NEW YORK ( TheStreet) -- I remember going to a Dodgers-Padres game last June. The Dodgers were mired in last place and their season seemed over. About this time, Dodgers management called up a Cuban outfielder by the name of Yasiel Puig from their Chattanooga minor-league outpost.
Puig swung a red-hot bat during his first few weeks as a big leaguer and there was talk of him being named to the midsummer Major League Baseball All-Star game. Jubilant fans heralded him as the next Dodgers superstar.
Even I was starting to drink the Dodger Blue Kool-Aid; I was ready to vote for Puig to be an All-Star after just one month in the majors.
Then I started to listen to a lot of veteran broadcasters and ballplayers whose opinions I respect. They had been around the game for a long, long time. The prevailing opinion, by far, was that a hot debut month does not an All-Star make.
I watched Puig cool off considerably after the All-Star break and he started coming back down to the bright green earth that he occupies in right field at Chavez Ravine in Los Angeles. It seems that the pundits knew what they were talking about. It was a little premature to proclaim Mr. Puig the next Ted Williams.
When I was developing my Best Stocks Now app, I had a similar issue. How long does a company need to be public before I can give it a Gunderson Grade, let alone Best Stocks Now designation?
How about a hot IPO that breaks out of the gate fast? Can I start to give it a performance grade after its first week, its first month, or its first three months? How long before the performance of the stock really starts to count?
I played around with various performance formulas to see which ones made the most sense. I finally came to the conclusion that a stock needed a minimum of a year as a publicly traded company before I could in good conscience begin to give it a performance grade. And without a performance grade, I could not give it an overall Gunderson Grade. Instead, the grade would show N/A.