Edgar? He ripped A-ball as a 21 year old, and was fine as a 22-yr old at AA, ripping AAA in a short stint that year. His 23-yr old AAA year was decent...then he destroyed AAA as a 24 and 25 year old...and as a 26 year old before he got his MLB shot. OK...as a 20-yr old, he struggled in 20 games in Bellingham in his first MiLB stint, but beyond that...he just didn't get a MLB chance to shine until he was 27. Then he shined....as he had for the 4-5 years prior in the minors. He got a late chance...not a late bloom.
LaHair? From the age of 22 on he was a fine minor league hitter, sometimes a great one. You know, he really wasn't a failure in his Seattle cup of tea as a 25 year old in '08. Ok..he was an 80-ish OPS+ guy...not great...but worthy of more opportunity. In '09,the M's were invested in Branyan at 1B and Griffey (!) at DH (Sweeney, too) and we just ignored LaHair, thus losing him. He didn't bloom late. He hit where ever he was. Finally he had to smash 63 Iowa homers, 68 doubles, hit about .320 and get on base 40% of the time.....before the Cubs finally said, "You know, this guy isn't bad!"
Morse? He was a productive MLB hitter at the age of 23. He hit at AAA or in the Majors in every season following....He was hardly a late bloomer. From 18-21 he wasn't great at the low minors levels...but at 22 he hit AA just fine. Is a guy who figures out AA at 22 a late bloomer. He's mostly fought injuries, but when given whacks he has hit it hard where they ain't.
Carp? He was a walking, doubles hitter from the age of 18. Productive right away, he later reinvented himself as a masher and now has let his eye return.
Injuries have stalled his development this year, an annus horribilis for sure. As a 25 year old, in his first MLB extensive shot (because the M's faild to realize for two years what they had) he was a masher. Even this year, a complete disaster for him, bodily-wise, he's been a better hitter than Smoak.
My worry about Carp isn't that he's a MLB hitter, it's whether he will get a job next year. Man, just give him slot and stand aside. He'll hit. I don't think, however, that Wedge will do that. Too bad.
I don't think any of these guys bloomed late. They just got their true MLB shot late.
Ibanez didn't play in the minors until he was 20. From 20-26 he hit well, sometimes way better, in the minors except for an ugly age 21 year. As a 26-yr old, in '98, he wasn't great in Tacoma or Seattle, really...but he was doing the Tacoma/Seattle shuttle thing. From '98-'00, he hit a bit better than .240 in Seattle and had on OBP of .300. He only hit 13 homers with 22 doubles in that period.....but you know what, he only got 500 PA's over those three years. So he was a .240-.300-.390-ish hitter for a full season of experience, then took off. It took him 500 MLB PA's to figure it out...then he whacked. That's a petty standard learning curve.
Late blooming or late chance?
All of those guys were bigger guys, sure. None of them was a burner. All fit in the natural 1B/DH role, and learned to play OF (well, Morse played a bunch of positions.....looking out of position). I wonder if there is a bit of concern in that bigger, but not completely tater hitting template.
There is a very interesting and very consistent Mariner tradition at 1B and DH. In '95 Tino Martinez was at 1B and Edgar was now a HOF'er-in-training at DH. In '96 we brought in a 30-year old Sorrento for two 1B seasons. In'98 we brought in a 31-yr old Segui for two 1B seasons. In "00 we brought in a 31-yr old Olerud for five 1B seasons. Then a 30-yr old Sexson for four 1B seasons, then a 33 year old Branyan for one and then a 27 yr-old Kotchman for one. After Egar retired in '04, we brought in Ibanez (33 yrs old, 1 year), Carl Everett (35/1), Vidro (32/2) Griffey (39/1) and Branyan at 34 for 1 season.
Basically, we rented productive 1B/DH types (the strategy was pretty successful until we get to the Griffey and Vidro years). But we didn't develop and use our own guys at those positions.....until we plugged Smoak in at 1B, all in. That was the Seattle way at 1B and DH.
Late blooming or later MLB chances is a fair question for the LaHair, Carp, Morse crowd.
moe
Muddyfrog writes,
Is there any correlation on age arc and large men? The reason I ask is
because we're seeing guys like Bryan LaHair, & Mike Morse peak in their late
twenties. Do you think this may be the case for guys like Smoak, Montero, and
Carp? Or more specifically can you single out a particular group or stereo
type a group of players that tend to peak in their late twenties and early
thirties. What's the median peak age?
Provocative question!
Lots of studies have been done on peak age for the whole population. Here's a series at Hardball Times and here's material from Tom Tango's epic website. A good player has his 95-100% results from about age 23 to about age 29-30.
..............................................................
But we've known that, in its broad outlines, at least since 1980. To me yours is a much more interesting question: what is the prototype of the player whose curve is right-shifted on this graph?
.
Q. What kind of studies have been done?
A. The ones I've seen don't help us. Bill James' "Strong Season Leading Index" is discussed here, among other places.
In that article, the Hardball Times was looking at bustout seasons by Russell Branyan, Aaron Hill and Mark Reynolds, and trying to decide whether those players were "for real." But there are a couple of problemos there that ace us out...
First, James' SSLI is a rotisserie-type device. As with the very similar BaseballHQ "Breakout Index," this formula is merely looking at the obvious to decide what the NEXT season will be. It takes into account age - if you're over 30, you're not likely to have your best season coming up. It takes into account unlucky BABIP. It takes into account the Plexiglass Principle, that players are likely to rebound to their career averages. Stuff like that.
And it's looking for a SINGLE season with up stats. It's not really designed to identify the next Raul Ibanez. I haven't seen any studies that do that, although somebody here may know of some.
.
Q. Do pitchers count?
A. Pitchers don't follow age-arc trends. They learn a new pitch, or they fix their mechanics, and then they become something different. It's batters that live off "number of pitches in the memory banks." For hitters, it's a race to see 1,000,000 pitches before their reflexes go at age 32.
But if you're talking about "late blooming" pitchers, probably the most extreme who ever lived was our own Jamie Moyer. As he began his age-30 season, he had 34 wins, 54 losses and was out of the majors. As you might have noticed, he had 235 wins in the tank from there.
There are tons of guys like this. Dave Stewart of the A's. Randy Johnson, people almost forget, was a joke until he was 29. People forget that Cliff Lee was a meatball for several years, with little apparent chance of ever getting better. Jeff Fassero. Odd that the Mariners' spectacular 1997 rotation featured three of the most radical such ever.
But whoever those guys are, you can't predict them. Cliff Lee figured out a cut fastball and how to use it; what pitcher couldn't do that, at least in theory?
.
Q. Since studies don't exist, or you don't know about them, where do you start?
A. ...
Comments
Brian LaHair could never hit LHP. Still can't - his .304 OPS against lefties this year is illustrative of his problems with it throughout his career. Has he always had good power against righties? Yes. He always hit for average and power against RHP - his career #s are dragged down severely by a lefty OPS around .550-600 CAREER vs lefties.
He struggled at 23 and 24 against higher-level pitching, which is where he messed up his chances for an earlier shot in the bigs. He wasn't bad, he just wasn't great, and after a .760 OPS in a full AAA season at 24, front offices will start to give up on a player's upside (hits righties, good average, decent eye) and focus instead on his downside (can only play first, lefties crush him, might have trouble getting power against more advanced breaking balls).
As a hitter, you've got to be careful how much doubt you allow to be planted in the minds of the decision makers. Morse was a man without a position (not enough glove for the middle, not enough power for the corners) who had a poor batting eye. That was the picture he allowed to be formed, and it dogged him right out of the org. Carp was really close to a similar diagnosis, except he started demolishing balls as he understood his swing better, and changed some opinions. He got his chance with us.
It's easier for a new team to see the positives in a player profile. "Hey, this Lahair guy KILLS righties. We can find a place for that, right?" Many successes come in the NL, because pinch-hitting (ie, allowing a player to be used only for his positive contributions) is far more common there. You can use Morse or Dobbs for specific purposes against certain starters or relief arms and get the most out of what you believe they can do FOR you without allowing their limitations over 500 ABs to hurt you.
In the AL you need to be able to play multiple positions to get a place on the bench. More swiss-army-knife, less bayonet. it's harder for the LaHair's of the world to play in the AL because of the style of play. I would have make an exception and had a platoon monster at 1B, but platoons are rarer here.
There are Ibanez-types, who for whatever reason are not given enough ML time to really get going until later. There are Willinghams, who don't push the right buttons for their own talent evaluators to be comfortable with em on a corner because they're not prototypes. There are Guillens, who are held down due to illness or injury and cannot show their true upside immediately.
But a lot of "late-bloomers" are guys with holes in their games that were not allowed to show they could overcome those holes until later, in the right situation. It happens. Peguero could always become one of those guys. Trayvon. Thames.
What's the difference between a AAAA player and a late-bloomer? A lot of times, it's just opportunity - but there are only 25 slots per team, and some of those are end-of-the-bench slots. Opportunities can be hard to come by. That's just the way the cookie crumbles. Make the most of the ones you get. I hope Carp gets one more here, but we'll see. If not with us, he'll probably hit 20+ HRs for a NL team in 2014 or 15 and we'll all lament it.
Stupid cookies.
~G
Us being in discussion mode, rather than controlled-study mode, there will be 85 things we're missing... for example, we could easily just be prone to notice the RBI guys...
Edgar I'm sure we could agree wasn't a late bloomer - just an opportunity guy. Morse is a great example of the point you make; he showed flashes early on and performance pretty early. Lahair, hmmmm... isn't it true that every eventual major leaguer has decent production in the minors? Not sure whether Lahair would have slugged .500 at 26... still, it's a gray area...
I think what we're talking abou tis that Raul shouldn't really be hitting .216/.301/.363 at age 26 in the minors. If the Rainiers have a 26-year-old doing that, don't you cut him?
... the more important one. The late bloomers that I happened to think of, anyway, are almost all inconvenient roster guys. The rosters now include the required backup catcher, the required backup SS, and then two (2) other bench players. Most orgs don't want to spend one on a slow corner OF or slow 1B type.
Just the same, there's such a thing as a late bloomer, right? How do you point at a couple of AAA players and go, this one could be a late bloomer, and that one is probably not?
That's the point I was making near the end of my post, Doc. If you'r a slower 1B/DH type, you better be a 25+ homer guy or a .300 guy, or you seem to be discounted. I like G's point about new teams seeing the assets you bring, not the deficits you have.
Hadn't thought about the NL/AL thing. I wonder how often AL teams just tell a 24-26 year old, "You're a DH. Go out there and hit, don't worry about the glove." So if AL teams have those tweener-type hitters, Morse's and LaHair's, do they simply get shuttled aside?
Worth considering.
BTW, Good thing that Jaso can't really catch.....Imagine how more perfect Felix's game would have been with Olivo behind the plate. (And I missed the game interviewing City Manager candidates. Dang!)