Since they lost last night, I need to tell you what I REALLY feel about the 2021 Sox!

[Bellhorn04]

One reason it might be easier is pitchers have just gone through a full season.

 

For years, David Price was held up as an example of a post season choker based solely on cursory glances at his post season stats. And for all of those years, I tried pointing out that as he routinely pitches well over 200 IP per season, maybe it was fatigue or soreness. Nope. Choke. Had to be.

 

Then 2018 happened. Price pitched about 40 fewer innings during the regular season. And was good in the postseason. A lot of people thought he overcame his yips, but I had been saying for years that the innings matter…

 

Sure, I'll buy that Price's postseason struggles could have been impacted by fatigue. There's logic behind it.

 

In general, though, it's hitters who are slightly disadvantaged in the postseason, because teams get to deploy their best pitchers more of the time due to the off days. That's simple logic too, right?

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Mookie detractors like to point to playoff batting averages or production. But anyone who watched every inning of the 2018 postseason saw he was an impact player throughout, jumpstarting the offense leading off, running the bases, and playing Gold Glove D.

 

There are other intangibles -- even beyond stats and WAR -- that a winning player can contribute to championships. How much did JD Martinez' ipad analysis help new teammates improve in '18?

 

Reggie Jackson was the heart of the order hitter on five World Series champs in seven years. You can't measure the stress he put on pitchers and defenses during at bats or even looming in the on deck circle, nor how that benefitted batters and baserunners around him.

 

Joe DiMaggio played 13 war-interrupted years; his teams went 9-1 in 10 World Series. Yogi Berra hung around for 19 seasons and caught for 14 pennant winners. He won 10 rings.

[Bellhorn04]

Mookie detractors like to point to playoff batting averages or production. But anyone who watched every inning of the 2018 postseason saw he was an impact player throughout, jumpstarting the offense leading off, running the bases, and playing Gold Glove D.

 

There are other intangibles -- even beyond stats and WAR -- that a winning player can contribute to championships. How much did JD Martinez' ipad analysis help new teammates improve in '18?

 

Reggie Jackson was the heart of the order hitter on five World Series champs in seven years. You can't measure the stress he put on pitchers and defenses during at bats or even looming in the on deck circle, nor how that benefitted batters and baserunners around him.

 

Joe DiMaggio played 13 war-interrupted years; his teams went 9-1 in 10 World Series. Yogi Berra hung around for 19 seasons and caught for 14 pennant winners. He won 10 rings.

 

Agree about Mookie and Reggie.

 

DiMaggio and Berra, I don't know, they probably benefitted from playing on stacked teams, but of course they were great players in their own right.

[Kimmi]

Well it depends how you define "sustainable".

 

If you perform most of the times, it could be defined as sustainable.

 

This team needs some moves either coming off the farm or via trade in order to be more sustainable in the second half and mostly at clutch hitting. Gonzalez, Santana, Chavis, etc need to be replaced if we want to be considered a serious contender. I bet Bloom will make some moves regarding this.

 

In terms of bench players, I am thinking a left handed bat to perhaps platoon with Dalbec. I don't think we will see any major acquisitions, but we'll see.

[moonslav59]

That's correct. One of the reasons it's harder for a hitter to put up the same numbers in the postseason is that they're not getting as many AB's off back-end starters.

 

And it's harder for pitchers, because they are facing better hitters and managers pulling out all the stops.

[Kimmi]

Nobody believed me when I said this last winter.

 

It was all about Kike playing 2B.

 

I wasn't 100% right, as I saw a Cordero-Renfroe platoon (in LF, no less!) with Kike in CF and Verdugo in RF.

 

You were spot on with Kike being better in CF. I don't think that was the plan for Kike when he was signed, but kudos to Cora and Bloom for going with that change.

[Kimmi]

The 947 in the postseason was against better pitching.

 

One of those things the stat people have never attempted to address. Not that I blame them...

 

Not sure who these stat people are that have never attempted to address this, but believe me, stat people have attempted to address this. The problem is the small sample size in the postseason. I know that explanation doesn't sit well with you.

 

Ortiz has played in the postseason in 9 different seasons. Here is the difference in OPS between the postseason and the regular season for each of those years:

 

2002, -.184

2003, -.316

2004, +.295

2005, +.082

2007, +.138

2008, -.201

2009, -.627

2013, +.247

2016, -.549

 

So, in 9 postseasons, Ortiz had a better OPS in the postseason than he did in the regular season 4 times. He had a worse postseason OPS 5 times. With that, can you really say that he was clutch in the postseason?

[notin]

Mookie detractors like to point to playoff batting averages or production. But anyone who watched every inning of the 2018 postseason saw he was an impact player throughout, jumpstarting the offense leading off, running the bases, and playing Gold Glove D.

 

There are other intangibles -- even beyond stats and WAR -- that a winning player can contribute to championships. How much did JD Martinez' ipad analysis help new teammates improve in '18?

 

Reggie Jackson was the heart of the order hitter on five World Series champs in seven years. You can't measure the stress he put on pitchers and defenses during at bats or even looming in the on deck circle, nor how that benefitted batters and baserunners around him.

 

Joe DiMaggio played 13 war-interrupted years; his teams went 9-1 in 10 World Series. Yogi Berra hung around for 19 seasons and caught for 14 pennant winners. He won 10 rings.

 

 

Of course, when DiMaggio and Berra played, it helped that free agency didn’t exist. So if you had a good team in, say, 1948, chances were you would also be good in 1949. And DiMaggio and Berra absolutely did play on some stacked teams that kept bringing everybody back…

[Kimmi]

Here is a much more statistically proven look at clutch hitting, with some focus on Ortiz' regular season numbers.

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/38519/prospectus-feature-revised-look-clutch-hitting-part-2/

 

There is a lot of math involved here, but the bottom line is that there is no consistency whatsoever to clutch hitting. It is just not a repeatable skill.

[Kimmi]

his clutch stats are really impressive.

 

Half the time. The other half, not so much.

[Kimmi]

He was great almost all the time.

 

Saying clutch is not sustainable is not counter to calling him great and fearing him as a pitcher.

 

Man, that granny vs Detroit was the balls, though, right?

 

There are clutch hits. There are also clutch seasons.

 

But hitting in the clutch is not a sustainable skill. If it were a skill, there would be some correlation from year to year.

[Kimmi]

Controversial take:

 

David Ortiz was good.

 

https://www.boston.com/sports/boston-red-sox/2016/10/15/every-david-ortiz-walk-off/

 

Confirmation bias. We don't tend to remember the times in which he failed as well.

[moonslav59]

Here is a much more statistically proven look at clutch hitting, with some focus on Ortiz' regular season numbers.

 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/38519/prospectus-feature-revised-look-clutch-hitting-part-2/

 

There is a lot of math involved here, but the bottom line is that there is no consistency whatsoever to clutch hitting. It is just not a repeatable skill.

 

Good read and solid proof.

[Kimmi]

We are talking about clutch hitting moon, not pitching.

 

Point is, not all the batters perform the same way with RISP than they do without RISP specially in high leverage situations and POs. That's simply a fact.

 

Clutch hitting is a baseball skill whether you like it or not.

 

Being a good hitter is a skill.

 

Being a clutch hitter is not.

[moonslav59]

There are clutch hits. There are also clutch seasons.

 

But hitting in the clutch is not a sustainable skill. If it were a skill, there would be some correlation from year to year.

 

Exactly.

 

Denying Clutch is a repeatable skill is not denying that clutch hits and stretches occur.

[Kimmi]

Thing is that most postseason moments are high leverage situations while facing the cream of the cream.

 

Point is actually really easy. When you hit or pitch well in key moments more often than others do, your clutch hitting/pitching skills are better. it's as simple as that.

 

When you hit or pitch better in key moments more often than others do, it's simply because you are a better overall hitter or pitcher than others are at all times.

[Kimmi]

Good read and solid proof.

 

And this is only one of many, many such articles/studies. Statisticians have been trying to prove the idea of clutch for 50 years, even before advanced analytics. To date, there is no statistical evidence that clutch hitting is a repeatable skill.

 

Along very similar lines is the idea of cluster luck. Teams often win their games because of the luck or randomness of being able to string their hits together rather than spreading them out.

[moonslav59]

When you hit or pitch better in key moments more often than others do, it's simply because you are a better overall hitter or pitcher than others are at all times.

 

Most of the time, yes, but with the random nature of baseball and somewhat small and scattered sample sizes, once can expect variations from players' norms. Not everyone is going to hit exactly the same as their career norm in clutch situations any more that they would in any randomly picked sample size.

 

It would be like saying hitting well on Mondays is a repeatable skill.

 

Now, with all this being said, I do think there may be a slight influence on a player's numbers under the intense pressure of a bases loaded, 2 out situation in the 9th inning. Some players may be able to stay calm and focused more than others, and maybe their personality allows that to be repeatable, but with hitting a baseball being so hard to do, that influence is likely very close to negligible.

 

You don't make MLB being someone who wilts under pressure.

[moonslav59]

And this is only one of many, many such articles/studies. Statisticians have been trying to prove the idea of clutch for 50 years, even before advanced analytics. To date, there is no statistical evidence that clutch hitting is a repeatable skill.

 

Along very similar lines is the idea of cluster luck. Teams often win their games because of the luck or randomness of being able to string their hits together rather than spreading them out.

 

Are there studies on slumps and hot streaks?

 

Take a 750 OPS hitter. If he's hit .500 in the last 2-3 weeks, is he more, the same or less likely to hit over.750 in the next 2-3 weeks. Same with hitting 1.000 for 2-3 weeks.

[Kimmi]

Most of the time, yes, but with the random nature of baseball and somewhat small and scattered sample sizes, once can expect variations from players' norms. Not everyone is going to hit exactly the same as their career norm in clutch situations any more that they would in any randomly picked sample size.

 

It would be like saying hitting well on Mondays is a repeatable skill.

 

Now, with all this being said, I do think there may be a slight influence on a player's numbers under the intense pressure of a bases loaded, 2 out situation in the 9th inning. Some players may be able to stay calm and focused more than others, and maybe their personality allows that to be repeatable, but with hitting a baseball being so hard to do, that influence is likely very close to negligible.

 

You don't make MLB being someone who wilts under pressure.

 

Yes, there are always going to be exceptions to the rule.

 

I tend to believe more in the idea of choking than I do in clutch. I do think that there are people who don't handle the pressure well. I think that the 'chokers' are weeded out very quickly at the major league level if they even make it that far.

 

I have seen many instances of a batter being too anxious at the plate in a key situation. At the major league level, however, I don't see that as a repeatable quality either. In other words, I don't believe that chokers exist in MLB.

[Kimmi]

Are there studies on slumps and hot streaks?

 

Take a 750 OPS hitter. If he's hit .500 in the last 2-3 weeks, is he more, the same or less likely to hit over.750 in the next 2-3 weeks. Same with hitting 1.000 for 2-3 weeks.

 

Yes, there are studies on this as well. Unless there is an injury, a change in mechanics, or something similar, there is no correlation on how a hitter hit over the past 2 weeks and how he will continue to hit in the next 2 weeks. Same with pitching. It is better to go with season long updated projections than to go with recent hot or cold streaks.

[notin]

Are there studies on slumps and hot streaks?

 

Take a 750 OPS hitter. If he's hit .500 in the last 2-3 weeks, is he more, the same or less likely to hit over.750 in the next 2-3 weeks. Same with hitting 1.000 for 2-3 weeks.

 

The WAPM operated on this exact principle!!!!

[moonslav59]

Yes, there are studies on this as well. Unless there is an injury, a change in mechanics, or something similar, there is no correlation on how a hitter hit over the past 2 weeks and how he will continue to hit in the next 2 weeks. Same with pitching. It is better to go with season long updated projections than to go with recent hot or cold streaks.

 

I'm guilty of saying things like, "Why demote Dalbec after hitting .830 over his last 80 PAs?"

 

I guess I could argue he is returning to his norm, as one could argue his previous 2 month slump was not his norm.

 

The hard part is us not really knowing who the real Dalbec is. .

[mvp 78]

I'm guilty of saying things like, "Why demote Dalbec after hitting .830 over his last 80 PAs?"

 

I guess I could argue he is returning to his norm, as one could argue his previous 2 month slump was not his norm.

 

The hard part is us not really knowing who the real Dalbec is. .

 

It's hard to say his career norm should be what we saw in 2020. It's probably some amalgamation of what he's shown this year.

[Kimmi]

I'm guilty of saying things like, "Why demote Dalbec after hitting .830 over his last 80 PAs?"

 

I guess I could argue he is returning to his norm, as one could argue his previous 2 month slump was not his norm.

 

The hard part is us not really knowing who the real Dalbec is. .

 

I am guilty of falling into that as well. If someone is on a hot streak and another player is in a slump, I want to see that hot player in the lineup. But the best bet is to put the better hitter in the lineup even if he may be in a slump.

[Bellhorn04]

And it's harder for pitchers, because they are facing better hitters and managers pulling out all the stops.

 

But it's more harder for hitters (LOL)

 

The lower batting averages in postseason are factual evidence.

[Bellhorn04]

Not sure who these stat people are that have never attempted to address this, but believe me, stat people have attempted to address this. The problem is the small sample size in the postseason. I know that explanation doesn't sit well with you.

 

Ortiz has played in the postseason in 9 different seasons. Here is the difference in OPS between the postseason and the regular season for each of those years:

 

2002, -.184

2003, -.316

2004, +.295

2005, +.082

2007, +.138

2008, -.201

2009, -.627

2013, +.247

2016, -.549

 

So, in 9 postseasons, Ortiz had a better OPS in the postseason than he did in the regular season 4 times. He had a worse postseason OPS 5 times. With that, can you really say that he was clutch in the postseason?

 

The 4 out of 9 thing is pretty skewed. In the 4 seasons he did better, there were a lot more games played than in the ones he did worse.

[Bellhorn04]

I know you can't prove clutch exists. I just think it's fun to play with.

 

If there's one player you might be able to make a case was clearly clutch, it was Schilling...

[mvp 78]

But it's more harder for hitters (LOL)

 

The lower batting averages in postseason are factual evidence.

 

Verifiably true.

[mvp 78]

The 4 out of 9 thing is pretty skewed. In the 4 seasons he did better, there were a lot more games played than in the ones he did worse.

 

MicroSSS vs MacroSSS