Performance with RISP (Discussion from Game Thread)

[Jazz]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

[justin23iu]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

[inari]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

 

I'm not sure if you're trying to fuel the "RBI's matter" argument, but if you are, I think you're doing it incorrectly. As you said, Rammy hits well in those situations because he's a good hitter, not because he's a clutch hitter. Rammy's gonna get his hits one way or another, and a lot of the time they'll come with runners on.

[David]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

 

I love it when people who are wrong are so emphatic about it.

 

100+ years of baseball statistics say you're wrong.

[justin23iu]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

 

I love it when people who are wrong are so emphatic about it.

 

100+ years of baseball statistics say you're wrong.

 

What about my statement, exactly, is wrong?

[CubColtPacer]

I'll just provide some stats in this argument with little conclusion. Here are the Cub veterans and their stats in different situations. I am only including players who have had at least 3000 at-bats to try to get a good sample, and these are all career numbers:

 

Cliff Floyd

Nobody on .268/.336/.479

Runners on .291/.383/.491

RISP .289/.395/.510

 

Jacque Jones

Nobody on .271/.313/.442

Runners on .291/.348/.470

RISP .289/.354/.487

 

Alfonso Soriano

Nobody on .290/.330/.535

Runners on .267/.320/.478

RISP .250/.317/.445

 

Jason Kendall

Nobody on .291/.359/.383

Runners on .308/.398/.411

RISP .290/.398/.374

 

Aramis Ramirez

Nobody on .276/.321/.487

Runners on .292/.353/.516

RISP .294/.366/.531

 

Derrek Lee

Nobody on .282/.357/.512

Runners on .278/.379/.482

RISP .279/.393/.488

 

6 players total.

difference between bases empty and runners on is:

 

5 people with a 50-100 point difference between the two OPS's, and 1 person with less than a 50 point difference.

 

difference between bases empty and RISP is:

 

1 person with over a 100 point difference, 3 people between 50 and 100 points difference, 2 people with less than 50 points difference.

[Dirt Dog Sparly]

Justin,

 

The problem with your statement is that you dont fall down and worship completely at the altar of stats.

 

Thank you Cub Colt Pacer for adding those stats. Where did you get them?

[Careless]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

Wait, you actually can't believe that it's possible that there exists a player who performs either better or worse under different levels of pressure? Not just "I don't think the evidence supports it" but "I don't see how there could be a mechanism in place for this to be so"

 

That's tremendously weird.

 

I don't see how it could be possible that every player in baseball could be completely unaffected by differing levels of pressure, personally.

[haltz]

Thank you Cub Colt Pacer for adding those stats. Where did you get them?

Baseball-Reference.com. We have a similar sized sample that "proves" that Ramirez becomes a terrible hitter when the game is tied, he's much better hitting fifth than fourth, better in the second half, he's better with 1 out than 2 or 0, etc.

 

Trying to prove that a player is capable of a certain level of performance, but over half the time he plays at something less than that, like that's a good thing, seems weird to me.

Edited September 22, 2007 by haltz

[CubinNY]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

Wait, you actually can't believe that it's possible that there exists a player who performs either better or worse under different levels of pressure? Not just "I don't think the evidence supports it" but "I don't see how there could be a mechanism in place for this to be so"

 

That's tremendously weird.

 

I don't see how it could be possible that every player in baseball could be completely unaffected by differing levels of pressure, personally.

That's not what he's saying at all and you know it.

[oldcubsfan]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

 

I'm not sure if you're trying to fuel the "RBI's matter" argument, but if you are, I think you're doing it incorrectly. As you said, Rammy hits well in those situations because he's a good hitter, not because he's a clutch hitter. Rammy's gonna get his hits one way or another, and a lot of the time they'll come with runners on.

 

Sorry, but this is a very tired and old argument. RBI's do count and so does BA/RISP. No onw with any knowledge disputes this. It is not based on position in the lineup. Use any player, Murton for example. He is a good OBP and decent average hitter, yet his BA/RISP is lower than his overall average. So, you must be suggesting that the law of averages seems to apply when he happens to come up with men on.

[haltz]

Use any player, Murton for example. He is a good OBP and decent average hitter, yet his BA/RISP is lower than his overall average.

And when he's hitting sixth in the lineup he turns into Ty Cobb. Same sample size.

 

It's not like anyone is going to dispute that Murton went 54-215 with RISP. It all matters to some degree. "Is it predictive?" is the question. Are there biases here. Is a 200 at-bat batting average susceptible to a lot of random variance? Or should we just conclude that, "that is Matt Murton ... can't hit with runner's in scoring position."

Edited September 22, 2007 by haltz

[Mizzou]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

Agreed. Some hitters are more locked in at the plate in big situations too, and on the flip side some hitters get more jittery in big spots. Baseball players are human after all, and don't always go up to the plate with the same mindset.

[oldcubsfan]

Use any player, Murton for example. He is a good OBP and decent average hitter, yet his BA/RISP is lower than his overall average.

And when he's hitting sixth in the lineup he turns into Ty Cobb. Same sample size.

 

It's not like anyone is going to dispute that Murton went 54-215 with RISP. It all matters to some degree. "Is it predictive?" is the question. Are there biases here. Is a 200 at-bat batting average susceptible to a lot of random variance? Or should we just conclude that, "that is Matt Murton ... can't hit with runner's in scoring position."

No, a reasonable person concludes others hit better with runners in score position. Many here tend to believe in absolutes with their theories and that just isn't the case.

[NewUserName]

White Sox Fan says in 2006 "I would rather have Crede than ARam because he hustles, plays better defense and IS A BETTER CLUTCH HITTER"

 

Just 1 year ago ARam was not considered a good clutch hitter. Funny how sample size can change peoples perspective real quick.

[Peoriaman]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

Agreed. Some hitters are more locked in at the plate in big situations too, and on the flip side some hitters get more jittery in big spots. Baseball players are human after all, and don't always go up to the plate with the same mindset.

 

 

exactly. This is true in all sports. Some guys are clutch free throw shooters, some are not.

 

Believe me, in the day, you would much, much rather have Billy Williams up in a big situation than Ron Santo.

[oldcubsfan]

White Sox Fan says in 2006 "I would rather have Crede than ARam because he hustles, plays better defense and IS A BETTER CLUTCH HITTER"

 

Just 1 year ago ARam was not considered a good clutch hitter. Funny how sample size can change peoples perspective real quick.

Not true. People bitched about him not carrying the team in a nonsensical way. People quote numbers that they don't understand. But then again, they read a book, so they know all. The evaluation ability here is always very questionable. Edited September 23, 2007 by oldcubsfan

[VVMattVV]

starting a new thread so as not to clog up game thread.

 

But, it's proven that he's consistently a better hitter with runners on base, i.e, BA w/RISP, a stat widely considered around here to be "meaningless" when this proves that it isn't for some players.

 

To refute this, I'm saying that a player's performance does not shift whether or not there is a base runner on or not. The fact that his numbers are different with runners on is all just a matter of coincidence. A player doesn't suddenly gain better offensive ability (or worse), based on the situation at hand, i just cannot believe that theory.

 

Well, you're wrong. Pitchers pitch differently with RISP, and are likely to leave more balls over the plate. Therefore, there is a difference when hitting with runners on. Good hitters, like Ramirez, will make pitchers pay for challenging them.

Agreed. Some hitters are more locked in at the plate in big situations too, and on the flip side some hitters get more jittery in big spots. Baseball players are human after all, and don't always go up to the plate with the same mindset.

 

 

exactly. This is true in all sports. Some guys are clutch free throw shooters, some are not.

 

Believe me, in the day, you would much, much rather have Billy Williams up in a big situation than Ron Santo.

 

You can't compare "clutch" in basketball to "clutch" in baseball, they're two very different sports.

 

Not true. People bitched about him not carrying the team in a nonsensicle way. People quote numbers that they don't understand. But then again, they read a book, so they know all. The evaluation ability here is always very questionable.

 

People quote numbers they don't understand? They read a book, so they know all? Now that you mention "nonsensicle"...

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Believe me, in the day, you would much, much rather have Billy Williams up in a big situation than Ron Santo.

 

Williams

Career: .853 OPS

w/ RISP: .895 (+ 42 from career)

Close and Late: .891 (+38 from career)

 

Santo

Career: .826 OPS

w/ RISP: .863 (+37 from career)

Close and Late: .856 (+30 from career)

 

I wouldn't say I'd "much, much rather" have Williams up, but I'd prefer him simply because he was a better hitter.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Believe me, in the day, you would much, much rather have Billy Williams up in a big situation than Ron Santo.

 

Williams

Career: .853 OPS

w/ RISP: .895 (+ 42 from career)

Close and Late: .891 (+38 from career)

 

Santo

Career: .826 OPS

w/ RISP: .863 (+37 from career)

Close and Late: .856 (+30 from career)

 

I wouldn't say I'd "much, much rather" have Williams up, but I'd prefer him simply because he was a better hitter.

 

It's clear you weren't around then, or you would have known that a clear mathmatical record of what actually happened doesn't tell the whole story.

[imb]

Believe me, in the day, you would much, much rather have Billy Williams up in a big situation than Ron Santo.

 

Williams

Career: .853 OPS

w/ RISP: .895 (+ 42 from career)

Close and Late: .891 (+38 from career)

 

Santo

Career: .826 OPS

w/ RISP: .863 (+37 from career)

Close and Late: .856 (+30 from career)

 

I wouldn't say I'd "much, much rather" have Williams up, but I'd prefer him simply because he was a better hitter.

 

It's clear you weren't around then, or you would have known that a clear mathmatical record of what actually happened doesn't tell the whole story.

 

Exactly.

 

Wait, why is that again?

[weis21]

You can't compare "clutch" in basketball to "clutch" in baseball, they're two very different sports.

 

why not? They are both sports that in particular cases ask a person to perform in a high pressure situation. Where is the grey area?

 

If you can't compare the situation to other sports, then what can you compare it to? And if its incomparable, it's impossible to make an argument for either side.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

You can't compare "clutch" in basketball to "clutch" in baseball, they're two very different sports.

 

why not? They are both sports that in particular cases ask a person to perform in a high pressure situation. Where is the grey area?

 

If you can't compare the situation to other sports, then what can you compare it to? And if its incomparable, it's impossible to make an argument for either side.

 

Because of the skill sets involved. One involves repeating a simple, repetitive motion the exact same way. The other involves an amazing feat of reflexes and hand-eye coordination and virtually no conscious thought.

 

More comparable to a free-throw would be a pitcher in a 3-0 count with the bases loaded in a tie game in a walk-off situation.

 

And yes, you can still make arguments for both sides. They just have to be objectively based, not founded in "it seems like it is this way" common-sense arguments.

[Ender]

If you want to look at this properly you really need guys who have at least 2000 PA's with RISP not just 3000 PA's total. It takes a lot of data for the data to be meaningful. You also need to compare it to league average or it has no meaning.

 

In 2007 baseball as a whole has put up the following stats...

 

 

.268/.336/.422/.758

 

With runners on it has the stats...

 

.276/.350/.429/.779

 

With RISP...

 

.271/.356/.423/.779

 

Close and late...

 

.253/.331/.390/.721

 

When you compare Ramirez's stats to league average his career numbers are just about exactly in line with expectations. Yeah his RISP is slightly better than expected but its only 1361 PA's which isn't close to a large enough sample to draw solid conclusions from and at least part of it is from the IBB's that pump up power guys OBP more than other players with men on.

 

A lot of studies have been done on clutch and they pretty much have all been inconclusive. If there are players who are clutch over a large sample they are very rare and they are only barely more clutch than anyone else.

 

There does seem to be some anti clutch guys though, especially guys with nasty platoon splits.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Also, certain types of hitters tend to do slightly better with runners on base. Specifically, high-contact hitters who benefit from the defense playing in a non-optimal allignment to hold the runners on.