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

[Bellhorn04]

The argument that these hitters are facing better pitching in the playoffs does not hold much water, to me.

 

What's wrong with that argument? It's a fact.

 

https://www.quora.com/How-much-lower-are-postseason-batting-averages-than-regular-season

Edited July 13, 2021 by Bellhorn04

[moonslav59]

What's wrong with that argument? It's a fact.

 

https://www.quora.com/How-much-lower-are-postseason-batting-averages-than-regular-season

 

I'm not doubting it's harder, but so what?

 

It's harder for pitchers, too. They are usually facing better batters.

 

One reason for better pitching numbers is the rare use of the 5th starter.

 

I'd like to see the OPS differential and see if it is 60 points lower in the playoffs- the same difference between Papi's career OPS and his career OPS Late & Close.

[iortiz]

I'm not doubting it's harder, but so what?

 

It's harder for pitchers, too. They are usually facing better batters.

 

One reason for better pitching numbers is the rare use of the 5th starter.

 

I'd like to see the OPS differential and see if it is 60 points lower in the playoffs- the same difference between Papi's career OPS and his career OPS Late & Close.

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.

[notin]

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.

 

I’m on board with high leverage, but really clutch isn’t so simple to define.

 

For example, people are citing postseason stats. Are all postseason stats really clutch? We all saw the Sox beat Cleveland in back to back games by scores of 11-2 and 12-2. Were the hits that drove in runs 11 and 12 really all that clutch?

 

I can agree that late and close numbers and high leverage numbers are good, but they can’t be all there is. JD Drew hit a pretty clutch grand slam in the 2007 ALDS, but it was in the first inning. So clearly, not late.

 

The only truly clutch hitter I can think of as the one guy with situational super powers was Pat Tabler. Career OPS - .724. Career OPS with the bases loaded - 1.198. Considering he wasn’t really even a starter for most of his career and was used as a pinch hitter - often because of his track record with the bases loaded - he’s the only truly clutch player I can think of…

[notin]

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.

 

His point is that if hitters can be clutch or choke, can’t pitchers, too? If you argue postseason is clutch because of the magnified pressure, aren’t pitchers also under the same pressure?

[mvp 78]

His point is that if hitters can be clutch or choke, can’t pitchers, too? If you argue postseason is clutch because of the magnified pressure, aren’t pitchers also under the same pressure?

 

Yes. Kimbrel is not clutch.

[iortiz]

I’m on board with high leverage, but really clutch isn’t so simple to define.

 

For example, people are citing postseason stats. Are all postseason stats really clutch? We all saw the Sox beat Cleveland in back to back games by scores of 11-2 and 12-2. Were the hits that drove in runs 11 and 12 really all that clutch?

 

I can agree that late and close numbers and high leverage numbers are good, but they can’t be all there is. JD Drew hit a pretty clutch grand slam in the 2007 ALDS, but it was in the first inning. So clearly, not late.

 

The only truly clutch hitter I can think of as the one guy with situational super powers was Pat Tabler. Career OPS - .724. Career OPS with the bases loaded - 1.198. Considering he wasn’t really even a starter for most of his career and was used as a pinch hitter - often because of his track record with the bases loaded - he’s the only truly clutch player I can think of…

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.

Edited July 14, 2021 by iortiz

[iortiz]

His point is that if hitters can be clutch or choke, can’t pitchers, too? If you argue postseason is clutch because of the magnified pressure, aren’t pitchers also under the same pressure?

 

 

Sure, it applies to pitchers as well.

 

Before 2018, David Price was a disaster as clutch pitcher in POs.

Edited July 14, 2021 by iortiz

[moonslav59]

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.

 

I know what the topic is, and nobody can prove their position- like it or not.

 

RISP is not "clutch" in a 14-2 game.

 

To me, Late & Close and High Leverage measure important hitting more, and nobody can prove one guy is clutch and another is not. There are countless examples of players labelled chokes who suddenly became clutch as vice versa. Even Papi was vastly different up to 2007 and after 2007.

 

It's unsustainable.

 

You are a skilled hitter, you will be more likely to get more clutch hits.

 

Maybe how a player reacts to high pressure plays a small role in the equation, but MLB players are used to that pressure. They all lived through it as the fought tp prove they belonged in MLB to begin with.

[moonslav59]

Sure, it applies to pitchers as well.

 

Before 2018, David Price was a disaster as clutch pitcher in POs.

 

Beckett was on his way to being one of the most "clutch" pitchers of all time, then he wasn't.

 

How does this support the claim that a player has such a skill or not?

[iortiz]

I know what the topic is, and nobody can prove their position- like it or not.

 

RISP is not "clutch" in a 14-2 game.

 

To me, Late & Close and High Leverage measure important hitting more, and nobody can prove one guy is clutch and another is not. There are countless examples of players labelled chokes who suddenly became clutch as vice versa. Even Papi was vastly different up to 2007 and after 2007.

 

It's unsustainable.

 

You are a skilled hitter, you will be more likely to get more clutch hits.

 

Maybe how a player reacts to high pressure plays a small role in the equation, but MLB players are used to that pressure. They all lived through it as the fought tp prove they belonged in MLB to begin with.

 

By definition a 14-2 game is not a clutch situation. Close-late games are clutch situations. Close games in the fifth with bases loaded in POs and even in regular season games are clutch situations.

 

If you hit well and more often than others in those situations, then your clutch hitting skills are better. It’s as simple as that. Not sure why you try to complicate things that aren’t lol.

[iortiz]

Beckett was on his way to being one of the most "clutch" pitchers of all time, then he wasn't.

 

How does this support the claim that a player has such a skill or not?

As any stat you have to evaluate their all-in-all performance (career).

 

Price by definition was not a clutch pitcher in POs all-in-all —even he was great in 2018 POs.

[moonslav59]

By definition a 14-2 game is not a clutch situation. Close-late games are clutch situations. Close games in the fifth with bases loaded in POs and even in regular season games are clutch situations.

 

If you hit well and more often than others in those situations, then your clutch hitting skills are better. It’s as simple as that. Not sure why you try to complicate things that aren’t lol.

 

You said the RISP stat showed "clutch," and I pointed out a flaw.

 

I like Late & Close or High Leverage better, but they are flawed, too.

 

We can't even agree what the term clutch means, so how can anyone prove it's a sustainable or repeatable skillset.

 

Countless examples exist of clutch players becoming unclutch and vice versa.

 

How can anyone prove it was a skill or just randomness?

[moonslav59]

By definition a 14-2 game is not a clutch situation. Close-late games are clutch situations. Close games in the fifth with bases loaded in POs and even in regular season games are clutch situations.

 

If you hit well and more often than others in those situations, then your clutch hitting skills are better. It’s as simple as that. Not sure why you try to complicate things that aren’t lol.

 

So, if a .800 hitter hits .750 in the clutch, he's more clutch than a .600 hitter hitting .749 in the clucth?

 

I'm not making it complicated. I'm pointing out we can't even agree on what clutch is.

 

One would expect an .800 hitter to hit better than a .600 hitter, in the clutch and in the non clutch. It's not clutch if you hit what you are expected to hit, IMO.

[moonslav59]

As any stat you have to evaluate their all-in-all performance (career).

 

Price by definition was not a clutch pitcher in POs all-in-all —even he was great in 2018 POs.

 

So, it's kinda random, no?

[iortiz]

So, if a .800 hitter hits .750 in the clutch, he's more clutch than a .600 hitter hitting .749 in the clucth?

 

I'm not making it complicated. I'm pointing out we can't even agree on what clutch is.

 

One would expect an .800 hitter to hit better than a .600 hitter, in the clutch and in the non clutch. It's not clutch if you hit what you are expected to hit, IMO.

 

If the sample is large this example of yours is pretty even. Find me two players with those numbers in large samples and we can debate.

 

We actually agreed in the most part of what clutch is.

Edited July 14, 2021 by iortiz

[iortiz]

So, it's kinda random, no?

 

Nope. Price was great in one year in POs. It doesn’t make him a clutch pitcher in PO though.

 

Porcello won a CY and it doesn’t make him a great pitcher as Sale who haven’t won one. Kind of the point.

[moonslav59]

"Mr. October" Reggie Jackson.

Mr. Clutch before we even knew what clutch meant.

Repeatable skill?

 

The guy was in 17 playoff series.

Strange thing is, he never hit between .698 and .932 in any series. He was hot or cold.

 

9 times at .933 or more

8 times at .697 or lower, including 5 below .520. (Hardly sustainable, right?)

 

He was a career .846 batter who hit .885 in the playoffs. While that's very good, it doesn't prove it was a skill he was better at than others. His playoff sample size was 77 games.

 

career

.856 RISP (.851 with 2 outs)

.804 Late & Close (well below his career OPS)

.855 High Leverage (about even)

 

[moonslav59]

Nope. Price was great in one year in POs. It doesn’t make him a clutch pitcher in PO though.

 

Porcello won a CY and it doesn’t make him a great pitcher as Sale who haven’t won one. Kind of the point.

 

The point being, it is unsustainable, yes.

 

Not repeatable.

 

A bit random.

 

When you flip a coin, you may get heads 7 times in a row. It doesn't mean you are an expert at flipping a coin heads.

[iortiz]

"Mr. October" Reggie Jackson.

Mr. Clutch before we even knew what clutch meant.

Repeatable skill?

 

The guy was in 17 playoff series.

Strange thing is, he never hit between .698 and .932 in any series. He was hot or cold.

 

9 times at .933 or more

8 times at .697 or lower, including 5 below .520. (Hardly sustainable, right?)

 

He was a career .846 batter who hit .885 in the playoffs. While that's very good, it doesn't prove it was a skill he was better at than others. His playoff sample size was 77 games.

 

career

.856 RISP (.851 with 2 outs)

.804 Late & Close (well below his career OPS)

.855 High Leverage (about even)

 

Most of the times he hit well in clutch situations regardless it was in POs or not, then he is a clutch hitter by definition.

 

Neither stat is black or white in baseball. You can always find holes if you split them like you are doing here but in the end when you look at the whole thing specially in large samples you can say whether a player is good or bad at something — like in MR October’s case.

[iortiz]

The point being, it is unsustainable, yes.

 

Not repeatable.

 

A bit random.

 

When you flip a coin, you may get heads 7 times in a row. It doesn't mean you are an expert at flipping a coin heads.

 

Lol flipping a coin has nothing to do with what we are talking about moon.

 

Said that, I’d rather put some players than others in clutch situations even if both are great — I wouldn’t flip a coin.

 

For example, I’d rather put Papi over Mookie any day of the week in clutch situations in POs.

 

Two great players who perform totally different in clutch situation in POs.

 

If you can’t see that, then you are missing a great part of baseball moon.

Edited July 14, 2021 by iortiz

[moonslav59]

Lol flipping a coin has nothing to do with what we are talking about moon.

 

Said that, I’d rather put some players than others in clutch situations even if both are great.

 

For example, I’d rather put Papi over Mookie any day of the week in clutch situations in POs.

 

Two great players who perform totally different in clutch situation in POs.

 

If you can’t see that, then you are missing a great part of baseball moon.

 

LOL.

 

Like I looked away when Papi came up?

 

What will you say, if Betts has a great playoff record going forward?

 

What did you say when Papi's thunder declined immensely after 2007?

 

People get big hits and we call those hits "clutch." It's great when they are Sox players.

 

Not thinking it's a sustainable skill does not cheapen of lessen the fun or amazement of this great game.

 

BTW, the flipping of a coin example was meant to show the randomness of sample sizes.

 

Papi and Reggie's sample sizes were about 300 PAs.

 

If 1,000 people flipped a coin 300 times trying to get heads and a couple guys flipped heads 200 out of 300 times, would you say that's a skill?

 

Would you bet they would do it again?

 

I know the 50-50 chance of getting a heads does not equate to one batter with a career .850 OPS vs one with a career .650 OPS. Each has different odds of getting a hit, which is not the same as flipping a coin, but my point is, if you compare 500 batters who bat .850 over any random 300 PA sample size, you will find the range of OPS would not all be very close to .850. Some might be .1.000 and some might be .600. We have no way of proving it wasn't luck or that it was some special skill the 1.000 hitter had, and Papi didn't even hit higher than his career OPS in late & close situations over his career, so I just can't see absolute proof.

 

The "I'll know it when I see it" argument actually carries some weight, in this debate. No doubt, Papi had more than "his fair share" of huge clutch hits, but proving it was some skill just because he did it 20-25 times in his career does not cut the mustard with me.

[moonslav59]

Most of the times he hit well in clutch situations regardless it was in POs or not, then he is a clutch hitter by definition.

 

Neither stat is black or white in baseball. You can always find holes if you split them like you are doing here but in the end when you look at the whole thing specially in large samples you can say whether a player is good or bad at something — like in MR October’s case.

 

So if an .900 hitter hits worse in late and close situations than not, but still hits a decent .800, he's "clutch" to you?

[moonslav59]

Most of the times he hit well in clutch situations regardless it was in POs or not, then he is a clutch hitter by definition.

 

Nobody bats over .500 in "the clutch," so what does "most of the time" mean?

[iortiz]

If Betts performs well moving forward in clutch situations, say next 5 seasons in POs, then he will be good a clutching. Right now Papi was way better in that department. It’s that simple.

 

I think you are going in circles moon lol

 

You can have the last word, I have rest my case. To me the thing is pretty simple. Seems like it is not for you. No problem.

[moonslav59]

If Betts performs well moving forward in clutch situations, say next 5 seasons in POs, then he will be good a clutching. Right now Papi was way better in that department. It’s that simple.

 

I think you are going in circles moon lol

 

You can have the last word, I have rest my case. To me the thing is pretty simple. Seems like it is not for you. No problem.

 

No. You are circling.

 

If it's a skill that Betts does not have, he shouldn't hit well in the clutch going forward. Not many ball players develop new skills taht late in their career, and how will we know it wasn't just random luck or just Betts regressing to his career norm?

[notin]

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.

 

Last year, the Dodgers put 11 runs on the Braves in the first inning of a postseason game. Are you telling me that - to use your words - "most of" the last 8 innings of that game had clutch moments?

[notin]

If the sample is large this example of yours is pretty even. Find me two players with those numbers in large samples and we can debate.

 

We actually agreed in the most part of what clutch is.

 

That's a big part of the problem is th sample sizes.

 

Mookie has 181 post-season plate appearances, but they're spread out over 5 years. You can't weigh 23yo Mookie Betts in 2016 the same as you do 2020 Mookie Betts at age 27. But when you look at post-season stats asa whole, that's what you do.

 

And if you simply count every post-season plate appearance as equally clutch because you over-romanticize October baseball, you cheapen the whole idea of clutch. Also, you ignore other factors...

[Bellhorn04]

I'm not doubting it's harder, but so what?

 

It's harder for pitchers, too. They are usually facing better batters.

 

One reason for better pitching numbers is the rare use of the 5th starter.

 

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.

[notin]

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.

 

 

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…