« A Fast Seller | Main | Forty Days & Forty Nights.... »
July 12, 2006
The A-Rod Story
Yesterday, on the drive home, I was listening to Max Kellerman fill in on The Michael Kay Show on ESPN Radio (in NYC).
And, I must say that Kellerman is as big an A-Rod Apologist as Kay.
Kellerman went on for a while about how under-appreciated Alex Rodriguez is in New York. Mostly, he cited A-Rod's OBA/SLG/OPS totals and offered something along the lines of "With numbers like these, given they're not typical Rodriguez numbers, but, they're still great, how can he not be helping your team?"
As I was listening to this, all I could think about was "It's too bad that Max knows nothing about Win Probability Results - because I would love to hear his reaction to how Alex fairs in that department this season."
But, then I quickly moved on to other thoughts and forgot about it.
However, just this morning, I noticed that Tom Tango had something posted about Win Probability Results on his site yesterday - that mentioned a New York Times feature by Alan Schwarz on Win Probability Results. This got me thinking about the Kellerman thing again. And, I thought, "I should pull up the numbers to see where A-Rod ranks now, in terms of Yankees Win Probability Results (WPA)." Here's what I found:
Here we see that Alex Rodriguez, according to WPA, is closer to Melky Cabrera, in terms of deserving credit toward helping his team win, than he is to guys like Jeter, Giambi, Posada and Damon. He's much closer to Cabrera than to Damon and Posada. And, Rodriguez is miles away from Jeter and Giambi.
Of course, this is only in terms of this season - to date. Things can change.
Nonetheless, the fans watch the games and they know the big spots that come up in each contest. And, if they're watching the games this season, they know how A-Rod has faired this season in those spots. And, this is why so many are down on Alex this season.
On the flip side, there will be people like Kellerman, who think they're advanced in terms of statistical appreciation, who will point to A-Rod's OBA/SLG/OPS numbers this season and say "You're using your eyes, gut, and heart when talk about coming through for the team. You have to look at the important stats in terms of A-Rod's production this year."
And, just as I thought yesterday, when I hear this, I wish those who like to look at the stats in an attempt to defend Alex Rodriguez would also look at Win Probability Results - because that's the A-Rod Story, so far, this year.
It's also the reason why many people are down on Rodriguez this season.
Posted by Steve Lombardi at July 12, 2006 09:42 AM
Comments
Steve, I think that you may be buying a little too much into the hype surrounding WPA. Mitchel Lichtman's (MGL) comments in the thread indicate that there are some serious problems with the stat.
WPA has simply not stood the test of time. It may, in the long run, be not worth much more than the infamous GWRBI stat. Ot, it may turn out to be useful, but flawed (e.g. McCracken's DIPS). Lichtman cites the overwhelming past evidence that shows that "clutch ability," if it exists, is very slight. Until WPA hangs around for a while and sabermetricians have argued its merits/demerits, I'll stick with the past evidence.
Posted by: jonm ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.waswatching.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 12, 2006 11:30 AM
I understand that clutch ability might be slight, in the long run.
But, just like having a paper cut is slight compared to the overall body state, it, clutch ability, does tend to get your attention when it happens, or doesn't happen, right?
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at July 12, 2006 12:24 PM
Kellerman is the only person I can stand to listen to on that radio station for an extended period of time. While he is an admitted Yankee apologist, at least he know what WHIP stands for. Plus, he's not shy to talk about guys he thinks have juiced in the past (namely I-Rod and Gonzo).
Posted by: Jen at July 12, 2006 01:00 PM
You're right about it getting your attention. It certainly does seem like it exists, but, in a way, it may be a self-fulfilling prophesy. I notice when ARod makes an out in a clutch situation and it irritates me. When Posada makes an out in a clutch situation, it doesn't affect me in the same way.
Posted by: jonm at July 12, 2006 02:39 PM
I think that's the equity factor. If someone has a decent history, we're willing to forgive a bit more.
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at July 12, 2006 03:30 PM
I was going to get on Jorge for his propensity to GIDP, but it seems he only has 4 this year.
Posted by: Jen at July 12, 2006 04:35 PM
That's lower than I would have guessed too.
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at July 12, 2006 04:41 PM
I'm more curious than anything else Steve - I don't mean to sound like a wise guy - but do they have WPA numbers for Reggie Jackson's time in the Bronx, seeing as you evaluated him by OPS (among other things) in your post above. Was he actually that valuable in pinstripes?
FWIW, I think WPA does an OK job of telling what happened in the past, but I don't put any stock in it as giving me an idea of what might happen in future. Like jonm said above, it kinda reminds me of GWRBI.
Posted by: Shaun P. at July 12, 2006 04:51 PM
I'm pretty sure this, WPA, is a stat that they just started tracking.
It would be cool to see someone go back and do the past too.
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at July 12, 2006 04:59 PM
So, if WPA is to be believed, when Sheffield and Matui come back from injury, we should immediately start booing them for how incredibly unclutch they were before their injuries? I might believe that psychologically there might be something affecting hitters so that they get worse in high pressure situations. But the inverse is just ludicrious- if hitters could suddenly hit homers when ever they wanted, why do home run derbies ever end? And another thing: I'm sure Joe Randa's WPA is excellent, would you rather have him playing third base in a pennant race?
Posted by: mehmattski at July 13, 2006 01:43 AM
FWIW, Matsui & Sheff's WPA is only based on 30 games. I would hope that their numbers would be better if they had played 80 games.
Posted by: Steve Lombardi at July 13, 2006 10:17 AM