24 thoughts on “Quiz – Heady Company (solved)”

1. Dr. Doom January 19, 2013 at 7:05 pm

   The idea that one of baseball’s “great-old-but-not-young” players in Appling and Bryce Harper share something in common is kind of awesome…

   Reply ↓
   1. Doug Post authorJanuary 19, 2013 at 8:47 pm

      That comment is actually kind of a hint for the quiz.

      Reply ↓
      1. John Autin January 19, 2013 at 9:42 pm

         Kind of a puzzling hint, since I disagree with Doom’s assessment of Appling. His first outstanding year was age 26, three more from 28-30. The fact that he also had many good years from his mid-30s into his 40s shouldn’t take away from his earlier years.

         Reply ↓
         1. Mike L January 19, 2013 at 9:48 pm

            I’m not sure he means it that way, Appling is probably the key. He’s the only player on the list with no power.

            Reply ↓
            1. AlbaNate January 20, 2013 at 8:35 am

               No power? You must have missed that home run he hit at RFK Stadium in ’82 when he was 75. 🙂
         2. Dr. Doom January 20, 2013 at 6:04 pm

            JA, I would argue that 26 is not “young” in baseball terms. No 26-year-old “prospect” would be deemed “young.” That’s really reserved for the 23-at-oldest-and-younger crowd. At least that’s how I see it. A great season at 26 is not surprising – after all, that’s right near the “prime age” of 27. A great season at 22 or 20 is MUCH more unexpected. That’s just what I meant. He was great during his prime, and continued to be so later in his career. But he wasn’t a great “young” player.

            Reply ↓
            1. John Autin January 21, 2013 at 9:43 am

               Doom, I see your point about Appling. And you’re right … [sigh] … 26 is not “young” for a MLB player.
2. John Autin January 19, 2013 at 9:54 pm

   Thinking out loud … If the theme is age and youth, then how exactly does Gehrig fit? His first and last years as a regular were ages 22 and 35, which is far from unusual.

   Appling was good at 40+.
   Hornsby was good at 20.
   Bonds was good at 21, and at 40+.
   Wagner was good at 40+.
   Harper was good at 19.
   Williams was good at 20 and at 40+.
   Ruth was a good pitcher at 20.
   Yaz was decent at 21 and at 40+.
   Ripken was good at 21 and … well, he played at 40.
   Trout was good at 20.
   Mays was good at 20 and at 40+.

   But Gehrig … He only played 23 games before age 22, and 8 after age 35.

   Reply ↓
   1. Doug Post authorJanuary 19, 2013 at 10:05 pm

      You’re all over it.

      The theme is definitely age, but not youth, necessarily.

      Reply ↓
3. Josh January 19, 2013 at 11:19 pm

   Do each player hold the record for most WAR at each particular age?

   Reply ↓
   1. Doug Post authorJanuary 19, 2013 at 11:56 pm

      Bingo!

      Well done, Josh.

      Reply ↓
4. RJ January 20, 2013 at 12:05 am

   If I may ask, whose records did Harper and Trout beat?

   Reply ↓
   1. Doug January 20, 2013 at 12:25 am

      Harper beat Mel Ott (3.7 in 1928).

      Trout beat A-Rod (9.2 in 1996).

      Reply ↓
      1. RJ January 20, 2013 at 1:34 am

         Cheers Doug. So looking at your table, before Trout’s blockbuster season the record WAR at each age increased year-on-year from 18 to 26. Now Trout owns the highest WAR for any age up to 23. Wow.

         Reply ↓
   2. GrandyMan January 20, 2013 at 12:34 am

      Also in 2012, Manny Machado had the 9th best season for a 19-year old at 1.5 WAR. Trout himself is one of only 27 players to have a WAR of at least 0.5 at age 19 (he had 0.6 last year).

      Reply ↓
5. BryanM January 20, 2013 at 7:52 am

   great quiz, doug! I scratched my head for a long time over it and didn’t come close, Even put my St Louis Cardinal’s cap on to help thinking — didn’t work, but I learned of Musial’s death while wearing it, which put a sweet edge on the nostalgia. Carleton Fisk at 33 – nice to see and old catcher on the list.

   Reply ↓
6. DaveKingman January 20, 2013 at 1:11 pm

   So this Ruth guy was pretty good, I take it?

   Reply ↓
7. Hartvig January 20, 2013 at 4:07 pm

   In retrospect it’s something that I feel like I SHOULD have spotted- you’ve got guys well known for being great “old” players like Old Aches & Pains & Pudge & Honus & of course Barry’s second half of his career “surge” as well as two current youngsters- but I have got to admit that I stared at that list for 10 minutes without coming anywhere close.

   In retrospect I think it was Yount that threw me.

   Well done Josh & Doug

   Reply ↓
8. Doug Post authorJanuary 20, 2013 at 5:58 pm

   In the category of `what have you done for me lately`, take a look at that 6 WAR season by Willie Mays in 1971 at age 40. And then, being dealt by the Giants just a few weeks into the next season. Sure, he was off to a bad start. But, even though events proved the Giants right in their judgment, franchise legends deserve better, do they not?

   Reply ↓
   1. Dr. Doom January 20, 2013 at 6:06 pm

      I always thought it poetic and just that Mays and Aaron were the key players on franchises that moved during their tenure, then returned to finish their careers where they started. It creates a nice symmetry.

      Reply ↓
   2. Hartvig January 20, 2013 at 6:09 pm

      Actually, IF my memory of events is correct Willie didn’t seem to be all that bothered by it at the time. After all, he was sort of going home to New York plus the Mets had just won the World Series. And again, IF my memory is correct I think he came out of the deal OK financially as well. I know there was a bit of outrage in the media at the time but like I said, I don’t remember Mays seeming to be too bothered.

      Reply ↓
   3. John Autin January 20, 2013 at 6:18 pm

      Doug, maybe the SFG management recognized Willie’s ’71 massive surge in both walks and strikeouts as compensation for a loss of bat speed. His power had vanished in the 2nd half of ’71, 4 HRs in the last 3 months.

      And the ’72 Giants got off to a bad start — they were 8-16 when Willie was dealt, and would never get back in the race. Willie was 9 for 49 without a HR. I think it was considered a courtesy move, giving Willie the chance for a “farewell tour” in the city where he became a star. No one expected his resurgence the rest of ’72 (145 OPS+ in 69 games).

      Reply ↓
      1. Doug Post authorJanuary 20, 2013 at 10:01 pm

         Could be, John. ’71 really was the last-chance season for the Giants with Mays at 40, McCovey at 33 starting to wear down and missing a third of the season, and Marichal starting to look mortal after finishing a decade where he averaged 280 IP. The Giants won the NL West, but couldn’t make it past the Pirates. With a bad start in ’72, time to rebuild and no time for sentimentality.

         With McCovey a few years later, the hard-nosed Giant management did much the same as with Mays. Stretch was injured again in ’72, missing half the year, but then played close to a full season (130 games) in ’73 with a nice OPS+ (162), but declining power and production. At age 35, that was enough for the Giants, and off McCovey went to San Diego. San Francisco would bring McCovey back at age 39, but to fill a different role. Only to have Willie surprise with a last hurrah season, his best since leaving the Giants the first time.

         Reply ↓
9. mosc January 23, 2013 at 2:55 pm

   I think there’s a decent chance the list might add another name with 43 year old Rivera in 2013 giving it another go. Would be fitting to get at least one pitcher on the list wouldn’t it?

   Reply ↓