Bucs Dugout: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
New Blog: Sounder At Heart for Seattle Sounders Fans!

Things I Believe, Part 2: the Class of '05 and the '08 Offense

2800881983_a1bc18af71_medium

Was Ryan Doumit's excellent 2008 season a career year? (Photo: ztil301)


This is the continuation of a series begun here, mostly for the purposes of informing new readers about what goes on here at Bucs Dugout. My hope is that readers will follow my arguments more easily if I explain some of the ideas that inform them.

6. Aging is tough. Conventional sabermetric wisdom holds that the average peak age of a baseball player is about 27, although some have argued it's actually a bit later. Either way, most players are in the big leagues precious few years before they start to go downhill. The aging pattern is particularly cruel to mediocre players. It is not uncommon for players to peak in their early 20s, or while still in the minor leagues. (This may or may not have happened to Steve Pearce in his standout minor league year of 2007, when he was 24.) These tendencies make rebuilding a very tricky enterprise, but it's actually pretty convenient for teams like the Pirates that these trends exist--by the time a player has enough service time to reach free agency, he's probably already past his prime. For example, take the position players who got their first sustained burst of major-league playing time for the Pirates in the 2005 and 2006 seasons. These players included Ronny Paulino, Humberto Cota, Ryan Doumit, Brad Eldred, Freddy Sanchez, Jose Bautista, Chris Duffy and Nate McLouth. These players, as a group, weren't actually all that young--most of them were in their mid-20s by the time they arrived. So it's no surprise that many of them are already gone. A look at their likely peak ages may surprise some readers.

PLAYER PEAK AGE? SUMMARY
Ronny Paulino 25 Forgot how to play
Humberto Cota 22 Once promising; probably peaked in minors
Ryan Doumit 27? Had best year in 2008
Brad Eldred 24 Skills probably better suited to minors; had best year there at 24
Freddy Sanchez 28 Won batting title in 2006
Jose Bautista 26 Emerged as a slightly-below-average hitter in 2006 and hasn't improved
Chris Duffy 25 Head case, not very good to begin with
Nate McLouth 26? Had best year in 2008

It is possible that some of these players haven't had their career years yet, but that looks unlikely, and the only ones who could reasonably be described as still on the upswing are Doumit and McLouth. It might look like the Pirates got unlucky with these players, but actually that isn't true--most of them just weren't very good, and on the whole their peaks occurred at around the standard times for players of their skill level. The problem was that they weren't particularly young when they arrived, so they had a limited amount of time to get where they were going. The Pirates thus got these players' best years at very cheap prices. The problem was that they simply weren't good enough.

7. Regression to the mean is tough. Here's a description of regression to the mean which, as it applies to baseball players, basically means that after a player has a season (or a month, say) that's unusually good or unusually bad for him, he'll typically return to something closer to his career norms. Of course, this rule comes with all kinds of caveats, and not every unusually good or bad season is fluky. But we should be wary of making decisions based on unusually good seasons.

8. Fans who aren't on board with points 6 and 7 tend to overestimate their favorite teams. A couple weeks ago in the semi-infamous Jason Bay post, I responded in part to a claim over at the Post-Gazette that "the offense... looked to be in place" before the Bay and Xavier Nady trades last summer. Not to pick on the Post-Gazette, but I'd like to explore that idea further.

There were, I thought, a couple things wrong with that statement. First, the position players who were scoring runs on offense were causing problems on defense, and thus were not as good as their stat lines made them look. Second, and perhaps more importantly, the early-2008 offense was built almost entirely around Bay, Nady, McLouth and Doumit. Three of those guys were in the midst of what might well have been career seasons, and thus were due for some regression to the mean. And, in fact, they all experienced it as the season wore on.

PLAYER 2007 OPS 2008 Pre-All Star OPS 2008 Post-All-Star OPS
Xavier Nady .806 .902 .825
Ryan Doumit .813 .943 .780
Nate McLouth .810 .899 .781

Nady, after being traded to the Yankees, immediately returned to being regular old Xavier Nady. Doumit and McLouth tailed off down the stretch.

Of course, this doesn't mean that I think these guys are bad players. Far from it, and I think the extension the Pirates gave Doumit was a good idea. But it does mean that you can't count on a player who's suddenly excellent to continue being excellent. Doumit's age (27 last year), injury history, position (catchers age poorly), and brilliant hitting in the first half of 2008 make it somewhat unlikely he'll ever top his 2008 season.

One might point out here that although the Pirates were getting surprising seasons from Nady, Doumit and McLouth in the first half of 2008, Freddy Sanchez and Adam LaRoche had done nothing up to that point, and thus the Pirates might be expected to sustain their offense with contributions from those players even if Nady, Doumit and McLouth faded. Well, fair enough, and in fact Sanchez and LaRoche were very good in the second half.

But to suggest that the offense was "in place" in any meaningful way--keeping in mind that the Pirates needed to look past 2008 to a time in the future when they could compete--ignores point #6. Aging patterns are cruel, and the general tendency of baseball players is to get worse, not better. The players around which the Pirates' early-2008 offense was based were already in their late 20s or early 30s. In two years, they probably won't be nearly as good as they are now. The Pirates' pitching was terrible last year and needs time to improve. Expecting the Bucs to retain their offensive players and wait for pitching would be a very bad strategy that would result in perhaps one decent year in a best-case scenario and, more likely, several more years of failure if it didn't work. And even that best-case scenario assumes that Bay and LaRoche would stick with the team instead of becoming free agents after 2009 anyway.

The mistake I think the Post-Gazette is making is assuming that the good things will stay the same, and that the bad things will get better. Fans often do this kind of thing, and occasionally they turn out to be right, but the more likely scenario would have been that the pitching would get a little better, and the hitting would get a bunch worse as the result of regression and of players aging. Major league baseball players are fleeting things, and it's unwise to expect aging players to stay the same or get better.

That sounds pessimistic and mean, but again, keep in mind that it would not be possible for the Pirates to compete if this weren't true. The Pirates can pay players with less than six years of major league experience bargain prices. If players tended to peak in, say, their ninth year in the big leagues, the Bucs really would not be able to enjoy the best years of a Nate McLouth or a Jason Bay. But because players peak so soon, they can. So they'll be able to compete once they get the right core of young players.

0 recs  |  Comment 28 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

More from Bucs Dugout

Perry Hill Speaks Out

Oct 2009 by Charlie - 64 comments

Jason Bay Headed to Free Agency

Oct 2009 by Charlie - 61 comments

Comments

Display:

Andy LaRoche and regression to the mean

Point 7 seems a bit pessimistic in how you’re putting it there Charlie. Its also true that players who perform significantly worse than expected based on their history should bounce back towards career numbers.

Take, for example, Freddy Sanchez and Adam LaRoche, who had terrible first halves last year but performed well down the stretch – as might be expected by their career numbers.

Or, take Andy LaRoche. In your Jason Bay post it frequently reads as if his terrible play down the stretch last year means Andy should be written off. But Andy has a history, and his .500 OPS is not in line with it what so ever.

So, if you believe in regression to the mean, shouldn’t you also believe that Andy LaRoche will bounce back and turn into a productive player? Not as good as he would’ve seemed when we got him, sure – the .500 OPS does provide new data. But, then again, if Andy hit 1.100 OPS down the stretch you’d expect him to fall off, but still be better than originally thought, because it provides new data.

by DJAnyReason on Dec 29, 2008 5:55 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure I follow you. I’ve never said Andy should be written off. In fact, it’s pretty much the opposite of what I believe.

by Charlie on Dec 29, 2008 6:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I mean, I don’t see how LaRoche’s performance with the Pirates can be viewed as anything but an enormous disappointment, but I don’t think he shouldn’t be written off and I never have.

by Charlie on Dec 29, 2008 6:08 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Another thing that most fans don’t consider is sample size. It would explain why some people thought Chris Duffy was the next Willie Mays or that Nijer Morgan deserved to start over McClouth. Throw-in Andy L.

150 or so ABs are not enough to hand out a verdict. LaRoche was an exceptional hitter in the minors with superior bat command and pitch recognition. There is no way on earth his 24 OPS+ with the Bucs goes anywhere but up. The question is what is his ceiling? I know I’m not going out on a limb here, but he could be anything from a serviceable bench player to a perennial All Star. My guess is somewhere in between. Better than Jose Bautista but not as good as Aramis Ramirez.

My opinion is that there is some recessive gene running in the LaRoche family that prohibits them from putting together a full productive season. Andy is just beginning to show the symptoms while Adam is in the advanced stages.

by Argentum on Dec 30, 2008 10:03 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

There Are A Lot Of AAAA Players...

and Andy LaRoche may well be one of them - a player that has performed well in the minors but has never been able to do it in the bigs.

What major league track record are you looking at, other than August/September 2008, that makes you feel that LaRoche is destined to turn it around?

by thegunner on Dec 30, 2008 10:14 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I’ve always thought the group in the majors at the end of ’05 had a decent shot at a decent season if they had just let them play together. Unfortunately, Tracy had already been hired, and veteran leadership was on the way….

by Arnold Rothstein on Dec 29, 2008 10:59 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I think this is

possibly the hardest truth for average fans to get around. They want their favorite players to stick around forever, regardless of performance, because they’re always convinced Joe Player at age 34 has a season left in him like Joe Player at 28.

Another hard truth is that a guy like Freddy Sanchez really wasn’t very good to begin with, even when he was winning a batting title. He has few other useful skills other than hitting for average, and so even when he surges as he did at the end of last year, he’s nobody to be building your team around.

by bucdaddy on Dec 30, 2008 12:30 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Oh, BTW (and this is an OT commercial)

Charlie is too principled to shill for his band on here, but I’ve seen FOX Japan maybe three times and they’re terrific. They’re playing in my town (Morgantown) on Saturday night, with one of our better local bands (Moon). Charlie will, of course, be there — he’ll probably be the tallest guy there, thus easy to spot — and so will I, and possibly the lovely and vivacious EmmaOMG. If you have nothing better to do (and look, you’re reading about Pirates baseball in the dead of winter, so you have no excuse) it would be well worth your time and effort and a little money (what’s the cover, Charlie, $5? Well, $7 at most) to help make it BucsDugout night at 123 Pleasant Street. Festivities commence 10:30ish.

by bucdaddy on Dec 30, 2008 12:41 AM EST reply actions   0 recs

Well thanks, Bucdaddy. You’re too kind. Actually I’ve posted links to my band’s website many times. I’m not sure if that’s the same thing as shilling or not.

Anyway, I’m pretty sure the cover is $5. Dave Bello’s band is also playing, and they’re pretty excellent.

You’re not going to be at 123 for New Year’s, are you? I think I will probably be there.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 1:11 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Probably not.

My age, you gotta pick your spots.

by bucdaddy on Dec 30, 2008 9:55 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Wish I could ...

I’ve heard your band’s stuff on MySpace and it’s quite good, Charlie.

If I didn’t have to work, I’d probably show. It’s not like there’s anything to do in Clarksburg.

by woobie on Dec 30, 2008 12:15 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks. I’ll let you know next time we play. We come to 123 a few times a year.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 7:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That's some good stuff

Unfortunately I live in Seattle and can’t make it out to West Virginia. It’s a shame since y’all sound like you’d be fun in person, and I love going to concerts in general too…

by shayborg on Dec 30, 2008 7:07 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks. Hopefully someday we’ll get to do a tour that gets us all the way out to Seattle.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 7:34 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'd love to

I live in Washington PA, making it only about a 45ish or so minute trek down there. But 10:30 as a gettin started time is, uh, way past mrs. kralc and I’s usual evening entertainment time slot. Especially given the hour drive back home and the weekly early-sunday-morning to the ginormously busy Wal-mart for grocery shopping (the ONLY time that place is even bearable). Unless you mean like 10:30 in the morning??

by matskralc on Dec 30, 2008 8:28 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Nah. We probably won’t even get on stage until around midnight. We should get together sometime, though—two members of my family are in Morgantown and two more are in Wheeling, so I come through Washington a lot.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 9:49 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Midnight?!?!?!?

I feel so old. I just turned 25, I swear!

Come through some time when the Wild Things play. Nothing like sitting first row behind home plate for 11 bucks…

by matskralc on Dec 30, 2008 10:23 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

I'm gonna do my best

If not, will be there in spirit.

by EmmaOMG on Dec 30, 2008 9:54 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Just curious....

What instrument do you play in your band, Charlie?

by phil79 on Dec 30, 2008 2:19 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I play guitar and sing.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 6:22 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

He's actually

pretty animated on stage, got a little Talking Heads-era David Byrne kinda thing going on there. So they’re fun to watch, too. Like all good bands should, they look like they’re having a blast on stage.

woobie, If what’s on MySpace is material from the CD, I will vouch that FOXJ is much better live. Keep an open schedule for next appearance (guessing spring break or so? End of March/start of April, right, Charlie?).

Moon’s on the bill too, and if you can imagine Monkees meet the Ramones and run through a British Invasion blender, you’d about have it.

by bucdaddy on Dec 30, 2008 7:47 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

More on Charlie Point No. 6

On this one I gotta go with The Gunner (I mean Bob Prince, not the small “g” guy who posts here), who always said a MLB player’s peak years of production are 28-32.

Charlie cited to Nate Silver quoting Moneyball and that’s usually “case closed” for me. True, looking back on Nate Silver’s 2004 post linked by Charlie shows that in hindsight history did not support him — Alfonso Soriano’s best 3 years have been at age 30-32 (his last 3 years). But one example proves nothing.

So I appreciate Charlie being kind enuff to post a link to the counter-argument. The Bowlling Green Professor’s research is pretty conclusive that Bill James argument was based on too small a sample size, cause Bill James just looked at players born in the 30’s and they peaked earlier as a group than MLB players born in other decades (that’d be an example of Charlie Point No. 7).

The 2002 Bowling Green study concluded that players born in the 1910s peaked at age 28.0, those born in the ‘20s at 28.6, and those born in the 30’s peaked at 27.1. Those born in the ‘40s peaked at 28.9, the ‘50s at 28.7, and the ‘60s at an average age of 29.8.

Guys born around 1982 have little in common with the Maz’s, Maury Wills’s and Bob Veale’s (names of guys born in the ’30’s I picked at random). Players born in the 30’s had winter jobs and usually only started conditioning at spring training — in the 60’s baseball was a 6 months a year job in which only one or two guys per team could hope to make $100K per year (I can still remember the reports that “bonus baby” Richie Hebner (born in ’47) had to make extra money in the off-season by digging graves). Guys who are 27 y.o. in 2009 condition year round, have the best diets, best training facilities and are competing to reach free agency around age 29-32 and get a $20 million dollar per year payoff.

I think Charlie’s better point is that mediocre and good players peak sooner than great ones, and the PBC has a lot of mediocre and just good players. Yep — that makes sense.

by WstCstBucco on Dec 30, 2008 9:00 PM EST reply actions   0 recs

I don’t pretend to understand all the math in the Bowling Green article, but it only considers players who have had 5000 PAs, so there’s selection bias there. Anecdotally, 27 makes much more sense to me, and it is probably actually even younger than that if you consider guys with very limited major league experience. I think many, many players peak in the minors before they even reach the majors. For a star player, I’m sure the number is much higher than 27, but for an average or fringe player, I think it is probably much lower.

by Charlie on Dec 30, 2008 9:55 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

That is an interesting point that I have

never seen anyone make before. Obviously the Bowling Green study can’t speak to this question at all, since probably 90% or more of the players who reach the majors don’t get 5,000 PAs. But I can’t understand why it would be true that star players peak later than other players. Do you suppose that it is true in other sports as well?

by WestCoastBuc on Dec 31, 2008 10:06 AM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Maybe the peak ages of great/marginal players are related

Star players are, well, good at what they do, and have the ability to refine their significantly above-average talent. They perform better later at the expense of the marginal players.

Said another way, two players at age 25 may have performance lines that are parallel. The star is an “8”, the journeyman is a 6. But then they diverge. Between 25 and 30yo, the star moves through 9 to 10, while the journeyman moves to 5, and maybe to 4, and he’s out of the majors in his early 30s.

by azibuck on Dec 31, 2008 12:59 PM EST up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Pittsburgh Pirates.
Start posting about the Pirates »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Park_fathersday_aj_bday_030_small
What's to become of Neil Walker?
Small
Pittsburgh Proud
Small
Pirates rotation next year
Small
Rich Harden
20090612mf_fleury_cup_500hp_small
JJ Hardy traded to the Twins!
101_0170_small
Lot of Pent Up News from World Series No Fly Zone
3dacrssi_small
Let's say we didn't trade Freddy...
18470r_small
Ex-Pirate Enrique Wilson is apparently a real sleazeball
Remer_small
What you can expect from Aki
Pitt20_small
Akinori Iwamura is Officially A Pirate

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

VV, Hacker, Lerud Off 40 Man
Kevin Polcovich honored
Rich Hill Is A Free Agent
Anyone for Brian Buscher
Atlanta's Offseason Needs May included Trading for Matt Capps
Shortstop – Jack Wilson, Pittsburgh and Seattle Wilson won’t win a Gold Gl...
Freddy Sanchez re-ups with Giants
Pirates name Carlos Garcia 1B coach/Infield Instructor
Pirates Claim Justin Thomas off Waivers from M's
Pirates to Move High-A Affiliate to Florida State League

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

SPONSORS


Managers

Charlie_small Charlie