Clutchiness
Anyone who's interested in the clutch vs. non-clutch debate should check out this site:
http://clutchiness.blogspot.com/
Here's the site description:
"Clutch hitting may or may not exist. Clutchiness most certainly does. By comparing a player's value in terms of win probability to his projected value based on OBP and SLG, we see how much he has over- or under-performed expectations due to performance in higher leverage situations. If clutch exists, it might just look like this."
There are some surprises on the A's page. The clutchiest player is Payton, but Crosby at #2?
Good stuff.
0 recs |
22 comments
Comments
A-Rod is definitely not clutch.
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 29, 2006 9:25 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
*looks again*
Duh.
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 29, 2006 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
*waitnohe'slast*
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 29, 2006 10:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Any formula in which
by Nico on Jul 29, 2006 10:18 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That is for damn sure
by china bob on Jul 29, 2006 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well,
The numbers back up Crosby being "clutch" in his own special way. He is terrible in meaningless situations, and merely below average in others(except bases loaded, which he's been pretty good, granted its only 11 or so PAs).
OPS -
Season: .637
Runners On: .669 (+.032)
RISP: .685 (+.048)
RISP w/2 out: .783 (+.146)
Bases Loaded: .917 (+.280)
by SuperBean on Jul 29, 2006 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not really.
It's actually a great insight into the clutch debate: with the game on the line, you want your best hitter at the plate, not your most clutch hitter. What we think is clutch is usually just a great player continuing to be great.
by salb918 on Jul 29, 2006 10:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indeed, if you look
by salb918 on Jul 29, 2006 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually read the link???
<refreshes AN, and goat porn, alternately, for the next 4 hours>
by Nico on Jul 29, 2006 10:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
look at the stats.
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 29, 2006 10:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
waitnevermind.
by Jjjsixsix on Jul 29, 2006 10:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just thought of something.
That is, a grand slam when you're already up 10 runs is worth rather little, while another grand slam that ties the game in the bottom of the ninth must be worth a lot. On the flip side, grounding into a double play in the eighth inning must hurt those numbers a great deal.
Put another way, how "clutch" you are is simply how much better a position is at after your at-bat. If you can compute win expectations down to a pitch-by-pitch level (can you?), presumably pitchers can also be evaluated this way.
But surely somebody else considered this already...
by GlassHeart on Jul 29, 2006 10:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That's precisely how these data
An excellent thought -- you're in good company with your ideas.
by salb918 on Jul 29, 2006 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just found the math clumsy.
Why would a player's average matter? By my cursory examination it seems that if a player was batting .200 one year and .300 the next, then he would be "clutchier" in the first year if he hit .300 with RISP in both years? That doesn't make any sense to me. To me, "clutch" is how much better a position you can move your team to, whether you're Frank Thomas or Antonio Perez.
by GlassHeart on Jul 29, 2006 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm surprised there isn't more talk
Clutch.
by JediLeroy on Jul 30, 2006 12:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Clutch doesn't exist
by Squeaky on Jul 30, 2006 4:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
acutally...
by Shippee33 on Jul 30, 2006 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Clutch exists!
by Philip Christy on Jul 31, 2006 7:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Except when A-Rod
by Nico on Jul 31, 2006 9:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perception IS reality
by Philip Christy on Jul 31, 2006 5:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 




















