« April 9th @ The Angels | Main | Yankees Universe Shirts »
April 10, 2006
Unsung Heroes In The Clutch
I've just started to read Baseball Between the Numbers (by the Baseball Prospectus Team of Experts). So far, I like it. (Once I am done, I will do a full review on it.)
In the beginning of the book there's a section on "clutch" hitting that I loved. In fact, I love it so much that I wish there was a way for me to hug it, kiss it, take it to dinner and ask it to marry me. It's that good.
Basically, it starts with redefining the definition of "clutch." Taking studies of base-out situations, run expectancy, and win probability, they're able to see what the "true" clutch situations are in a game.
For example, most fans think the solo homer with two outs in the bottom of the eight, when you're down by three, is clutch. Well, it is nice. But, it's not as clutch as the lead-off batter in the 7th reaching base safely in a game where you trail by one run (when you factor in the probably of runs scored from that point, etc.).
Using the "true" definition of what's clutch, the Baseball Prospectus Team then came up with a complex way of determining who's been the best/worse in the last 30 years in terms of clutch batting - in a season, a career, etc. But, what was most interesting to me is that they found there is a correlation between being a "true" clutch player and a batters who walk frequently while rarely striking out. They used "batting eye" (two times unintentional walk rate minus strikeout rate) to test out this correlation.
So, reading this, I decided to look at the "batting eye" (BE) of Yankees in the Torre era. And, this is what I found:
This data suggests that Tim Raines, Chad Curtis, and Chuck Knoblauch were important to the 1996-2001 Yankees.
It also points towards how big that hurt was when the Yankees had to replace John Olerud with Tony Clark in the 2004 ALCS.
And, it says that Giambi and Sheffield help the Yankees more than A-Rod or Jeter in the "true" clutch.
Pretty interesting stuff.
Posted by Steve Lombardi at April 10, 2006 10:20 AM
Comments
so- based on this- the fact that Giambi walks a lot- does that make him "clutch"?
Posted by: gator49 ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.waswatching.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 10, 2006 12:39 PM
It's not all that simple.
Good BE hints that he's the type of player who would tend to be clutch, by the new definition of clutch.
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at April 10, 2006 01:17 PM
The problem is that "clutch" has been redefined into "who is a good hitter." I know this has always been BPro's thought, but they have essentially created a new definition and formula to prove themselves correct. They should have stuck with their original thoughts on clutch from Voros M. and said the problem with clutch is no one knows what it means, and clutch guys may shift from one year to the next. Is clutch RISP? Is it 2 outs bottom of the 9th? Is it in the playoffs?
Frankly, I do not think anyone thinks a HR with no one on in the bottom of the 8th, when down ny 3 is clutch. Nor is a walk in the 7th.
A better study would be to take every situation that is definitely clutch and see how a guy performs. For instance, 9th inning when trailing, playoffs, World Series, Runners in Scoring Position. These are "clutch" at-bats. BPro, or someone else with lots of time on their hands, should run an analysis of performance in these situations, break it out by each type of situation and see what happens. I suspect the same result would occur, good-hitters (or players with good batter's eyes) get more hits/walks in clutch situations.
Posted by: GABP&Popup=HR at April 10, 2006 01:19 PM