First understand, I like Lenny Harris; I always did.   He was kind of a poor man’s version of one of my all-time favorite players, Tony Phillips.   You could put Tony Phillips at any of seven positions, and he’d be the best defensive player on the field at six of them.

            Lenny Harris, not so much; you could put him anywhere and he was OK.   He was a really interesting player, in that he had an 18-year career in which he was never a regular.   He had 400 at bats only twice in his career, with a high of 431.   Ordinarily, a player who is good enough to last for 18 years has to be either a catcher or good enough to play regularly at least five of them, but Harris—and a few other guys—have been exceptions to the rule.   I’m not knocking on Lenny Harris, but somebody has to finish last in our competition, and. ..obviously Lenny Harris was not a Hall of Fame player.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 19

            Of the 36 players in our study, four reached the majors at the age of 19—Bert Blyleven, Tim Raines, Alan Trammell and Juan Gonzalez.  Their aggregate Win Shares and Loss Shares at age 19 are 13 wins, 16 losses, of which 12 wins and 10 losses are accounted for by Blyleven; the other three guys were just getting their feet wet, and went 17-for-103 as hitters.   Blyleven was a complete major league pitcher at age 19.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Rueter (pronounced Reeder) was a soft-tossing lefty who managed to go 130-92 (credited wins and losses) in a thirteen-year career although he recorded strikeouts about as often as Washington records a balanced budget.   Here is something that turned up in my research that I absolutely did not expect.   I figured the "Team Success Percentage" for each player in this study, and. . .guess who came in first?   Rueter.   You’d never think it, would you?   He played for Montreal (1993-1997) and San Francisco (1997-2005), a total of 14 teams, and made only 30 starts in his career for teams that had losing records—9 in 1995 (Montreal), 3 in 1997 (Montreal) and 18 in 2005 (San Francisco).   Otherwise (306 starts being included in the "otherwise"), he pitched exclusively for teams with winning records—which helps explain how he was able to stay in the league all those years.   These are the highest Team Success Percentages for players in this group:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 20

            Eight of the 36 players in our study were in the major leagues at the age of 20.   Three of them were regulars and very productive players—Bert Blyleven (23-14 Win Shares and Loss Shares), Roberto Alomar (20-12) and Alan Trammell (15-11).   After that it drops down to Juan Gonzalez (3-2), Dale Murphy (2-2), John Olerud (0-0), Lou Whitaker (0-2), and Tim Raines (0-1).

            Blyleven was 23-14, which we can represent as a "Win Share Value" of 28—23, plus (23-14)/2.   If you save the decimals for Blyleven it works out to 27.66.   This is what we call a "High Quality Regular/Near All Star" level of play.   Blyleven was 16-15 with a 2.81 ERA in 278 innings.   We can use the following chart to describe Win Share Values:

            I will also sometimes refer to players with Win Shares Value of 28 or 29 as playing at an All-Star level, because sometimes it seems foolish to deny them that status.

            Win Share Value measures a player by how far he is above a .250 replacement level—thus, 16-16 is the same as 15-13 or 14-10; they’re all eight games over .250.  It is useful to have those descriptions, but we have to be careful of them, as they can be misleading in the middle of the chart.   A "Win Shares Value" of 10 can be a player who plays only a month and goes 7-1, or it can be a player who is in the lineup all year but contributes more losses than wins (14-22, or 13-19, or 12-16).   Win Share Value is not always a perfect indicator of how much you would like to have the player on your APBA team.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Charles Johnson was a muscular catcher with a tremendous throwing arm.   He won the NL Gold Glove at catcher his first season as a regular (1995) and for three years after that, and emerged as a star in 1997, when he threw out 56 of 118 would-be base stealers, hit 19 homers and helped the Marlins win the World Championship.    After that he played well intermittently, and got the reputation, fairly or unfairly, as a guy who only played well when his contract was on the line.   He hit .304 with 31 homers in 2000.

            Johnson was a good player, a decent hitter and an outstanding defensive player; our system evaluates him as the second-best defensive player in this group of 36 players.    Still, his career was too short to be taken seriously as a Hall of Famer, as was recognized by all of the Hall of Fame voters.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 21

            At the age of 21, 16 of the 36 Hall of Fame candidates in our study were in the majors.   There is a regularity about this—4 at age 19, 8 at age 20, 16 at age 21.   Of the 16 players who were in the majors at age 21, 9 were regulars or near-regulars; the other 7 just played a few games.  

            Bert Blyleven in 1972, again posting a 23-14 won-lost contribution, the same as the previous year, again was the best player in the group at age 21.   He was followed by Lou Whitaker (19-9), Roberto Alomar (20-16), Tim Raines (15-3), Juan Gonzalez (15-14), John Olerud (11-7), Alan Trammell (13-14), Harold Baines (12-17) and Carlos Baerga (7-10); those were the 9 regulars and near-regulars.   In tenth place was Cecil Cooper, who hit .310 in 14 games (the season scored at 2-1.)  

            The value of the 36 players in this group at age 21 was 19% of their mature value.    We credit them at age 21 with an aggregate won-lost record of 154-116.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Higginson in 1997 hit .299 with 27 homers, 101 RBI.   His triple crown numbers were slightly better in 2000, but his actual value was very slightly less. He was named "Tiger of the Year" by the Detroit media in both of those seasons.

            Higginson played for Temple University and did not reach the majors until he was 24 years old, which made him the oldest player in this group at the time he reached the majors.   Higginson played very well his first few years, but injured his elbow after signing a multi-year contract, and his contract became an albatross to the Tigers. 

            Like Whitaker and Trammell, Higginson played all of his career with the Tigers, which at his time was not a great thing.   The Tigers had a losing record every year that Higginson was with them, losing 109 games in 1996, 106 games in 2002, and 119 in 2003.   Higginson’s team success percentage was by far the worst of any player in this group:

             Those are the only players in this study with Team Success Percentages less than .500.   Higginson, because he played for such horrible teams and was the highest-paid player on that team the second half of his career, inevitably came to symbolize the frustrations of the organization in that era, but this is unfair; he was an above-average player on balance.   He wasn’t a Hall of Famer, but he was a left-handed power-hitting outfielder who had some good years and had a good arm.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at age 22

             At the age of 22 thirty of the thirty-six players were in the major leagues, with 13 of those 30 being regulars or near-regulars.    Bert Blyleven, pitching 325 innings with a 2.52 ERA, continued to reign as the best player in the group, posting an individual won-lost contribution of 26-9, the best of his career.   This is an All Star level/Near MVP performance, and, in fact, this ranks as the best season by any pitcher in this group at any age.   No pitcher on this year’s Hall of Fame ballot ever won an MVP Award or a Cy Young Award.

             These are the top players in the group at age 22:

             The aggregate won-lost record of the 36 players at age 22 was 262-206, and their overall value was 36% of what it would be at their peak.   As you can see, no one else in the group was really close to Blyleven in value at that age.  Most of the guys who were regulars at that age were just a little bit better-than-average players. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Carlos Baerga, who came up with Cleveland in 1990, played at a level suggestive of Hall of Fame ability early in his career.   He had 205 hits in 1992, 200 in 1993, and hit over .300 both of those years with at least 20 homers and at least 100 RBI.   He played equally well in 1994, although the season was shortened by a strike.   He was a third baseman/second baseman, and an infielder who could rack up those kind of numbers at a young age was perceived as a player who could go all the way.

Performance at Age 23

            From ages 19 to 22 Bert Blyleven was by far the best player in this group.   At age 23, although still the best pitcher in the group (21-10), Blyleven slipped to 7^th overall, as many of the young position players stepped forward as stars.   Don Mattingly played at a near-MVP level (.343, 23 homers, 110 RBI; we score the season at 27-5.)   Mark McGwire shattered the record for Home Runs by a rookie with 49 (24-5).   Tim Raines scored 133 runs, drew 97 walks and stole 90 bases (25-9).   Juan Gonzalez hit .310 with 46 homers (23-5).   Carlos Baerga hit .312 with 20 homers, 105 RBI, 205 hits (23-11).   Jeff Bagwell was the NL Rookie of the Year, hitting .294 with 15 homers, 82 RBI (21-9).

            At the age of 23, 34 of the 36 Hall of Fame candidates were in the major leagues; the only two who were not were Edgar Martinez and Bobby Higginson.   Twenty-four of those players were regulars or more-or-less regulars, the 24^th man (by value) being Dale Murphy, who hit .276 with 21 homers in 104 games, although he was having massive defensive problems at the time.

             The aggregate won-lost contribution of the 36 players at age 23 was 430 wins, 282 losses, and they had attained 63% of their peak value by age 23.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

            Benito Santiago hit .300 as a rookie in 1987, had a long hitting streak, hit 18 homers, stole 21 bases, won the Rookie of the Year Award, and was generally regarded, as a 22-year-old rookie, as the best catcher in baseball.   Although he had a 20-year major league career he was unable to sustain the level at which he came in to the league, let alone go forward.  He never hit .300 again, apart from one injury season of 29 at bats; in fact, he never hit .280 again as a regular. He never stole 20 bases again, as catching quickly took away his speed, and he stole less than 100 bases in his career.   He hit as many as 18 homers only one more time, when he hit 30 in 1996.

            There were two problems—one, that catching creates constant injury issues that make it difficult to sustain excellence as a hitter, and two, that Benito, in his brilliant rookie season, had a strikeout to walk ratio of 112 to 16—112 to 14 if you don’t count the two intentional walks.   Although he was tremendously strong and had a nice, quick stroke, his inability to control the strike zone undermined him as a hitter.   Once the pitchers found out that they didn’t have to throw him a strike, they didn’t.   He was, however, a very good defensive catcher, throwing out 35% of base stealers in his career, and he ranks third among these 36 Hall of Fame candidates in career defensive winning percentage (63-24, .724).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 24

            By the age of 24 all 36 of the Hall of Fame candidates that we are considering here were in the major leagues.   Three of them played at an MVP level.   Don Mattingly actually won the MVP Award for the Yankees, hitting .324 with 35 homers, 145 RBI, and we rank him as the third-best player in the group (28-6 for Mattingly, behind Tim Raines (31-3) and John Olerud (29 + 2).   Seven other players in the group played at an All-Star level at age 24—Dave Parker (25-7), Jeff Bagwell (24-10), Roberto Alomar (23-7), Barry Larkin (23-9), Carlos Baerga (23-9), Dale Murphy (23-9), and Bert Blyleven (23-10).    Four others were high quality regulars—Raul Mondesi (20-8), Mark McGwire (20-10), Larry Walker (19-7), and Harold Baines (20-14).   If you took an All-Star team of these players at the age of 24, you would win the pennant in a walk.  

            31 of the 36 players were regulars or near-regulars by age 24, the exceptions being Bret Boone, Kirk Rueter, Lenny Harris, Edgar Martinez and Al Leiter.   The aggregate won-lost contribution of the 36 players was 575-315, a .646 Winning Percentage, and the group’s value at age 24 was 88% of their peak value.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Boone is sort of the opposite of Carlos Baerga—a second baseman who started slowly, but played at a Hall of Fame level in his early thirties; in fact, if you splice their careers together, you can make a Hall of Fame second baseman:

             That’s Carlos Boone; Carlos Baerga up to the age of 28, Bret Boone after the age of 28.   I’ve been told many times, although I don’t have the stats, that Boone was actually a below-average hitter in college, at USC.   This comes up in draft rooms, because there is always somebody who wants to draft some player who can’t hit, so somebody else always says "Tell me a player who hit like this in college who became a good major league hitter", and the first scout always says "Bret Boone."   He’s the exception that proves the rule.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 25

            At the age of 25:

            All 36 of these players were in the major leagues,

            34 of them were regulars or near-regulars,

            24 of them were high-quality regulars or better,

            6 played at an All-Star level, plus 6 more at a near-All Star level, and

            2 played at an MVP level, although neither happened to win the Award.

            The two players who were not regulars at age 25 were Edgar Martinez and Al Leiter.  The two who played at an MVP level were Don Mattingly (.352 with 31 homers, 113 RBI, 238 hits including 53 doubles) and Tim Raines (.320 with 30 doubles, 13 triples, 11 homers, 81 walks, 70 stolen bases); I score Mattingly at 29-5 and Raines at 28-2.   The other four All-Stars were Fred McGriff (27-5), Roberto Alomar (24-7), Alan Trammell (22-5), and Jeff Bagwell (22-7).   Near the All-Star level were Raul Mondesi (23-10), Larry Walker (22-7),  Harold Baines (22-8), Lou Whitaker (21-10), Dave Parker (20-10) and Rafael Palmeiro (20-12).   The best pitcher was still Blyleven (20-13, just off the "near All Star" level.)

            The aggregate won-lost record of the 36 players at the age of 25 was 584-286, a .671 percentage.   By the age of 25 these players were at 92% of their peak value. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Al Leiter, a left-handed pitcher drafted by the Yankees in 1984, emerged over the next two years as a huge, highly publicized prospect, despite very unimpressive performance in the minor leagues.  For several years after that he battled blisters on his fingers that interfered with his ability to pitch.   Traded to the Blue Jays in 1989, he overcame the blisters but was set back by a pinched nerve in his elbow, tendinitis and two arthroscopic surgeries on his left arm or shoulder.

             Finally straightened out in 1993—he was in his late twenties—Leiter was a fine pitcher from 1995 through 2004, posting won-loss equivalencies of 15-8 (1995), 20-11 (1996), 20-5 (1998), 19-11 (2000), 15-13 (2002) and 16-9 (2004).   If he had gotten started five years earlier, he would have been a viable Hall of Fame candidate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 26

             This group of 36 players reached their peak at the age of 26.   I have traditionally used 27 as the peak age for groups of players, and we hear a lot of hooey now about players reaching their peaks at ages 32 to 35, but. . .this group of players reached their peak at the age of 26.

             I consider a Win Share Value of 40 to be an MVP season.  We have no "40s" here, but four players at 38 or 39—Dave Parker (28-5), Jeff Bagwell (25+4), Tim Raines (26-3) and Fred McGriff (26-3).   Bagwell, with a Win Share Value of 39 in just 110 games in a strike-shortened season, was a unanimous MVP selection in 1994, aged 26.  Dave Parker, winning the National League batting title at .338 and with power, speed and defense, finished third in the NL MVP voting; he would win it the next year.   Raines, hitting .334, finished sixth in an MVP vote that he perhaps should have won, while Fred McGriff, hitting .300 with 35 homers and 94 walks, finished only 9^th in the MVP voting, largely because he drove in only 88 runs.  (In fact, he did not hit well in RBI situations.) 

             Following those four we have eight more players having seasons of All-Star quality and two actual MVPs.   The eight are Raul Mondesi, 1997 (25-7), Alan Trammell, 1984 (24-5), Mark McGwire, 1990 (25-7), Lou Whitaker, 1983 (25-8), Rafael Palmeiro, 1991 (24-7), Barry Larkin, 1990 (24-9), Don Mattingly, 1987 (23-7), and Dale Murphy, 1982 (23-10).   Murphy won the 1982 National League MVP Award, due to a combination of circumstances—his team came out of nowhere to win the division, he played in the best hitter’s park in the league, people were tired of voting for Mike Schmidt, and nobody else really had a great year.   Juan Gonzalez, aged 26 in 1996, also won the American League Award.   I don’t really see him as being a legitimate MVP candidate, let alone a legitimate MVP.   I’ll explain why when I get to him.

             The aggregate won-lost record of the 36 players at age 26 was 637-310.  Although the players had more playing time at ages 27 and 28, more at bats and more innings, they played far better at ages 25 and 26 (.671 and .673 winning percentages).    All 36 of these players were in the majors at age 26, and all of them except Lenny Harris were regulars or near-regulars.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             OK, we have crossed a threshold here.  I recognize seven grades of Hall of Fame candidates:

             There are no "A’s" in this group of candidates; A’s are like Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle and Mike Schmidt.   There are none of those here.   Albert Pujols will be an "A".  

             Up to this point, we have been dealing with players in Group G—players who were good enough to be put onto the ballot to test the response, but players who were not really Hall of Fame candidates, as was recognized by almost all of the voters.   We have crossed the line now; you probably don’t like this fact, I’m guessing, but there are a few players in the Hall of Fame who were no better than Raul Mondesi.   He represents, for us, the bottom of the bottom group of real Hall of Fame candidates.  

             For a player of the quality of Raul Mondesi to make the Hall of Fame, he generally has to have three out of four things going for him.   First, he needs to be well liked.   Second, he needs to play for championship teams.   Third, he generally needs to play several key seasons in New York City.  And fourth, he needs to play in a park or in a place that flatters his skills, making him look like he might have been better than he was.   Mondesi was 0-for-4.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Performance at Age 27

             While I have traditionally regarded 27 as the prime moment of a player’s career, this group of 36 players did not play well at age 27.   Baerga and Boone were both not very good at age 27—Baerga fading and Boone still struggling at the plate.   Ellis Burks was injured, Neato Santiago had a bad year, Al Leiter was still trying to put his career together, John Olerud had an off year, Mark McGwire hit .201, B. J. Surhoff hit .252 with 4 homers in 480 at bats, Jack Morris was 17-16 with a league-average ERA, and Alan Trammell was a .500 player.

             There were also many fine players in the group at age 27, but this is a field of Hall of Fame candidates; that many short-circuits is more than usual.   The aggregate won-lost record of the 36 players at age 27 was 591-368, down 52 games (52 Win Shares—actually 17 games) from age 26.

             On the up side, Dave Parker (27-3) and Dale Murphy (26-6) were the best two players in the group, and both were voted MVP at that age.   Three other players were of All-Star quality, Raines, Larkin and McGriff, but that makes five players of All-Star quality in the group at age 27, whereas at age 26 there had been twelve, and at age 24 there had been eleven.

             This is the performance summary for the 36 players at every age.   The categories of this chart are the count of the number of players in the major leagues at that age, their batting win shares, batting loss shares, fielding wins and fielding losses, pitching win shares and loss shares, their total win shares and losses shares, their winning percentage, their value by the formula I have been using here, and the percentage of their peak value that the group had at this age:

             That will do it for today; we have 36 players to discuss and this makes nine, so I’ll break here and pick it up tomorrow with B. J. Surhoff.