Age in the Minors: A Levels

It’s easy to focus on the success stories of the 2016 Wisconsin Timber Rattlers and ignore the rough season endured by the 2016 Brevard County Manatees. The Milwaukee Brewers system really was split into two different prognoses this season, which provided an excellent reminder that work throughout a minor league system, even during a thus-successful rebuild, can never be finished. Even though David Stearns made some moves to procure talent for the low minors, and now-Vice President of Scouting Ray Montgomery oversaw two solid drafts, some of that talent will not be to Class-A or Advanced A ball for another year or so. In the meantime, the Timber Rattlers showcased some of the strengths of recent drafts and trades, while the Manatees reminded Brewers fans that their system was in rough shape not too long ago.

Continuing age-based analysis of minor league statistics, the 2016 Midwest League could be the most interesting case yet. Unlike the Southern League or Pacific Coast League, the Midwest League featured a group of three different age levels with similar production, and two adjacent age groups that did not fall far. From age-21 to age-22 to age-23 players, Midwest League bats slashed .245 / .316 / .356, .249 / .318 / .352, and .247 / .317 / .353, respectively. On the outskirts, age-20 batted .249 / .307 / .367 while age-24 batted .252 / .315 / .333, giving the league an expansive middle ground of 345 players that can be judged by very similar production standards.

One might ask whether this reflects the nascent stages of minor league competition, perhaps where players may be closer to the same development curve, thereby exhibiting less stratification among minor league players. Perhaps Class-A is the first level at which “organizational lifers” emerge, or players hit their first professional ceiling and stick around for a year or two before heading to their next career. It would be worthwhile digging into a scouting explanation for this phenomenon, in order to see how the physical tools relate to the statistics; perhaps everyone (or almost everyone) at Class-A is still learning the strike zone, or pitch recognition, or some foundational trait that places the vast majority of players on the same level.

There are a number of notable bats that defined the Timber Rattlers in 2016. Isan Diaz produced one of the best seasons at the Class-A level, and although he did not win MVP, he certainly has the performance level worthy of consideration. Lucas Erceg also stormed the league out of the 2016 draft, demonstrating a completely different developmental stage (relatively polished college draftee) than Diaz. Along with Diaz and Erceg, several depth players produced interesting or good seasons, giving fans and writers more players to think about and watch during the 2017 campaign. Perhaps no one will be more interesting to follow than Monte Harrison, whose statistical line was damaged by a rough April and early-May, and whose hot streak was cut short by injury. Harrison has shown flashes of “putting it together,” so it will be crucial to see how he returns from injury.

Down in Florida, the Brevard County club had a rough season, mostly due to the bats. This level lagged behind in the system during 2016, and unfortunately, even age-based statistics do not allow one to reconsider many gems.

It is worth noting that Corey Ray produced a fine campaign, based on his age level and the fact that he was making his professional debut in an aggressive assignment. While Ray’s surface stats of .247 / .307 / .385 does not look very good, age-21 players in the Florida State League were notably worse than that production level, allowing one to see that Ray showed solid hitting, discipline, and (especially) strong isolated slugging. Even if one follows scouting reports to raise some questions about the hit tool, there is a sense that Ray’s tools are already showing up in his stat line, even if that line is depressed by his environment.