Article: MLB's Youth Movement

[Teflon]

In 1971 the average age of MLB non-DH starting position players was 28.9. This began rising year by year to a peak of 30.1 years of age in 1996. One could assume this was due largely to players’ careers being extended artificially by PEDs. Or one could also possibly assume teams were selecting older players in the amateur draft or perhaps being more deliberate with their prospects.Based on how the trend changed following a Senate hearing, a BALCO bust and a couple of Jose Canseco tell-all books, however, I mostly assume the former.

 

And here’s how the trend changed. The average age of starting MLB position players has dropped by three years, to 26.9. This going-to-youth trend is observed at every position.

 

 

 

Pitchers, who have been hovering around the same average age of 29 for the last 35 years, were younger in comparison to hitters through the 70s, 80s, and 90s but are now older in comparison – even though their trend has been moving slightly downward since 2004. (This is the dotted black line - based on the top10 innings-pitched pitchers on each team, each season)

 

 

 

 

A three-year shift in the age of hitters means teams are increasingly built around the earlier contracts of players. A larger number of players at low-end salaries means even more money thrown into the fewer top-end salaries - meaning the pay gap gets bigger and bigger and the already-dwindling MLB middle class gets even smaller. (Basically one Donald Trump on the payroll and 24 fast-food drive-through employees)

 

To me, these changes represent a major philosophical and practical shift in the way baseball teams now make decisions, but no one seems to be talking about it. A three-year shift in the average age of players is huge.

 

Click here to view the article

[diehardtwinsfan]

Interesting topic. I wonder if improvements in coaching/development have something to do with this.

[Guest]

I suspect this trend reflects the fact that it's not just teams like the Twins and Royals who are emphasizing building their teams through player development anymore. For a long time, small and mid market teams focused on development, while the large market teams traded away their prospects for older established players and signed even more established players as free agents. Now, even those large market teams are seeing the wisdom of developing most of their roster from within and not being nearly as anxious to trade away their prospects.

 

The result is, as pointed out, a squeezing out of the middle class of players. GMs figured out that they can usually get production from a rookie 2B they pay $500,000 to that's not too dissimilar from the experienced, but not All-Star level, veteran that might command $2-3 million through arbitration or free agency.

[sane09]

"One could assume this was due largely to players’ careers being extended artificially by PEDs. Or one could also possibly assume teams were selecting older players in the amateur draft or perhaps being more deliberate with their prospects"

Or MUCH more likely, many more players were playing COLLEGE BASEBALL, because of its increasing popularity,instead of signing out of HS.

[mikelink45]

The Twins are in the middle here - look at the pitching staff and we are old, look on the field and we are young.  But then the Twins are seldom in line with the rest of the league.  What I am waiting to see is when we reach the point where teams learn to stop giving long term high price contracts to players who have passed their prime.  I look at the angels paying for what Pujols did with the Cards because they were smart enough to know that he was only going to go downhill.  The Cards made the right decision, but I am looking at these contracts that are out there now and it makes no sense in light of what these charts show.

[Teflon]

 

"One could assume this was due largely to players’ careers being extended artificially by PEDs. Or one could also possibly assume teams were selecting older players in the amateur draft or perhaps being more deliberate with their prospects"
Or MUCH more likely, many more players were playing COLLEGE BASEBALL, because of its increasing popularity,instead of signing out of HS.

 

If an increased emphasis on signing college players (which is what "selecting older players in the amateur draft" means ) was the major factor driving the average age up, then the now declining age trend would mean that the opposite is occurring - and it isn't.

[thegambler]

The reasoning behind the age drop for position players is simple. Players are demanding ridiculous contracts when they are past their prime. Teams aren't necessarily trying to build from within, as suggested by another user. Teams are simply finding that they can find players at league minimum, who can do the same job as players demanding $100-$200 million dollar contracts. It's insane what these players are askinh for now. Pitching is different, much harder to come by. Experience and age of pitchers tends to be more omitting. Age also proves durability. But, when it comes to position players, youth has the edge because it's cheaper, and gets the job done for more value.

[Teflon]

 

I suspect this trend reflects the fact that it's not just teams like the Twins and Royals who are emphasizing building their teams through player development anymore. For a long time, small and mid market teams focused on development, while the large market teams traded away their prospects for older established players and signed even more established players as free agents. Now, even those large market teams are seeing the wisdom of developing most of their roster from within and not being nearly as anxious to trade away their prospects.

 

The result is, as pointed out, a squeezing out of the middle class of players. GMs figured out that they can usually get production from a rookie 2B they pay $500,000 to that's not too dissimilar from the experienced, but not All-Star level, veteran that might command $2-3 million through arbitration or free agency.

 

Agreed. With players back to having normal peaks of performance followed by a normal decline instead of more extended plateaus - front offices realize the return on investment now more quickly diminishes for later contracts. A model to better balance the return based on the declining age trend would be to shorten the amount of years teams control players, allowing them to reach free agency a year, if not two, sooner, so the second contracts are given earlier and expire earlier but contain more true worth. 

[beckmt]

PED's have a lot to do with the older trend.  Players now fall off shortly over 30.  Only superstars now can last into their mid to late 30's.  Plus system is rigged as commented above to playing a good share of players less in years 1-4 against what they can make later. 

Because of this I expect a new CBA to be very difficult to do.

[Old Twins Cap]

One thing for sure:  the young players are playing a lot more baseball at a young age than in the '70s,'80s and 90s.

 

Every level of baseball, youth leagues, development leagues, extended Spring training, -- in the US, in Latin America, in Asia.  Kids are coming to Professional Baseball having so many more games under their belt.

 

Video, coaching, weight lifting, endless training, year around camps -- the real issue, IMO, is that single sport athletes are focusing in and developing skills in young people, quicker -- there is a tremendous incentive to get really good, really young. 

 

There are millions of dollars on the table if you can be really good at a young age, the market is driving this on several levels.

[sane09]

 

If an increased emphasis on signing college players (which is what "selecting older players in the amateur draft" means ) was the major factor driving the average age up, then the now declining age trend would mean that the opposite is occurring - and it isn't.

Assuming that the increase, followed by the decrease in average age were caused by the same reason (but opposite directions) is an incorrect assumption.

 

IMO the increasing age starting in the 70's was due to the huge growth of college baseball.

IMO the recent declining age is due to the huge salaries for veteran players compared to younger players, making younger players more valuable for the dollar.

 

In other words, different causes driving the ages in different directions; rather than the same cause trending in opposite directions in different eras.

[sploorp]

Very thought provoking stuff, though I'm not sure how much PEDs were extending careers.  I'm also not sure how much can be placed on college baseball.  It may have become popular, but it also enabled players to come to MLB with more advanced skills which, in turn, enabled them move faster through a team's system.

 

I personally think the correct answer is MONEY.  If you go back and look at the transactions teams were making then, compared to now, through a lens of cost versus value, I think you will get a much clearer picture of what really forced ages up and down.

 

The average age will go back up when arbitration forces youth's salaries past the point where they stop being a cost effective alternative.

[ScrapTheNickname]

Thought-provoking is right ...

 

Could it be that the pool of MLB-potential players has risen (for various reasons: International players, concentration of one-sport players in the USA, etc.) and with the rise of sabermetrics a player's prime productive years has focused into his early-mid years (say 24-30), thus mediocre and older (and higher paid) players are being squeezed out.

 

Makes me think of the way that the minor league system used to be run a long time ago (I don't exactly when it changed, off hand); older famous players and popular players who were AAAA types would continue playing past their prime for the entertainment value it provided the minor league cities. In other words, at one time minor league teams weren't merely feeder systems to the big leagues.

[Eris]

Another potential issue that drives the age towards younger players is the travel schedule.  Years ago it was that every get away game was an afternoon game.  The lack of afternoon getaway games poses additional and very significant demands on sleeping schedules.  For example, any team playing a night games followed by a 3 hour flight would expect to get to their hotels at 4 or 5 in the morning.  The older you get, the more brutal this schedule becomes.  This couples with the elimination of certain stimulants also gives an advantage to younger players.

[Monkeypaws]

Buxton, Buxton BUXTON!

[The Wise One]

The average age trending downwards could me multifactorial.

Better and faster pitching  leads to average age going down.

Better metrics would lead teams to identify poor developing and or over the hill players quicker.

To say the age is up because of the popularity of college would say that going to college stunts development significantly. Remember the graphs are for MLB players not MLB and MiLB players. Similarly for international players signed at 16 might not develop as quickly

[DJL44]

I agree that there is a willingness to go with younger players due to cost. PED testing is a factor in the age trending downward but that doesn't explain the dip below 1979. A lack of MLB expansion will also drive average age downward. Expansion tends to help extend careers.

[ShouldaCouldaWoulda]

 

One thing for sure:  the young players are playing a lot more baseball at a young age than in the '70s,'80s and 90s.

 

Every level of baseball, youth leagues, development leagues, extended Spring training, -- in the US, in Latin America, in Asia.  Kids are coming to Professional Baseball having so many more games under their belt.

 

Video, coaching, weight lifting, endless training, year around camps -- the real issue, IMO, is that single sport athletes are focusing in and developing skills in young people, quicker -- there is a tremendous incentive to get really good, really young. 

 

There are millions of dollars on the table if you can be really good at a young age, the market is driving this on several levels.

I agree. 

[Teflon]

Some additional information...

 

The Lahman database has a list of years players attended colleges. Using the same players from aging trends data, here is a breakdown of the years of college for the non-pitching starters by year:

 

 

There was a trend into the mid 90's of an increasing number of starters being 3-year college players that was indirectly proportional to the falloff in the number of players with no college. (0 years). This has since reverted. Starters are now increasingly likely not to have college experience. So this does support sane09's assertions - but isn't the sole reason as the reverting college trend hasn't surpassed the early 70s level as the aging trend has.

 

Pitchers show the same change - perhaps even more so:

 

 

And just to finish this train of thought, I decided to look at the aging trend of managers:

 

 

Since this is a smaller set of data, it tends to be skewed by persons at the extremes like Connie Mack. Still, the overall trend is that the average age of managers is rising. 

 

[Mike Sixel]

My theories:

 

1. Baseball was stuck in the dark of ages of "there is a right way to do this" for a long time. Then they started hiring different kinds of leaders, and those people did some math, and figured out that young players were more athletic, better, and cheaper than older players. I think this is number one, a different type of leader has emerged that isn't in love with "proven veterans" and experience are needed to win.

 

2. They are cheaper than older players, and owners like money.

 

3. More international players? I don't know, but I would guess that the there are more international players, those players debut younger because they sign so young.

 

4. More willingness to promote players faster in the minors.

 

5. Teams are afraid pitchers will get hurt, so they promote them faster (especially RP) so they get value out of them before they are hurt. I've read this is true, but that doesn't make it true.

[dougd]

Makes me think of the way that the minor league system used to be run a long time ago (I don't exactly when it changed, off hand); older famous players and popular players who were AAAA types would continue playing past their prime for the entertainment value it provided the minor league cities. In other words, at one time minor league teams weren't merely feeder systems to the big leagues.

"The Battered Bastards of Baseball" is my favorite baseball movie and is one answer to your question. Documentary on the Portland Mavericks, a team founded by Bing Russell when the Pacific Coast League left Portland in 1973. Players who had been rejected or never given a chance (including Jim Bouton) joined a team that managed to beat the bonus babies. Very entertaining, and something to do while waiting for the Twins to make another move.