I thought Lester's contract was unwise.

 

If it works out, then of course it looks brilliant. If it works out, then the moves are worth it. But you really have no way of knowing that when you're making the move.

 

Well that's right. It's my belief that the way things are set up, you can't always be risk-averse.

 

Theo Epstein clearly subscribes to that theory. And he is the man, after all.

[oldtimer]

Yes, there is. My bad.

 

I still think Jacko's age ranges are too kind in terms of production.

 

I would classify prime as perhaps 25-30, and post prime productive as 30 - 32.

 

I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion of how age impacts players and their capabilities, but with the trainers and nutrition expects helping players these days, wouldn't you thiink the prime years might be extended? What is the data used to back up the gradual reduction in player capability and does it apply to all players or is there a difference for pitchers, catchers, field players? Do thinner guys remain in their prime for longer? It seems like that would be quite a research project and one that probably been undertaken by most of the teams to justify their contract offerings.

[moonslav59]

Yes, there is. My bad.

 

I still think Jacko's age ranges are too kind in terms of production.

 

I would classify prime as perhaps 25-30, and post prime productive as 30 - 32.

 

I'd go something like this.... (of course, there are exceptions to every grouping)

 

23-24 Pre-prime (semi productive)

25-26 Productive pre-prime

27-29 Peak prime

30-32 Productive post prime

33-34 Post prime (semi productive)

35> Steep decline likely

 

[Bellhorn04]

I'd go something like this.... (of course, there are exceptions to every grouping)

 

23-24 Pre-prime (semi productive)

25-26 Productive pre-prime

27-29 Peak prime

30-32 Productive post prime

33-34 Post prime (semi productive)

35> Steep decline likely

 

 

36> Ted Williams, David Ortiz

[moonslav59]

36> Ted Williams, David Ortiz

 

Plenty of exceptions to every grouping.

[dgalehouse]

When an athlete starts to decline depends on things like health , conditioning , diet , genetics and other factors . You really can't set one age where it begins . Far too many exceptions for there to even be a general rule . Eventually though , it will catch up to everyone .

[FredLynn]

36> Ted Williams, David Ortiz

 

Don't forget Tom Brady. I think that classifying age ranges for being productive is an exercise in futility. Meaningless. It would be more accurate to simply say that for most athletes there are peak productive years followed by an age related decline. When an athlete peaks and declines is quite variable.

[harmony]

Ivan the Great at the Atlanta Braves' site Talking Chop analyzes aging:

 

https://www.talkingchop.com/2019/2/9/18202695/baseball-analysis-primer-aging

 

Ivan the Great's analysis of surplus value could be helpful in assessing trade proposals:

 

https://www.talkingchop.com/2019/2/10/18202698/baseball-analysis-primer-surplus-value

[moonslav59]

Don't forget Tom Brady. I think that classifying age ranges for being productive is an exercise in futility. Meaningless. It would be more accurate to simply say that for most athletes there are peak productive years followed by an age related decline. When an athlete peaks and declines is quite variable.

 

I was only referring to baseball, and again there is no rigid rule on these groupings.

[Bellhorn04]

Plenty of exceptions to every grouping.

 

I was just joking around. Williams and Ortiz might have been the two most incredible exceptions to the rule in history.

[notin]

I was just joking around. Williams and Ortiz might have been the two most incredible exceptions to the rule in history.

 

Nolan Ryan?

[moonslav59]

Bonds (with PED help)

[moonslav59]

Red Sox by Age

 

35 Pearce & Pedey

34 Wright

33 Price & Moreland

 

31 JD M, Nunez,Brasier

30 Porcello, Holt, Velazquez, Hembree, Workman, Thornburg, Walden

29 Sale, Leon

28 Eovaldi (turns 29 before season), JBJ, Vazquez, Barnes, Johnson

 

26 Bogaerts, Betts, Swihart, Poyner, M Hernandez, Brewer & Shepherd

25 ERod, Travis & Josh Taylor

24 Beni, Lin, Lakins

 

23 Chavis

22 Devers, D Hernandez & D Reyes

 

 

Edited February 10, 2019 by moonslav59

[Kimmi]

Well that's right. It's my belief that the way things are set up, you can't always be risk-averse.

 

Theo Epstein clearly subscribes to that theory. And he is the man, after all.

 

Theo is the man. As I've posted before, he's not perfect.

[moonslav59]

Yankees by Age:

 

38 Sabathia

36 Happ

35 Gardner & Ellsbury

34 Tulo

33 Ottavino & Kontos

 

31 Britton & Hale

30 Tanaka, Paxton, Chapman, Betances, LeMahieuRomine

29 Stanton, Hicks & Kahnle

28 Gregorius

 

27 Voit, Green, Heller & Harvey

26 Judge, Sanchez, Montgomery, Bird, German & Cessa

25 Holder

 

24 Severino, Loaisiga, Frazier, Adams, Wade, de la Cruz

23 Andujar

22 Torres

[Bellhorn04]

Theo is the man. As I've posted before, he's not perfect.

 

No, he's not perfect. But in my opinion, if we're going to look to a 'model team builder' it has to be one who actually exists.

[Kimmi]

I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion of how age impacts players and their capabilities, but with the trainers and nutrition expects helping players these days, wouldn't you thiink the prime years might be extended? What is the data used to back up the gradual reduction in player capability and does it apply to all players or is there a difference for pitchers, catchers, field players? Do thinner guys remain in their prime for longer? It seems like that would be quite a research project and one that probably been undertaken by most of the teams to justify their contract offerings.

 

The beloved stat geeks have already researched aging curves in most ways imaginable, and they continue to do so. Yes, aging curves are slight different for pitchers, catchers, and position players. They are also slightly different by body type.

 

I am sure that with the advances in technology and science, the aging curve might be extended. OTOH, the aging curve was extended due to PEDs use, and now that we are no longer in the steroid era, the aging curve might be shortened.

 

All that said, the aging curves that I have seen all conclude roughly the same thing.

[Kimmi]

I'd go something like this.... (of course, there are exceptions to every grouping)

 

23-24 Pre-prime (semi productive)

25-26 Productive pre-prime

27-29 Peak prime

30-32 Productive post prime

33-34 Post prime (semi productive)

35> Steep decline likely

 

 

I once read that a runner's speed decreases by one inch per second, pretty much from age 22 or 23. So do a couple of other traits which I can't recall off the top of my head. The reason why we don't notice this immediate decline is because those young players are gaining experience, so what they lose in physical ability, they gain in baseball smarts from experience.

[Kimmi]

No, he's not perfect. But in my opinion, if we're going to look to a 'model team builder' it has to be one who actually exists.

 

Sure, and he realized first and foremost the importance of a strong farm system.

[moonslav59]

I once read that a runner's speed decreases by one inch per second, pretty much from age 22 or 23. So do a couple of other traits which I can't recall off the top of my head. The reason why we don't notice this immediate decline is because those young players are gaining experience, so what they lose in physical ability, they gain in baseball smarts from experience.

 

Very true, and some players take longer to get over an issue that held them back, so their curve looks out of whack. Others seem to really respond to the experience aspect of the game. Dewey Evans comes to mind. Others, who maybe relied more on their physicality seem to drop quickly. Jim Rice comes to mind, although his eye sight troubles may have been the real reason.

 

I'm sure GMs are wise to all this, or are getting there quickly.

 

[moonslav59]

Our season begins March 28th with a 4 game road trip to Seattle (no off days until after game 11).

 

With no injuries, I'm assuming we start with Sale, Price, Porcello & Eovaldi

 

4 at Oakland: ERod, (6 man rotation to start the year?), Wright or Johnson, Sale & Price

 

3 at Arizona: Porcello, Eovaldi & ERod

 

Day off/ travel to BOS

 

4/9 TOR

Day off

4/11 TOR

4 vs BAL

 

then, at the Yanks for 2

[dgalehouse]

Our season begins March 28th with a 4 game road trip to Seattle (no off days until after game 11).

 

With no injuries, I'm assuming we start with Sale, Price, Porcello & Eovaldi

 

4 at Oakland: ERod, (6 man rotation to start the year?), Wright or Johnson, Sale & Price

 

3 at Arizona: Porcello, Eovaldi & ERod

 

Day off/ travel to BOS

 

4/9 TOR

Day off

4/11 TOR

4 vs BAL

 

then, at the Yanks for 2

 

West coast trips can often be a problem , but , especially with weather considerations, it is good to get one of them out of the way right off the bat . All in all , a pretty easy start to the season as we get ready for the Yankees . Can't complain.

[moonslav59]

West coast trips can often be a problem , but , especially with weather considerations, it is good to get one of them out of the way right off the bat . All in all , a pretty easy start to the season as we get ready for the Yankees . Can't complain.

 

I agree, and if we can start 2019 like 2018, we'll be off to a great start with the major west coast trip out of the way early.

[moonslav59]

There other west coast trip leads into September.

 

3 @ SDP

day off

3 @ COL

day off

3 @ LAA

day off (travel)

3 v MN

4 v NYY

3 v TOR

day off

2 @ PHI

day off

3 v SFG

4 @ TBR

3 @ TX

3 v BAL

End of Season

 

[moonslav59]

The Yanks open the season at home vs BAL & the Tigers. They hit the road to BAL & HOU.

 

They end the year, starting AUG 20th, with...

3 @ OAK

3 @ LAD

3 @ SEA

day off

3 v OAK

3 v TX

day off

4 @ BOS

3 @ DET

3 @ TOR

day off

3 v LAA

3 v TOR

day off

2 @ TBR

day off

3 @ TX

 

 

 

[dgalehouse]

I agree, and if we can start 2019 like 2018, we'll be off to a great start with the major west coast trip out of the way early.

 

I think we won 17 of 19 to start last season . It will be very difficult to match that . I do think that MLB was good to the Sox with the early season schedule. What I don't like is that we will play two games in London against the Yankees, and both games will count as home dates for the Sox . Why is that ?

[moonslav59]

I think we won 17 of 19 to start last season . It will be very difficult to match that . I do think that MLB was good to the Sox with the early season schedule. What I don't like is that we will play two games in London against the Yankees, and both games will count as home dates for the Sox . Why is that ?

 

It should count 1 as NY and 1 as BOS.

[dgalehouse]

It should count 1 as NY and 1 as BOS.

 

Exactly.

[moonslav59]

I think we won 17 of 19 to start last season . It will be very difficult to match that .

 

Our season did start out awesome:

 

19-2

 

Then...

 

11-12

 

15-5

 

6-7

 

21-5

 

4-3

 

13-3

 

2-6

 

13-5

 

5-7

 

Then, the playoffs