Fire alex cora

[notin]

In which case, there is no past performance.

 

He never pitched before?

[a700hitter]

He never pitched before?

He never ran the bases before.

[moonslav59]

He never ran the bases before.

 

He didn't that time either. He never got a chance.

 

He ran a base.

 

(BTW, he probably ran down to 1B once or twice when batting at an NL park.)

[a700hitter]

He didn't that time either. He never got a chance.

 

He ran a base.

 

(BTW, he probably ran down to 1B once or twice when batting at an NL park.)

He did have 6 PAs with no hits, 3 k's and a sac bunt. He never got to !B.

[moonslav59]

He did have 6 PAs with no hits, 3 k's and a sac bunt. He never got to !B.

 

Well, he may have run to 1B on a ground out or on the sac bunt.

[a700hitter]

Well, he may have run to 1B on a ground out or on the sac bunt.

I checked the videos. He peeled off to the dugout.

[moonslav59]

I checked the videos. He peeled off to the dugout.

 

But, but, but...

 

What about Little League?

[a700hitter]

But, but, but...

 

What about Little League?

He said that the last time that he ran the bases was High School.

[moonslav59]

He said that the last time that he ran the bases was High School.

 

There you go!

 

A real expert at running the bases!

[S5Dewey]

Even if that were true all the time, those numbers typically represent history, and said history was achieved by humans, complete with faults and foibles.

 

I would say that the stats alone account for the human element, and probably do so to a greater degree than any of us are capable...

 

Are you saying that momentum, clutch, and choke exist and they show up in the stats?

[jad]

Even if that were true all the time, those numbers typically represent history, and said history was achieved by humans, complete with faults and foibles.

 

I would say that the stats alone account for the human element, and probably do so to a greater degree than any of us are capable...

 

It seems like a small difference, but you mean "incorporate the human element" right? (rather than 'account for' it)?

[Slasher9]

Are you saying that momentum, clutch, and choke exist and they show up in the stats?

 

Notin doesn’t believe in those things. He thinks every MLB player tries their hardest (ie: gives 100% laser focus) on every pitch of every game....

[notin]

Are you saying that momentum, clutch, and choke exist and they show up in the stats?

 

If they show up anywhere, it’s in the stats. Hitting streaks, recent samples, high leverage.

 

The real illusion is fans saying they see these things. Everyone remembers the big hits, but most forget the outs in the same situation...

[S5Dewey]

Notin doesn’t believe in those things. He thinks every MLB player tries their hardest (ie: gives 100% laser focus) on every pitch of every game....

 

I think players think they do that...but in reality they don't.

 

At the same time I don't think any player ever said, "I think I'll just 'mail it in' on this AB". But for some players when they find themselves in a pressure situation they feel the tingle...the goose bumps of knowing THIS is where they want to be... and they can dig down and find a bit more focus than they usually bring. That's clutch.

 

Now.. are they always successful? No. Because baseball is such a random game that nothing is "ALWAYS". But these players are able to hit, field, pitch, or throw just a bit better than they usually do in those situations. It's reflected in their BA, etc. but since it's not identified as a pressure situation some folks think it doesn't exist.

Edited October 19, 2019 by S5Dewey

[S5Dewey]

If they show up anywhere, it’s in the stats. Hitting streaks, recent samples, high leverage.

 

The real illusion is fans saying they see these things. Everyone remembers the big hits, but most forget the outs in the same situation...

 

Then we agree on this. Clutch does exist and it shows itself in the stats.

 

My opinion is that a clutch player who is normally a .290 hitter will pick up a few clutch hits throughout the season to raise his average to .310. (That's only 10 hits over a season based on 500 AB's). In the eyes of the statistician he's then a good hitter @ .310 rather than a slightly better than average hitter @ .290. And it's due to his being clutch.

[notin]

Then we agree on this. Clutch does exist and it shows itself in the stats.

 

My opinion is that a clutch player who is normally a .290 hitter will pick up a few clutch hits throughout the season to raise his average to .310. (That's only 10 hits over a season based on 500 AB's). In the eyes of the statistician he's then a good hitter @ .310 rather than a slightly better than average hitter @ .290. And it's due to his being clutch.

 

Well, yes and no.

 

The fan perception of clutch is usually just a confirmation bias.

 

The definition of clutch that has been dispelled is that certain players get better in key situations. The stats actually tell you they perform the same. But that confirmation bias typically has fans only remembering the successes and forgetting the failures. This in turn allows for redefining the clutch player to any success in key situations, and not improved rate of success.

 

Fans also like to select samples for definition of key, and a big one is al postseason numbers. While we all get why, there are two major flaws. 1. Post season numbers typically involve a bunch of small samples over a number of years. A bunch of small samples don’t always equal one large sample. And 2. Not every postseason AB or IP is in a high leverage situation. Using postseason numbers does make it easy to look stuff up, but it doesn’t make it accurate...

[notin]

Then we agree on this. Clutch does exist and it shows itself in the stats.

 

My opinion is that a clutch player who is normally a .290 hitter will pick up a few clutch hits throughout the season to raise his average to .310. (That's only 10 hits over a season based on 500 AB's). In the eyes of the statistician he's then a good hitter @ .310 rather than a slightly better than average hitter @ .290. And it's due to his being clutch.

 

But how many high leverage at bats did it take him to get clutch hits? It’s all about the total opportunities, too.

 

Otherwise, you’re just confirming what I said about confirmation bias...

[notin]

Notin doesn’t believe in those things. He thinks every MLB player tries their hardest (ie: gives 100% laser focus) on every pitch of every game....

 

While neither of us is probably right, your perception that players in small market cities (which are still CITIES) are just blue collar lunchpail-carrying Regular Joe’s who can just mix in with the masses while large market players are limo-driven rock stars living in ivory towers seems a little narrow-minded, too.

[S5Dewey]

But how many high leverage at bats did it take him to get clutch hits? It’s all about the total opportunities, too.

 

Please define a high leverage situation.

[moonslav59]

Please define a high leverage situation.

 

https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/li/

 

I like the Late & Close stat, but this capture some earlier inning moments when the game may be on the line, too.

[notin]

Please define a high leverage situation.

 

LOL B-R has a definition on their site. But think of it as an opportunity for a clutch hit...

[S5Dewey]

https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/li/

 

I like the Late & Close stat, but this capture some earlier inning moments when the game may be on the line, too.

 

I know that Fangraph's has their definition of 'high leverage' but I'm not at all sure it pertains to the topics of clutch and choke. Only the player can determine whether he feels that he's in a 'high leverage situation' and it's how a player responds to that feeling that determines clutch.. or choke, for that matter.

 

Besides,not all 'high leverage' situations are created equal. For example, a rookie player who's 0-for-22 and knows he's on the verge of being sent down may think each at- bat is a 'high leverage' situation because... for him - it is! Does Fangraphs take that into consideration?

 

There are also different degrees of 'high leverage'. If David Ortiz is at bat in the 9th inning with a runner on base and behind by a run in the regular season as 'high leverage' as Papi in that same situation if it's the 7th game of the WS?

 

I know that 'they' are trying to quantify everything but IMHO there are some things, some parts of a game, that just aren't quantifiable because they deal with a player's emotions and neither Fangraphs or anyone else knows what's going through that player's mind.

[moonslav59]

I know that Fangraph's has their definition of 'high leverage' but I'm not at all sure it pertains to the topics of clutch and choke. Only the player can determine whether he feels that he's in a 'high leverage situation' and it's how a player responds to that feeling that determines clutch.. or choke, for that matter.

 

Besides,not all 'high leverage' situations are created equal. For example, a rookie player who's 0-for-22 and knows he's on the verge of being sent down may think each at- bat is a 'high leverage' situation because... for him - it is! Does Fangraphs take that into consideration?

 

There are also different degrees of 'high leverage'. If David Ortiz is at bat in the 9th inning with a runner on base and behind by a run in the regular season as 'high leverage' as Papi in that same situation if it's the 7th game of the WS?

 

I know that 'they' are trying to quantify everything but IMHO there are some things, some parts of a game, that just aren't quantifiable because they deal with a player's emotions and neither Fangraphs or anyone else knows what's going through that player's mind.

 

1) I'm not trying to quantify everything- not even things that can be quantified, let alone those that never can be.

2) A rookie trying to stay in the bigs might view an AB as high leverage, but I don't, if it's a 10-0 game. I'm okay with you thinking it is.

3) Certainly some important ABs are more important than others. Nobody disputes that.

4) Certainly some players have better numbers in important situations than others. That's to be expected, even if everything is 100% random. (It's not, BTW.)

[notin]

I know that Fangraph's has their definition of 'high leverage' but I'm not at all sure it pertains to the topics of clutch and choke. Only the player can determine whether he feels that he's in a 'high leverage situation' and it's how a player responds to that feeling that determines clutch.. or choke, for that matter.

 

Besides,not all 'high leverage' situations are created equal. For example, a rookie player who's 0-for-22 and knows he's on the verge of being sent down may think each at- bat is a 'high leverage' situation because... for him - it is! Does Fangraphs take that into consideration?

 

There are also different degrees of 'high leverage'. If David Ortiz is at bat in the 9th inning with a runner on base and behind by a run in the regular season as 'high leverage' as Papi in that same situation if it's the 7th game of the WS?

 

I know that 'they' are trying to quantify everything but IMHO there are some things, some parts of a game, that just aren't quantifiable because they deal with a player's emotions and neither Fangraphs or anyone else knows what's going through that player's mind.

 

 

To me, if you’re going to attack the definition of “high leverage”, it might be best to not use equally undefined terms like “clutch”, which has all the same question marks...

[moonslav59]

To me, if you’re going to attack the definition of “high leverage”, it might be best to not use equally undefined terms like “clutch”, which has all the same question marks...

 

Yes, if that rookie gets a hit in that game down 10-0, and it saved him from being demoted and possible never getting to play in the bigs again, it might have been more clutch than Papi's HR.

[oldtimer]

Yes, if that rookie gets a hit in that game down 10-0, and it saved him from being demoted and possible never getting to play in the bigs again, it might have been more clutch than Papi's HR.

 

One high leverage situation is batting with runners in scoring position and this is something that is measured now.

[S5Dewey]

To me, if you’re going to attack the definition of “high leverage”, it might be best to not use equally undefined terms like “clutch”, which has all the same question marks...

 

While I do appreciate the tutorial, at the same time at least we agree that "high leverage" is an undefined term.

[Bellhorn04]

While I do appreciate the tutorial, at the same time at least we agree that "high leverage" is an undefined term.

 

A reasonable definition of high leverage can be produced.

 

The main principle is that it's a situation in a game that has a big impact on win expectancy.

 

For me the thing that's missing is the leverage of the game.

[Bellhorn04]

If you're going to discuss clutch as a real thing you should be using real players and making a case.

 

I tend to go with postseason numbers because, as notin said, they're easy to obtain.

 

And if I had to pick one player to try to make a case with, I'd go with Schilling.

[moonslav59]

Some interesting numbers:

 

Career OPS

 

Papi

.931 Regular season

.947 Playoffs

.943 High Leverage Reg Season

.870 Late & Close

 

Reggie Jackson

.846 Regular Season

.885 Playoffs

.855 High Leverage

.851 Late & Close

 

Manny Ramirez

.996 Regular Season

.937 Playoffs

1.018 High Leverage

1.050 Late & Close