keyboard_arrow_uptop

One of the central tenets of performance analysis is the idea that position
players generally peak between the ages of 25 and 29. The evidence for this
is a study initially published in the 1982 Bill James Baseball
Abstract
There are exceptions, and there is some evidence that players
may be peaking later (or declining more slowly), but in general the study’s
conclusions are a good guideline.

So when teams try to build champions with a team full of thirtysomethings,
skepticism is in order. Older players tend to be more expensive, they carry
a greater risk of injury and the tendency is for them to decline. While
individual players who are past their peak can have unusual career paths,
relying on a group of them to do so is dangerous at best, and a recipe for
disaster at worst.

Ladies and gentlemen, your 2001 Arizona Diamondbacks:

SS Tony Womack     Age 31
2B Jay Bell        Age 35
1B Mark Grace      Age 37
LF Luis Gonzalez   Age 33
3B Matt Williams   Age 35
CF Steve Finley    Age 36
RF Reggie Sanders  Age 33
C  Damian Miller   Age 31

The 2000 Diamondbacks were the oldest team in the National League, then
they signed a 37-year-old to play first base and
a 33-year-old to play
right field
. Depending on who wins jobs on the bench–and there are going
to be people like 31-year-old Greg Colbrunn on it–this team has a
fairly good chance of being among the oldest in baseball history.

Now, this isn’t the Orioles. Two of the players in that lineup, Steve
Finley
and Luis Gonzalez, have been much better players in their
mid-30s than they were prior. Both were very good last year. Jay
Bell
and Matt Williams played well for the 1999 division-winning
team, and Williams, at least, can be expected to bounce back a little from
an injury-plagued 2000.

But there’s just no upside here. There are no players who you can
comfortably project to be among the best in the league at their position,
and there are a few who carry the specter of a decline to replacement
level. Frankly, all of these guys could hit exactly what they’re expected
to and the Diamondbacks wouldn’t be very good. Yesterday,
we noted that the
Wilton projections
in Baseball Prospectus 2001 pegged the Astros’
starting lineup as worth about 577 runs. That same exercise for the
Diamondbacks yields 474 runs. Ten percent of the difference is park effect,
but that’s still an inadequate number for a starting lineup.

The idea of an age-27-centered career path applies to hitters, not
pitchers, but it’s worth noting that the Diamondbacks’ rotation can discuss
Woodstock and Watergate, too:

Randy Johnson      Age 37
Curt Schilling     Age 34
Brian Anderson     Age 29
Todd Stottlemyre   Age 36
Armando Reynoso    Age 35

Bobby Witt and Mike Morgan, each coming off a strong 1988
season, are hanging around camp trying to win jobs. The staff is the
D’backs strength, but other than Randy Johnson, there’s no one here
who’s a good bet for 200 innings of league-average ball.

Veteran teams can and do win–Yankees, anyone?–and I’m certainly willing
to admit a bias towards younger teams, but the Diamondbacks aren’t just a
veteran team. They’re an old one, they’re making themselves older
and they don’t have the younger players that a team needs for cheap production
and long-term success.
Given the financial commitments to the guys on this page and the stripped farm system, the
D’backs may be on the brink of one ugly stretch, beginning right now.


Joe Sheehan is an author of Baseball Prospectus. Contact him by

clicking here
.

You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe