Braves sign Freeman to 8 year 135M deal! *Updated to 135m*

But1b generally take longer to develop do they not? Can't find the website at this time, but I remember reading that

No. Players at power positions tend to debut later because of talented hitters already at their position.

The article dicusses why peak has basically gone away. Gone are the days of players having ****ty diets and exercising routines in the minors. Players are groomed for the majors now, they're coming in in great shape with great diet and exercise, they're facing better talent in the minors, and so on so forth. That's what's been going on. That's why you're seeing so many legendary debuts like Trout or Jason. Cause players are ready. Obviously no player is the same, so they have different aging curves, but in general the expectation of players getting better as they hit their late 20s is likely gonna break many people's hearts in the upcoming seasons.
 
No. Players at power positions tend to debut later because of talented hitters already at their position.

The article dicusses why peak has basically gone away. Gone are the days of players having ****ty diets and exercising routines in the minors. Players are groomed for the majors now, they're coming in in great shape with great diet and exercise, they're facing better talent in the minors, and so on so forth. That's what's been going on. That's why you're seeing so many legendary debuts like Trout or Jason. Cause players are ready. Obviously no player is the same, so they have different aging curves, but in general the expectation of players getting better as they hit their late 20s is likely gonna break many people's hearts in the upcoming seasons.

I'm not convinced by the latest research from Fangraphs on the lack of an aging curve. The way I see the data (and here I'm only talking about hitters) is if you slice hitters into groups by some metric (OPS or wRC+ or whatever). And then further divide up the groups by those above a certain age and those below, you will find that for about 80-90% of the hitters it looks likes performance is a random walk from one year to the next and is unrelated to age. But at the tails (players who improve a lot, and players who drop off a lot) you definitely find significantly more young players in one group and significantly more old players in the other group. Imo the best type of player to invest in is the good but not elite hitter under age 27.
 
I'm not convinced by the latest research from Fangraphs on the lack of an aging curve. The way I see the data (and here I'm only talking about hitters) is if you slice hitters into groups by some metric (OPS or wRC+ or whatever). And then further divide up the groups by those above a certain age and those below, you will find that for about 80-90% of the hitters it looks likes performance is a random walk from one year to the next and is unrelated to age. But at the tails (players who improve a lot, and players who drop off a lot) you definitely find significantly more young players in one group and significantly more old players in the other group. Imo the best type of player to invest in is the good but not elite hitter under age 27.

I'm not really sure where you're going there.

Players have generally followed a trend. Of course generally doesn't mean every player does it. In the past they debuted then got way better then aged. Now they're debuting strong and not improving as much. They age at about the same curve minus some steroid blips.
 
I'm not really sure where you're going there.

Players have generally followed a trend. Of course generally doesn't mean every player does it. In the past they debuted then got way better then aged. Now they're debuting strong and not improving as much. They age at about the same curve minus some steroid blips.

Another reason for that is because now days most kids are being groomed for only one sport and they spend their entire time, energy and focus on that one sport, so naturally they reach their peak faster and there's usually not drastic improvement once they reach the majors.
 
I'm not really sure where you're going there.

Players have generally followed a trend. Of course generally doesn't mean every player does it. In the past they debuted then got way better then aged. Now they're debuting strong and not improving as much. They age at about the same curve minus some steroid blips.

My point is there are more marginal young players getting significant playing time in the majors now. They are there mostly in reaction to how expensive older players have gotten. Their aging curve is not the same as the better young players.
 
My point is there are more marginal young players getting significant playing time in the majors now. They are there mostly in reaction to how expensive older players have gotten. Their aging curve is not the same as the better young players.

Fair point but why wouldn't the marginal players also improve? If the defining factor is seeing more playing time and getting bigger. But to counter that, it would have adjusted the spike. If only cream of the crop players debuted in the past, then you'd see more guys doing well at a young age.
 
Fair point but why wouldn't the marginal players also improve?

That's a good question. Maybe they do but not in the same way. Since they are averaged into the data for young players they can affect what the overall aging curve for young players looks like simply by having a different one.
 
Well, I think batting leadoff is a good place for Jason. It probably simplifies his approach some and utilizes his speed and good eye.
 
Well, I think batting leadoff is a good place for Jason. It probably simplifies his approach some and utilizes his speed and good eye.

I think that was the case last season when he exploded and went on that hot streak that powered the Braves to a 25-7 mark before Jonathan Niese hit him in the face with that pitch.
 
Back
Top