I don't know, but if he did, I'm going to say he's wrong. It's so common to have players to have monster years in their contract years. If it's a myth, explain Adrian Beltre. Explain Jorge Posada.
Well, I believe the point of James running the numbers is to show that - while it might be "common" for players to put up big numbers in their contract years, it is just as likely for them to put up big numbers in non-contract years... but due to the fact that it's not a contract year, no one thinks about it, and so no one weighs it as evidence against the contract year theory. Basically, since it's a dynamic game, players will vary from season to season around whatever their "career norms" are (which can really only be determined in hindsight after many years in the league). If you're a career .290 hitter, hitting .310 one year isn't too unlikely. Hitting .340 is more unlikely, but it does happen. If it's not, explain Andruw Jones. Explain Bartolo Colon. It's their contract year, too. If there truly was a contract year motivation, you should be able to see an across-the-board increase in performance for players in their contract year. And it should happen consistently enough that you could recognize a trend in the numbers. What James found (I believe) is that the variance from career norms didn't change. It's just your run-of-the-mill variance.
not all players will show this phenomenon, but the fact that there are a number of players who have ridiculous years in their contract years, far and beyond above what they did in other years, is enough to show me it exists. JD Drew and like 100 other players over the pas 10 years. It isn't normal variance to not hit higher than .287 in any season your entire career, and then all of a sudden at 34, hit .340.
So it exists, but only when it exists, because not all players will show the phenomenon. That makes no sense. If Contract Year Motivation exists as an independent force that inspires players to play better, it shouldn't be seen in some players, but not in others, and it should happen consistently in players in whom the phenomenon manifests. And my point is, if you look at ALL the players (not just the ones who had good seasons) you'd find that there were just as many who had BAD contract years. The thing about variance is... well... it varies. Posada's having a career year, no doubt. But there isn't any evidence to say that the cause is the contract year. And although such large variance is rare, it DOES happen. Let me ask you this... if Posada is spurred on by his contract status, why didn't he have a breakout year in 2001? Why was it in 2003 - in the middle of his latest contract - that he had his (to date) most productive season?
beats me. But if you want to say there's nothing to the contract year theory because not all players do that, that's fine. But it doesn't make sense. I'm sure there are many players who don't have career years in their walk years because they're always going all-out. But I believe that the phenomenon does exist, and I don't have to show that it happened to every single player to back that up. I also happen to believe some players perform better under pressure than others. to me, ridiculous cases like Posada, Drew, and Beltre are what keep it in my mind. There's no normal way to dismiss a player at age 34 hitting .340 when his previous high was .287. I'm also willing to bet that after he signs a big contract, he never hits .340 again. In fact, next year, I bet he doesn't even hit .315.
Good points Cappy. I've personally always laughed at the whole "Walk Year Phenomenon" theory. As you said, more than enough guys have dismal contract years as those that have above-their-heads years. We could argue Mo Rivera is having a career year for himself in a contract year, but that would be discounting the fact that for the past, I believe it's 4, but might be 3 years, that every year has been a career year, and progressively better than the ones previous. (And he's not getting younger.) As far as Posada, while his total hits for the year are far above his career average, there is another curious anomoly. His doubles for the year are approaching a career high (32/40,) while his total home runs are just above his career low (14/12.) Keep in mind, Posada has said all year he's "thinking middle." His mindset at the plate changed this year. Being in a lineup suffering for run prodcution, something he's never had to deal with, changed his whole approach at the plate. I'd attribute his higher-than-normal average this year more to a different mental approach to at-bats than I would to a contract year.
no, I don't think Rivera is a guy that's having a "contract year". He's shown that he's not that kind of player. Posada is different. And if Posada all of a sudden has revolutionized his hitting approach, I suppose we'd expect to see a similar season next year. I'd bet anything that doesn't happen.
I don't know who would argue Rivera is having a career year. I'd take either of his last two seasons over this one.
I didn't say he revolutionized his swing. I said he changed his approach. It was necessary, due to the fact that the Yankees weren't producing as a team. His entire career, he's been allowed to be a power hitter. In lineups that could score almost at will, he could afford to swing for the fence all the time. This year, however, the Yankees weren't scoring, so rather than "trying to hit the 5 run homer" he has been taking pitches, and swinging with the intent to make contact, not reach the fence. I see no reason Posada should have such a high average next year, and I would still not consider it an anomoly this year. He won't go on to be a DH if he hits like this every year, and I'm pretty sure he wants to DH when his knees can't handle the rigors of everyday catching any longer.
He's been just as good this year as any other year, if not better. (And I argue he's been better.) Cappy posted the stats a week or so ago. I'm just too lazy to go look them up.
If the guy has one massive hitting season and never approaches it in any other year, that qualifies as an anomaly according to anyone's definition.
in terms of what? saves? I don't see why you'd argue this is his best year. Give me his 1999 season over this one. give me 2005
Well, it doesn't change what I said anyway. It wasn't a revolution in his approach, it was just an adjustment in his mindset. Rather than thinking home run, he is thinking contact. Most MLB players can do this. They just don't. If Giambi could get it into his head to look to go the other way, he'd get a lot of hits, increase his AVG, and lower his HR production. Abreu's second half resurgence is a direct result of thinking the other way rather than pull. And you've been vocal about Abreu.
of course I've been vocal about Abreu. I've been vocal because I insisted he would come around and get hot (and that his numbers for the season would approach his normal numbers), even when yankee fans were burying him as a garbage player.
You're not looking at the whole picture. I explained why it's a bad career move for Posada to continue to hit for average, rather than for power.
Point is, when he started thinking differently at the plate, he started hitting. Sorry, I can't continue this argument. I have to go out. Talk to you later man. :beer:
but his homer numbers are roughly the same as usual. he hasn't really sacrificed power. He's just getting a lot more singles and doubles on ABs that used to be outs.
