Timmy Kirkjan (sp)

[deathroh]

By a clutch game, I just meant a player had a good game in what is deemed a pressure situation.

I'd give eaqual weight to a player going 5-5 with 5 HRs in an April blowout as I would in a player going 5-5 with 5 HRs in game 163.

Then there's your answer.

Is there value in having a clutch game? Value in doing well in pressure situations? If you believe so, it seems pretty inconsistent to then say you don't value a good performance in a game 163 over an April blowout.

 

[Mitchrapp]

You can't prove a negative, the burden of proof is on you.

I could google a few studies on the subject, all of which will say there is no such thing as a clutch player though, if you'd like.

Now Bill James is one of those people but he also says this "How is it that a player who possesses the reflexes and the batting stroke and the knowledge and the experience to be a .262 hitter in other circumstances magically becomes a .300 hitter when the game is on the line? How does that happen? What is the process? What are the effects? Until we can answer those questions, I see little point in talking about clutch ability."

Basically he doesn't know. He basically says he can't answer the question so it must not exist.

 

[mjsb2]

Then there's your answer.

Is there value in having a clutch game? Value in doing well in pressure situations? If you believe so, it seems pretty inconsistent to then say you don't value a good performance in a game 163 over an April blowout.

There's value to the team, but when I'm analyzing players, I try to minimize things outside of their control, and that would include the situation.

 

[beez]

Your skill sets DO change..some guys skills waiver under pressure..some guys tense up and let their mind cloud and don't get it done because of it. Pressure is a bitch if you can't handle it. You don't believe humans are burdened by pressure and that pressure affects performance?

 

[deathroh]

There's value to the team, but when I'm analyzing players, I try to minimize things outside of their control, and that would include the situation.

Luckily in this case their situations were pretty much the same in August and September. Use whatever stat you prefer that accounts for opponents, ball parks, etc and compare the two. Shouldn't the player that provided more value to their team in these pressure situations be given a boost in the Most Valuable Player award?

 

[mjsb2]

Luckily in this case their situations were pretty much the same in August and September. Use whatever stat you prefer that accounts for opponents, ball parks, etc and compare the two. Shouldn't the player that provided more value to their team in these pressure situations be given a boost in the Most Valuable Player award?

There are blowout games in August and September.

Those games don't matter anymore.

A walkoff hit in April adds just as much value as a walkoff hit in September to put your team ahead one game.

Their situations weren't the same, every day they were different, way too different to compare them based on teh situations.

 

[Rebbiv]

Clutch can be subjective or objective.

There are a few stat splits one might choose to look at. RISP is one, but it does not necessarily tell the whole story. Meaning, we don't know if the runner was on second or third. Whether there was none, 1 or 2 outs. Having a runner on 2nd with 2 outs is a little different than bases loaded and no outs.

Leverage takes this into account.

" Within a game, there are plays that are more pivotal than others. We attempt to quantify these plays with a stat called leverage index (LI). LI looks at the possible changes in win probability in a give situation and situations where dramatic swings in win probability are possible (runner on second late in a tie game) have higher LI's than situations where there can be no large change in win probability (late innings of a 12-run blowout).

The stat is normalized so that on average the leverage is 1.00. In tense situations, the leverage is higher than 1.00 (up to about 10) and in low-tension situations the leverage is between 0 and 1.0. "

DET in 2012 was second only to NYY in High Leverage situations.


2012 DET with at least 90 PAs in High Leverage Situations (Career High Leverage)


Fielder = .372 BAVG .456 OBP .620 SLG 1.076 OPS (1.009 OPS Career)

Jackson = .330 BAVG .404 OBP .585 SLG .989 OPS (.813 OPS Career)

Cabrera = .343 BAVG .408 OBP .571 SLG .979 OPS (.941 OPS Career)

Avila = .278 BAVG .356 OBP .456 SLG .812 OPS (.781 OPS Career)

Boesch = .309 BAVG .316 OBP .436 SLG .752 OPS (.717 OPS Career)


Peralta = .223 BAVG .302 OBP .384 SLG .686 OPS (.707 OPS Career)

D. Young = .240 BAVG .270 OBP .320 SLG .590 OPS (.756 OPS Career)



Cabrera has a Career .956 OPS. He is constant in almost all situational hitting, regardless of leverage. Then you have Delmon. He had a .936 OPS in High Leverage Situations on 2010 (Career Year), .642 OPS in 2011 and finally .590 OPS this year.

If you look at 2011 for Delmon, he had a .778 OPS w/RISP, but .642 OPS in High Leverage. Meaning, he hit better in games with RISP when the game wasn't on the line. 2010 was an aberration.


So, this is one a major reason I prefer WPA/LI as a stat. It takes leverage into account. Delmon's only year with a positive WPA/LI was 2010. Cabrera has had 5.9, 6.1 and 6.0 as WPA/LI over the last 3 years, leading the AL in 2010 and 2012. Fielder has gone from 3.8, 6.5 to 4.5.


I guess another way at looking at "clutch", is that for most players (not all), it varies from year to year based on sample size. I do not discount a player as being clutch, but you certainly cannot look at one season to make that proclamation.

 

[mhughes0021]

Im still waiting for someone to bring up the WAR argument so they can explain to me if we didnt have miggy we would only win 6 less games. Miggys WAR should be like 30 lol.

*crickets*

 

[deathroh]

There are blowout games in August and September.

Those games don't matter anymore.

A walkoff hit in April adds just as much value as a walkoff hit in September to put your team ahead one game.

...

Changing your story, eh? I'll take this as your concession.

 

[Mitchrapp]

*crickets*

Oh I didn't see that but I do agree. The WAR as in the definition makes no sense. No Miguel means Brandon Inge, lol.

 

[mjsb2]

Changing your story, eh? I'll take this as your concession.

Nope, haven't changed at all.

From the beginning I said games in September/Oct don't count more than games in April.

The post you quoted shows me saying the same thing.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Nope, haven't changed at all.

From the beginning I said games in September/Oct don't count more than games in April.

The post you quoted shows me saying the same thing.

In the traditional sense as in a win is a win. But on a broader scope, they matter more. Lets reach a little, Boston loses more games than they did in April, 2011 but played much better in September, 2011 and still missed the playoffs by a game. Does there manager get fired or do they rip their team apart etc. Impossible to answer like I said it was a reach.

 

[deathroh]

Nope, haven't changed at all.

From the beginning I said games in September/Oct don't count more than games in April.

The post you quoted shows me saying the same thing.

I did mis-read, but this takes us back to your contradiction. You see value in performing under pressure due to the context within a game, but don't give any value in performing under heightened pressure due to the context of a game within a season. Why?

 

[beez]

So by your belief no one has ever choked due to pressure.

 

[mjsb2]

I did mis-read, but this takes us back to your contradiction. You see value in performing under pressure due to the context within a game, but don't give any value in performing under heightened pressure due to the context of a game within a season. Why?

I said it adds value to the team, but I ignore that when evaluating individual players.

There's obvious value in driving in the game winning run with a single, but that was only possible because of factors outside of that players control, i.e., his teammate getting on base to score off his hit. The same player could have had a single with nobody on base and it's not nearly as valueable to the team, but was his performace any different?

IMO, a player controls how often he gets a hit, via talent, but he does not control when those hits happen, they're just random variation. A player whose true talent level is a .300 BA will result in a .300 BA over a sample size of a few thousand PA's, but if you randomly select any 100 or so of those PA, his BA could range from .220-.400, but his true talent level will still be that .300 hitter. It wasn't because he was clutch, or unclutch, it's just because in the small sample size his BA will vary greatly from the mean. So I don't give bonus points for getting a clutch hit when evaluating a player.

When I analyze players, I try to minimize stuff that is outside of their control, and that includes the situation. I'll look at the end result, what were his triple slash stats, his ISO, his K and BB rates, how is he on the basepaths, how is his defense, his arm, his range, and then I'll form my opinions based on those. I'm not gonna look at the when, only the end results.

 

[lonesometiger]

Then why do people bring it up? Why does hitting a HR in the 7th or later get more value than a 1st inning HR? I hear it all the time.

Mickey Mantle use to say hit a HR in the late innings(7) or later, gave the other team less time to recover! Would argue with MM about hitting Homeruns, late?

 

[Mitchrapp]

Mickey Mantle use to say hit a HR in the late innings(7) or later, gave the other team less time to recover! Would argue with MM about hitting Homeruns, late?

I am in agreement that late HR matter more.

 

[mgoblue030703]

How many of us expected Miggy to be even as good at 3B as he was this year...especially after taking a ball off the orbital bone in ST? Not only did he move over there so that Prince could come aboard, he did it without hesitation and had some early obstacles to overcome. He settled in quite nicely after that. Trout is unbelievable and could have a special career... he could also fall off and have a sophomore slump next year. Do I expect that? No, but it COULD happen. You couldn't argue either player's legitimacy for the MVP, however, I firmly believe it is time Miggy gets his due. Ten years of proven production deserves some hardware at some point, and, as was said, what the fuck more could he have done this year? If he doesn't win the MVP this year then he never will.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I doubt anyone besides us will look at it this way. They will see Miguel as sub-par defender and nothing more.

 

[deathroh]

I said it adds value to the team, but I ignore that when evaluating individual players.

There's obvious value in driving in the game winning run with a single, but that was only possible because of factors outside of that players control, i.e., his teammate getting on base to score off his hit. The same player could have had a single with nobody on base and it's not nearly as valueable to the team, but was his performace any different?

IMO, a player controls how often he gets a hit, via talent, but he does not control when those hits happen, they're just random variation. A player whose true talent level is a .300 BA will result in a .300 BA over a sample size of a few thousand PA's, but if you randomly select any 100 or so of those PA, his BA could range from .220-.400, but his true talent level will still be that .300 hitter. It wasn't because he was clutch, or unclutch, it's just because in the small sample size his BA will vary greatly from the mean. So I don't give bonus points for getting a clutch hit when evaluating a player.

When I analyze players, I try to minimize stuff that is outside of their control, and that includes the situation. I'll look at the end result, what were his triple slash stats, his ISO, his K and BB rates, how is he on the basepaths, how is his defense, his arm, his range, and then I'll form my opinions based on those. I'm not gonna look at the when, only the end results.

Is it that ridiculous to believe that some people are mentally and emotionally better equipped to handle stressful situations? I understand it may not be possible to mathematically prove it based on the standards you're looking for, and I understand taking out as many outside variables as possible when comparing players, but doing those things and acknowledging that some human beings handle stress differently aren't mutually exclusive.

But anyway, you keep wanting to spread this out over a career to find true talent. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about who was the most valuable player during a one year snapshot in time. Whether something was a fluke, not repeatable, whatever...doesn't matter. Who added more value? And as you agreed, performing well under high pressure games adds value. Sure, it would take a heck of a lot of work to 100% fairly judge that, but I feel very confident in saying that nearly every August and September game for both Cabrera and Trout had more pressure than their early season games, regardless of the opponent, location, etc. And the wide margin by which Cabrera out performed Trout in those games gives him a feather in his cap.