Re: moneyball

[Kenneth Campbell <kkc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Very interesting.

I recall (and this is all from memory, so forgive errors on exact stats)
the most interesting financial conclusion James came to was about "trade
value" -- and how lesser lights in the front office were continually
taken on the market.

In particular, statistical analysis of the value of field players (not
pitchers and catchers who have a whole different thing going on) showed
that most topped out at age 27. That is, there actual performance peaked
in that year.

Yet, that was usually around the time they ended their (relative)
poverty years. Jesse Barfield comes to mind. Those kind of players who
rise fast then fall fast...

But, as your quote seems to be showing, the market value actually is in
reverse. Barfield got terrible wages for worth in approaching age 27 --
then, when hitting the age of expected peak, he was at, ironically, his
highest market value. (I think he went to the Yankees.)

James also did another form of that study, showing performance value
based on when a player "got the big contract." It might be related to
the age study, maybe not. Applies a lot more to pitchers, who are more
age resistant.

I betcha JP read that stuff.

Ken.

--
Age is a question of mind over matter. If you
don’t mind, it doesn’t matter.
          -- Satchel Paige