drewski6

100% agreement there.

To get better prospects in the package

Well, I meant guys over 33 not over 34 because I wanted to count Freeman twice. Lets not small sample size fluxuations here. Freddie Freeman is not a tag along on the dodgers. He is not still playing because of PR or ticket sales. They dont need him to sell tickets. Hes been part of their core. Now going into age 36 season maybe that happens. But age 35 AND age 34 (thats two full years): OPS+ = 141. Thats my point. The north of 33 hanger-ons are certainly there. Getting that next contract out of PR and name recognition. But the truly great players are usually still helping their team wins even when they are north of 33 and Freeman is a pt for team drew.

very correct on the 1-2% being massive though. Imagine how easy it is to go from perfect-perfect on a fastball to slightly late. We're talking a less than 1% differnce in swing timing. Could be a difference between depositing a 3 run jack over center-left and a loud foul. No hypothetical about it. Margin for errror that slim. 100%

For sure. Some things are especially linked. SOme weird connections but are too correlated to not be true. Gut health and leg strength are 2. Mouth health is a weird third. But I have my suspicion that mouth health and dimentia are correlated through a secondary correlation of gut health. Physical strenght for sure, but especially leg strength. Maybe its "dont be bed-ridden" But 1000000% when either the body or mind rots, the other soon follows.

Just the bold part is wrong. Some , sure. But there are more guys over 34 who are still contributing to playoff wins than there are guys under 23 who are contributing to playoff wins.

Im just like "obligatory eye roll"

I said hall of fame talent and i chose those words with purpose , haha Fair point. My only point here is how quick some are to poo-poo it or demand our trade partner subsidize. Which im like, cmon. I think you are I are close to agreement on this one. We can see why we wouldnt bite here, and can even understand the argument. Just have to throw in some eye rolls at the notion that we need money eaten when he would be our best positional player and its not like we are loaded with hitting right now.

Im trying to set myself up to not get old as young as my dad did, so my point is that Im pretty well read on decline right now.

21 65% of prime, 22 70%, 23 75%, 24 85%, 25 90%, 26, 95%, 27 100%, 28 98%, 29 96%, 30 94%, 31 91%, 32 88%, 33 84%, 34 78%, 35 68% Would be my estimates. And Im not talking out my butt here. I am 41 with a dad suffering from early dimentia (hes 75 going on 95) so Ive been doing a TON of reading and consulting with my doctors (i have plenty because my best friend is a doctor as our a few of my uncles, and i have my own PCP)...So ive been reading up a lot on decline both physical and mental (spoiler alert, they are linked) especially lately.

But now, your body is closer to its prime at 31 than it is at 21. Even 33 vs 23. 34 vs 24 it starts to flip.

The science here is simply not true. Decline starts in the late 20s/early 30s and is very gradual (1-2%/yr) until the 40s. The issue is to play ball at the mlb level, you dont need to decline very much to no longer be able to hang with the best of the best. But physically, you are still on the way up at 25 and you really dont start coming down until 29-31, then it hits a second gear around 41. But sure, sometime around 35/36, after 4-6 years of gradual decline , its very hard to still be among the best of the best.

A hall of famer is not washed up at 32. Hes going to be at or near hall of fame level talent for another 2-3 years, followed by 2-3 years of being a contributor (but overpaid). Overall, maybe you get par value from the contract maybe even a little less. Dont care. This is a bit chicken vs egg, and I think you are mostly right. But at a certain point it flips. Are the contributors at minimum wage more valuable than the stars making star money? Well you cant afford the stars making star money without either a) a team of holes or b) guys filling holes on rook deals. So I get it, you need the cheapo contributors to be underpaid so you can pay the stars who lean overpaid. But as much as a team with stars making star money needs youngsters making cheapo money, guess what? A team of youngsters making cheapo money NEEDS stars making star money to go anywhere! Teams with cores under 25s are very rarely champions. So whats more valuable the underpaid players filling holes, or the elite taletns getting paid like such? I think its usually the former, but for the trully elite, its the latter. Ortiz in his 30s was more to us than any player south of 25 ever. And he was a DH. You woudnt flip Ortiz at 31 yrs old for blue chip prospects. Because when you get to that good. Carry a team to a championship good (and Seager has) , you flip the script. You become the prize. You become the chicken and stop being the egg (or become the egg and stop being the chicken). But you become the end-game. The youngsters are the road, the truly elite are the destination. But sure, Seagers durability throws a wrench in it. But poo-pooing a hall of famer, who is not washed up, on a team that is #3 revenue generating, and has no offensive all-stars (other than duran who is likely to be traded)......Really is a sorry state of things, Im sorry for saying that. But our only hitter last year in the top 50 was Duran. Hes likely to be traded, so we have none in the top 50. Heres a 32 yr old hall of fame hitter, and we are like: nope, too rich. The #3 revenue team. I dont think Im crazy to hit the "give me a break" button here. Baseball isnt a race to dump stars. But it seems like it sometimes, and thats sad.

Im not really speaking of polanco, just mostly this common cultural belief that younger is better. Just so we arent talking past each other. If you are speaking primarily on Polanco, then we could be having different conversations. My point is that if you are going to count on people to win you playoff series, you are better off counting on guys 30-33 than 21-24. Your square prime years are 26-28, but it falls off between 29 and 39 gradually. Sometime in teh mid 30s most guys cant compete at the highest levels anymore, sure. But you dont want a team of 23 year olds, even if you are planning 5 years out. "fit the timeline" is overrated cuz you usually want a mix of old and young, but if caught between teh two you would prefer to be older. (older meaning more core players between 29 and 34 than 21 and 25). Its tempting and exciting to think about the future. Even Michael Jordan was not dominating until he got a little older. Very few guys dominated younger than 25. You dont even have your man strenght yet. And many guys were one and dones, and many guys were hyped prospects that never could figure it out. There is something to be said for a guy who has established a baseline. Im thinking more of Story than Polanco. I am glad Story didnt opt out. Some people wanted younger and cheaper at the position, some people always want younger and cheaper. I think thats the bias I speak of, and I dont mean that you , Hugh, is someone who gets misled by the cultural youth worship. Im really jsut saying pump the breaks on "younger and cheaper is better" cuz theres plenty of guys who are in their 30s who are more reliable than any sophmore. Maybe not their mid-upper 30s, granted. And some guys fall off younger, for sure.

Anything you get from a player under 25 is gravy. Except for those rare stars that are superstars by 23.

There is a reason why going into last year Mayer, Anthony, Campbell were supposed to carry us but instead we wound up carried by story, bregman, and duran.

Respectfully, there are some biases effecting your position. Yes, players who are all-stars well known around the league, have illustrius careers. Stars. Tend to fall off in their 30s. Sure. 100% of them. But its not usually the early 30s and the year in which they fall off is getting pushed further back. Guys are playing longer. But the average MLB career is under 3 years. There are so many young guys that come and go. So many one year wonders. So many hyped prospects that couldnt make it in the league. So many cusp guys who get a call up in their late 20s and just cant stick. These type of guys greatly outnumber but arent often remembered There is something to be said for having been there before, for being a professional, doing the things so your body is always readdy to play, focus, maturity. Youth worshipping is cultural. A team of 31 yr olds beats a team of 23 year olds (holding talent level near equal)

Well, i feel like an ass for asking if a righty back doors a pitch with glove side run. Generally I assume righty batter, so that would be the front door. I forgot to add the "to lefties" when i asked if he can backdoor it. My mistake. But TY for the answer.

Agree , here we are debatin what we are going to do with Mayer if they trade for Marte and ink both Bregman and Alonso. Lets table this until that happens, haha.

Yeah, my first question is who specifically. Some poeple go by their gut feel and theres not a lot of real time fact checking on the radio. I dont doubt it. But I can also see this being something that has gotten twisted by the ole game telephone. Heard from a guy who heard from a guy who heard from an insider type of thing. I dont doubt it, but I also dont fully buy it. 3-4 years is not going to get it done. I think its going to take 6. I think we should go six. Schwarber had multiple 5 yr offers on the table.

Sure. I dont think of Beltre as a ranger, but maybe I should. He did have a lot of years there, I just think of him as a dodger and a mariner first. Palmeiro, albeit with a longer career than Juangon, to me is essentially juangon. Same team. I use to follow that team cuz i wa enamored with all the power. Both confirmed cheaters. Disappointing. But if we are dinging both for roids, palmeiro of course is higher. I do kinda think of palmeiro as an oriole. Dunno much about buddy bell, thats a blidspot for me. You wont catch me saying a bad word about my tribesman Ian Kinsler.

Its a sad state of baseball when the #3 revenue generating team is not interested in hall of fame talent unless its heavily subsidized to a well below market value contract. I refuse to believe that we have fallen that far. I understand that its been disappointing and frustrating for most of us who do not root for JH's bank account - but I honestly think we'll snap back. That might be a surprising trade for Seager. That might be a surprise 6 yr deal for Alonso. It may be neither of those things, and may not even happen this year. But between now and the time you are dead - I do believe that the red sox will have top players making top player money at some point.

I always liked him ,but Im not sure how much of that is because of his name. Does he even throw a cutter? And can he backdoor it?

stove is warm right now. Last 48 hours. Good to see.

Thats not really how it works, and I dont mean to come at you because youve been on fire (in a good way) But generally, pros are pros. Look at Story. He gets to the ballpark at the same time every day. He prob doesnt drink alcohol when he has a game the next day. Hes an adult. Hes not partying all night. Hes not picking up chicks at the local bar. Hes not getting DUIs. Ditto Bregman. Because they are adults and professionals. The most likely to fall of a cliff is the kids. Becuase they are young, not use to their success, not use to their monies, havent been established. League can adjust to them. Sophmore slumps are very real. Vets are good. Pros are good. You wanna only be working in a few youngsters at a time, ideally. You want your best players between 27 and 33. The dudes who are most likely to fall off a cliff arent because they are older, its because they are younger.