...
....
George Scott was 24 years old when he had his terrible season; Craig last year was 29. That's certainly a difference.
I'm quite sure I could find a dozen players who had terrible off seasons at age 29, then recovered and had good careers after that. . ..well, [hey], I suppose I can do that much. Jermaine Dye, after driving in 100 runs in 1999, 2000 and 2001, was George-Scott-level terrible in 2003, aged 29, hitting .172 in 65 games. He would hit 20 homers the next six seasons, including 44 homers and 138 RBI in 2006, aged 32.
Darrell Evans hit 41 homers, drove in 104 runs in 1973, drew 124 walks that year, 126 the next, 106 in 1975. In 1976, aged 29, he hit .205 in 136 games, 471 plate appearances--.641 OPS. He would hit 286 home runs after that season, including 40 home runs at age 38.
Fred Lynn, after winning the MVP Award in 1975 and hitting .333 with 39 homers, 122 RBI in 1979, aged 27, hit .219 with 5 homers in 76 games at age 29. He hit 20 homers in each of the next seven seasons. [plenty of Fenway players on here - Dr D]
Victor Martinez, a great hitter from 2004 to 2007, hit only 2 homers in 266 at bats in 2008, aged 29, his OPS slumping to .701. I’ve heard he was doing OK in recent seasons.
Tony Phillips in 1988, aged 29, hit .203 79 games, 212 at bats. He would have just short of 1500 hits in the major leagues after that season. Pete Runnels, after hitting .310 in 1956, hit just .230 in 1957, aged 29. Over the next five seasons he hit .322, .314, .320, .317 and .326.
Willie Horton, who drove in 100 runs in 1965 and 1966, had an OPS of .855 in 1970, .845 in 1971. In 1972, aged 29, he hit .231 with a .681 OPS. He would drive in 92 runs three years later, and 106 runs seven years later.
Travis Jackson, a Hall of Famer (although not actually THAT good), hit .246 with no homers as a part-time player at age 29, 12 RBI on the season. He drove in 101 runs at age 30, and hit .301 (as a regular) at age 31.
Ethan Allen, inventor of the table top baseball game with the spinners and baseball coach at Yale, was a regular and .300 hitter 1925-1929. He was absolutely terrible in 1932 and 1933, ages 29 and 30, then was a regular and hit .330 in 1934, and had 198 hits in 1935.
Deron Johnson, who hit 32 homers and led the majors in RBI in 1965 (130 RBI), hit .208 with 33 RBI in 137 games in 1968, aged 29. He recovered somewhat in 1969, then hit 27 homers, drove in 93 runs in 1970 (aged 31), then hit 34 homers, drove in 95 runs in 1971 (aged 32).
There are many, many similar examples; I could give you a dozen more at age 29, and of course equal numbers at ages 28 and 30. It is not uncommon for a player who has a terrible season at age 29 to recover and have many good seasons after that.
...
James is giving detail, which is his wont. For my purposes, I'd be just as glad to hear him say "Oh yeah, you see this happen all the time, a good hitter have a terrible off year and then just get right back to it.
The Red Sox already made several of their statements about Allen Craig, when they traded for him during a downslide. Now, if they're going to trade him, they've got little choice but to Sell Low.
Bill James' (implicit) judgment, implied above with respect to Allen Craig, represents (to me) the best current argument you could make that Craig has good years ahead of him. And I don't think that James would use "Hey Bill" as a misdirection opportunity on behalf of the Red Sox.
.........