33anda3rd wrote:You'r right, I was saying in 2010 that his decline had begun. And in 2010 he was 2 years into decline.haltz wrote:Not 2012. You were saying that the decline had begun in 2010 when he led the league in OPS+.33anda3rd wrote:psssshhhhhh.haltz wrote:How dare you. You got lucky.You're like the guys on here who were arguing with me 7 years ago that Pujols wasn't already 2 years into a decline.
The numbers don't lie, haltz. I was saying in 2012 that the decline had begun and people were arguing with me that it had not. Go look on fangraphs today and tell me when the decline began.
That's part of why I'm the GRB Resident Expert On Aging Curves Among Pro Jocks.
2008 .459 wOBA / 8,7 fWAR
2009 .447 wOBA / 8.4 fWAR
2010 .419 wOBA / 6.8 fWAR
2011 .384 wOBA / 4.0 fWAR
That's decline, year-over-year, steadily, since his peak in 2008. It was small, then it got bigger b/c that's what it tends to do, right? That he led the league in OPS+ in 2010 is meaningless. He was 5th in wOBA that year after leading the league in that measure the two years prior.
You always misconstrued the argument that you had against those folks back in the Pujols aging argument days. Considering I was one of the biggest disagreers with you, I should know.
The argument was never that Pujols had started to decline and that he was aging. We all pretty much agreed with that. The argument was about if Pujols would ever provide more value than he had in previous years. While aging trends in the same direction for everyone, the way a player ages is fluid and there can be peaks and valleys in that aging curve.
My argument was never that Pujols was aging, it was that I disagreed with your stance that it was impossible for Pujols to have another big year since he had already started down his aging slope. Sadly, the only Argument that Pujols ever gave for my point was 2014 when his wOBA spiked slightly and his fWAR went from utterly mediocre to slightly above replacement level.
So even though Pujols didn't help my cause (I expected Pujols to have a more Musial-esque aging curve at the time), I still agree with the principle of my argument.
Harper has likely already started his aging, though there have been arguments that generational talents tend to peak earlier and age slower than the average player...but I suppose that depends on how generational you feel Harper's talent is, but that doesn't mean he is never going to have a season above the .376 wOBA and 3.5 fWAR he put up in 2018.
Over the life of his contract his floor and ceiling will continue to drop, but if we say his ceiling is 6-7 wins now and will drop to 2-3 wins at the end of his contract, that is a huge variation and potential for value.
It's still entirely possible that Harper has several 6+ win seasons in his future based on his current talent regardless of his aging curve. It's also entirely possible he never cracks 4 wins again. The older he gets the former gets less likely and the latter gets more likely, but there is still plenty of statistical variation in what his performance will do in spite of his aging curve.