The Underage Trio
When all is said and done, I would be willing to bet that the rookie class of 2010 will go down as the best in the history of the game. The new wave of talent that has arrived in the show this year is off the charts. With Stephen Strasburg, Carlos Santana, and Buster Posey, we’ve seen three guys step right in and become premier players right away, and the depth of players behind those three is just nutty.
But rather than focusing on the class as a whole, I just wanted to look at the trio of underage guys who are making a big impact for their clubs. Jason Heyward, Mike Stanton, and Starlin Castro are all in their age 20 season (Heyward turned 21 a couple of days ago), and all performing well, which is a rare accomplishment.
In terms of performance in a year before age 21, this group (Heyward, Stanton, and Castro) is almost certainly the best in recent history. They have combined for +6.6 WAR, a staggeringly high total for three guys who can’t drink, especially considering two of them began the season in the minors. While guys like Alex Rodriguez had a great individual age 20 season, it’s rare to see three super young guys come into the league together and all play well.
In terms of talent, this is probably the best trio to arrive together since 1989, when Ken Griffey Jr, Gary Sheffield, and Sammy Sosa all hit the scene at the same time. Of those three, however, only Griffey was a good player that year- Sosa and Sheffield would develop into productive players later on in their careers.
The ultimate comparison, though, is the three guys who showed up together in 1951: Willie Mays, Mickey Mantle, and Chet Nichols. Okay, fine, the last name in the group doesn’t really belong with the first two, but he was a sensation in his rookie year, posting a league leading 2.88 ERA and finishing second (to Mays) in the Rookie of the Year voting.
We don’t know where the careers of Stanton, Heyward, and Castro will go from here, though given their talents, its easy to suspect that all three are in line for some great things going forward. Whether they can match the ultimate star power of the 1989 group is something we’ll only know in 20 years. What we can say, however, is that we probably won’t see a trio of underage guys this good break in together again any time soon.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
This is a pretty cool article/situation.
I wouldn’t bet that they’d be the best rookie class ever, especially given the two rookie trios you mentioned.
The two things that jumped into my mind were:
[1] I love it that teams are getting their young talent to ML. Unless a player is going through a position change, new approach, new pitch, etc … I am not in favor of extended minor league experience.
[2] What strong debuting trios or rookie classes ended up flaming out.
Are there really 3 HoF’ers in this rookie class?
I bring this up as one who remembered how Cory Snyder and Pete Incaviglia were going to change baseball with their power.
Re 1: I agree, but it’s sort of surprising teams actually bring up such young players in the environment of 6-years of cheap team control. If you’re going to only get bargain rates on a player for six years and can control when those years start, don’t you want those years to include a player’s prime rather than having them end just when their primes are getting under way? E.g., imagine what an asset the Twins would have if this was Delmon Young’s first MLB year.
Each of the trio has a positive curveball pitch tape value. That probably is the reason for their success.
No love for Bumgarner? He turned 21 a couple days ago
probably because he hasn’t had the kind of impact that the other 3 have yet (hasn’t been up very long).
Uhhhh… Mike Leake anyone? Hell, even Chris Johnson deserves an honorable mention.
The article is about under 21 players.
Both are over 20 (Leake is 22 and Johsnon 25).
Leake had a great start to his rookie season, but his 1.82 K/BB rate is below average.
Johnson has a career .744 OPS in the minor leagues and his .430 BABIP in only 178 PA’s this season screams fluke.
Sorry, but neither is in the same category as Heyward, Stanton or Castro in terms of long term potential.
Did you even read the article? Mike Leake is a 22-year-old with a 4.47 FIP. That’s not particularly impressive.
So in hindsight is Starlin Castro the most glaring ommision from the trade value series? I would think GMs would line up out the door for a chance at a 20 year old SS already producing at this level.
Castro was pretty much thrown out there in the comments as soon as the trade value article was posted.
Castro just went 10-20 in a 4-game set against the Giants. In his last 10 games, he’s hitting .422 (19-45) with a BB and 5 K. He has a .366 OBP and .450 SLG. His next hit will be his 100th as a major-leaguer. He’s hitting 30 points *higher* against righties than lefties, and he’s hitting .407 in the last 30 days. At home, his XBH cluster between the power alleys, weighing somewhat toward left field. At the same time, most of his air outs at Wrigley are going to right-center.
As to the question of bringing kids up early and having to deal with club control/arbitration earlier, well, winning is more important. If the Cubs and Braves believe that giving Castro and Heyward these reps in MLB (rather than at Iowa or Gwinnett) will improve the team’s chances of success now or in the near future, by all means bring them up.
Castro will be 25 still when club control expires (March birthday). The means the Cubs can offer him a post-club control 7-year deal for the kind of money a cornerstone player wants, and still be out from under it when Castro is finishing his age 32 year. And since he’ll be signing at 25, he likely won’t have yet put up his peak potential numbers, which would in turn drive up his market value.
I’m obviously more familiar with Starlin than Heyward, being in Chicago, but I’d assume that the generally intelligent Braves front office see Heyward in a similar fashion. Although I must say, Heyward’s numbers are amusing to me because he has Pujols’ patience but Jacque Jones’ contact results (LD/GB/FB). It’ll be interesting to see how long it takes before he consistently drives the ball on a line and in the air.
Compare their situations to the situation of the rookie home run leader, Tyler Colvin. He’ll be 25 in 3 weeks: the Cubs have club control through his age 30 season. They won’t pay him much during his prime years, but if he becomes an everyday outfielder (or first baseman), then an extension to an already late-prime player is that much more of a gamble.
And a last thought: as a Cubs fan, I have become pretty touchy about ascribing star status to pitchers in their rookie seasons. Strasburg has already been on the DL with soreness. Having lived through Kerry Wood’s 20-strikeout game…and Tommy John surgery, and then Mark Prior’s 7.6 WAR 2003…and his new deal with the same league featuring 18-year-old female sidearming knuckleballer Eri Yoshida. It’s a nightmare scenario for both the Nationals and the guy who paid $17,000 for a baseball card at auction recently. But with pitchers, you never know.
The headline seems like Cameron learned something from Leitch at FanGraphs Live regarding headline writing.
Underage Trio Streaking Towards Their First Pay Day
sounds like a good evening at college.. underage trio streaking….
Minnie Minoso played a bit in 1949 but was another HOF in the 1951 rookie class, finished close 2nd to Gil McDougald in RoY voting.
better than 1986? Bonds and Maddux — the two sickest of their generation. and Larkin a HOFer. not to mention Canseco, Will Clark, Wally Joyner, Galarraga, and yes Cory Snyder
He’s saying these three guys have had tremendous positive impacts on their team in that season during their age 20 season. Most of the guys you just listed weren’t in their age 20 season.
He also said, “When all is said and done, I would be willing to bet that the rookie class of 2010 will go down as the best in the history of the game.” Which is fair to say, but the odds would be strongly, strongly against it knowing what we know about how variable things like that are and how good we know classes like the 1986 class were.
Have you believed about making a video clip to cover the subject in even larger detail? I’m not unique what it might get, but my understanding is it is relatively easy to undertake now.