Perhaps keeping veterans around should help boost attendance? (a "popularity" rating that grows with time?)
Speaking of development, isn't it the conventional wisdom that batting average drops a bit and power goes up in the early 30's? I'll admit that I've never read any hard numbers or research on this, so I decided to do a quick look at some power hitters from the last 25 years or so.
I see that Bonds only had one season of 40+ homers before age 32, but since then 5 of 7 seasons have been 40+ homers. Sosa had one season of 40+ before age 30, but since then every season has been 49 homers or more. Even McGwire, who hit 49 as a 24-year-old rookie, only hit 40+ twice in his 20's, but then hit 50+ for four straight season age 33-36. (and had 32 in only 236 at at bats at 37)
. Looking a little farther, all three of Mike Schmidt's 40+ homer seasons occurred at ages 29-33 (and he had 31 in 354 at-bats in the strike-shortened '81 season, when he was 31). Actually, Schmidt's career make a good case for veterans dropping off the table. In '87, at age 37, he put up a .293-35-113 season, but then at age 38, he was .249-12-62 in 390 at bats. On the other hand, Greg "The Bull" Luzinski is a very different case. His best power seasons were at age 24-27, and he only hit 30+ once after age 30. He had a .255-32-95 year at age 32, then at 33 he was .238-13-58 and his career was over. Dale Murphy had five seasons of 30+ homers in his 20's, but his only 40+ season was at age 31. He REALLY dropped off the table after that year though: age 31: .295-44-105, age 32: .226-24-77, age 33: .228-20-84, age 34: .245-24-83 and out. Rafael Palmeiro had one season of 30+ homers before age 30, but all 8 of his full seasons at ages 30-37 he hit 38 homers or more. The Crime Dog has dropped off a little in power since age 30. He had six straight 30+ homer seasons age 24-29, and four since then. (Curiously, he's picked it back up the last four seasons though. Three of his last four seasons he's had 30+ homers--ages 35-38). Eddie Murray had 4 30+ homer seasons before age 30, and one afterward. "Pops" Stargell had one 30+ homer season before age 30, and five afterward, including 32 in only 424 at bats at age 39. Winfield had one 30+ season before age 39, two afterward. King Kong Kingman had two 30+ seasons before age 30, and five afterward. Andre Dawson had one 30+ season before, and two after (including hitting 49 at age 32). Joe Carter had two before, four after. Galarraga had none before, and five after, his first coming at age 33. (Yeah, I know four were in Colorado, but The Big Cat hit 44 in Atlanta age age 37, and 28 at age 39 after sitting out a year with cancer.)
Conclusions: Hard to draw any hard-and-fast rules from this mini-study, but my main conclusion is that
player development curves need to have the ability for a fairly wide variance.
1. Guys like Greg Luzinski and Murphy, who were among the top power hitters in the game, had pretty sudden drop-offs. They'd be the far left of the bell-curve development distribution
2. Sosa, Bonds and Palmeiro would be the poster children for SIGNFICANTLY ADDED power after age 30, perhaps the far right of the bell-curve.
3. It seems that in the middle would be guys who add a little bit of power.
As far as the player decline curve, my guess is that two sets of variables are needed. One would be the "peak years". Again, that would be a bell-curve distribution, with the middle of the curve probably being 27-33 or something like that. The other set would be the "ramp-up speed" and "decline speed" variables. In other words, how quickly a guy's ratings increase toward his peak, and how quickly his ratings drop off after the peak is passed. Once again, a bell-curve distribution, with the "average" slope (probably a gradual, but noticeable ramp-up and decline), being the most prevalent in the middle.
Whew. That was WAY more than I intended to do with the post, but hey, there it is. Hope it can be useful.
--Ben