BA w/ RISP

[champaignchris]

I know, I know, I know. There's no such thing as clutch. It's early in the season. Etc., etc.

 

But how do we explain the Cubs through 36 games

 

70 H in 309 AB, .227 w/ RISP

277 H in 950 AB, .292 w/o RISP

 

?

 

That's just bizarre.

[SouthSideRyan]

Variance. There's no history with these players performing woefully in the clutch, it's just one of those things. It'll even out some, the problem is we've dug ourselves a hole.

[Exile on Waveland]

Basically no one has ever argued clutch doesn't exist -- if a player hits a walk-off grand slam down 3-0 on a full count with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, it's a clutch hit. The argument, instead, is that clutch hitters don't exist. Those numbers figure to somewhat work themselves out.

[woodchip2153]

Basically no one has ever argued clutch doesn't exist -- if a player hits a walk-off grand slam down 3-0 on a full count with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, it's a clutch hit. The argument, instead, is that clutch hitters don't exist. Those numbers figure to somewhat work themselves out.

 

Didn't The Book say that clutch hitters may exist, but the sample sizes are so small that it's impossible to determine who is clutch and what's just random variance.

[MSG T]

Basically no one has ever argued clutch doesn't exist -- if a player hits a walk-off grand slam down 3-0 on a full count with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, it's a clutch hit. The argument, instead, is that clutch hitters don't exist. Those numbers figure to somewhat work themselves out.

 

Didn't The Book say that clutch hitters may exist, but the sample sizes are so small that it's impossible to determine who is clutch and what's just random variance.

 

I think that's how they put it. Also, the difference generally wasn't big enough to really plan on as an advantage.

[jiml60]

Cubbie occurrences.

[Bull]

OTC

[Northside Blues]

Note: Prior to today's game.

 

 

The Cubs were 2nd in the league in BA, 3rd in OBP, 4th in SLG, and 3rd in OPS but 10th in R/G.

[hawkeyecub]

Quade says if we stay up that high in OBP and SLG the runs will come. He's right.

[TruffleShuffle]

Quade says if we stay up that high in OBP and SLG the runs will come. He's right.

 

well i guess that is probably true, but the OBP and SLG are being propped up by the third-highest BABIP in baseball, so if that comes down then the OBP (cubs' BB% is the worst in baseball) and SLG (9th-worst ISO in baseball) will be pretty bad.

[Cubswin11]

Basically no one has ever argued clutch doesn't exist -- if a player hits a walk-off grand slam down 3-0 on a full count with two outs in the bottom of the ninth, it's a clutch hit. The argument, instead, is that clutch hitters don't exist. Those numbers figure to somewhat work themselves out.

 

Didn't The Book say that clutch hitters may exist, but the sample sizes are so small that it's impossible to determine who is clutch and what's just random variance.

 

I think that's how they put it. Also, the difference generally wasn't big enough to really plan on as an advantage.

So basically there are clutch situations, but the individual players who make up those clutch situations may or may not be clutch. They simply aren't in those positions enough to produce a large enough sample size to deduct anything from.

[SouthSideRyan]

We also have the 2nd highest LD% in baseball and the 9th worst HR/FB rate in the majors.

[Northside Blues]

So basically there are clutch situations, but the individual players who make up those clutch situations may or may not be clutch. They simply aren't in those positions enough to produce a large enough sample size to deduct anything from.

 

Not exactly. The difference between what a clutch player is in those situations compared to what he is in non-clutch situations is too small to detect.

[Cubswin11]

So basically there are clutch situations, but the individual players who make up those clutch situations may or may not be clutch. They simply aren't in those positions enough to produce a large enough sample size to deduct anything from.

 

Not exactly. The difference between what a clutch player is in those situations compared to what he is in non-clutch situations is too small to detect.

Got it.

[loukycub]

i think the low average with risp is a symptom of a bigger issue. this team has shown very little power so far this season. whenever the first game with saint louis was, it was 13 hits, all singles, 4 runs. i believe that at one point the cubs had a collective 20 or 25 hits spread over a few games, all singles. if the team mixes in maybe 4 or 5 doubles, the risp may go up some and there are 3 or 4 more wins on the board. if all that i being hit is singles, the defense can gameplan for that

 

with the psn being down the last 3 weeks i haven't been able to see a lot of the games but i don't seem to recall a whole lot of xbh this season, granted that there are more singles hit than any other type of hit. maybe our resident stat geeks could list how many xbh the cubs have had this season vs other teams in the league (if that is even possible)?

[bukie]

i think the low average with risp is a symptom of a bigger issue. this team has shown very little power so far this season. whenever the first game with saint louis was, it was 13 hits, all singles, 4 runs. i believe that at one point the cubs had a collective 20 or 25 hits spread over a few games, all singles. if the team mixes in maybe 4 or 5 doubles, the risp may go up some and there are 3 or 4 more wins on the board. if all that i being hit is singles, the defense can gameplan for that

 

with the psn being down the last 3 weeks i haven't been able to see a lot of the games but i don't seem to recall a whole lot of xbh this season, granted that there are more singles hit than any other type of hit. maybe our resident stat geeks could list how many xbh the cubs have had this season vs other teams in the league (if that is even possible)?

They are just 4th in the NL in SLG. They get a huge amount of singles, though. Far too much of their OBP/SLG is single-based. Not enough walking, not enough XBH.

[WrigleyField 22]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

[Guest]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

Can you imagine the pressure of being drafted, showing up for minor league camp and trying to perform? The whole process of going through HS, college & the minors will weed out the guys who are "unclutch".

[SouthSideRyan]

I really doubt defenses are aligning themselves to protect against singles when they play us.

[javy knows my name]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

Can you imagine the pressure of being drafted, showing up for minor league camp and trying to perform? The whole process of going through HS, college & the minors will weed out the guys who are "unclutch".

 

That's a good point. Never really thought of that because I've never spent a ton of effort trying to debunk theories formed as a result of tiny sample sizes.

 

Also, I disagree that being "unclutch" is any more likely/feasible than being clutch. They're both bogus analyst talking points used to fill space on a broadcast.

[Guest]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

Can you imagine the pressure of being drafted, showing up for minor league camp and trying to perform? The whole process of going through HS, college & the minors will weed out the guys who are "unclutch".

 

That's a good point. Never really thought of that because I've never spent a ton of effort trying to debunk theories formed as a result of tiny sample sizes.

 

Also, I disagree that being "unclutch" is any more likely/feasible than being clutch. They're both bogus analyst talking points used to fill space on a broadcast.

Oh, I fully believe "unclutch" exists in just about any pursuit. For example, I do a fair amount of public speaking and spend time around other people who do it as part of what they do for a living. I've seen people who are perfectly good speakers in small, comfortable groups absolutely seize up in front of a larger crowd. However, those people that seize up usually don't get invited to speak in front of yet larger crowds in the future.

 

I think it's much the same in baseball. The guys who get nervous and seize up at the plate just won't make it that far in baseball.

[champaignchris]

So the game after I start this thread griping about the inability to hit with runners in scoring position, the Cubs go 7 for 14. The next day, I neglect to comment on the subject, and they go 0 for 6.

 

Noticing the obvious causality, I am here again prior to tonight's game wondering why we can't hit with runners in scoring position.

 

It may be just a coincidence, but without adequate scientific testing, I'm not sure we can rule it out yet.

[Guest]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

Can you imagine the pressure of being drafted, showing up for minor league camp and trying to perform? The whole process of going through HS, college & the minors will weed out the guys who are "unclutch".

 

That's a good point. Never really thought of that because I've never spent a ton of effort trying to debunk theories formed as a result of tiny sample sizes.

 

Also, I disagree that being "unclutch" is any more likely/feasible than being clutch. They're both bogus analyst talking points used to fill space on a broadcast.

Oh, I fully believe "unclutch" exists in just about any pursuit. For example, I do a fair amount of public speaking and spend time around other people who do it as part of what they do for a living. I've seen people who are perfectly good speakers in small, comfortable groups absolutely seize up in front of a larger crowd. However, those people that seize up usually don't get invited to speak in front of yet larger crowds in the future.

 

I think it's much the same in baseball. The guys who get nervous and seize up at the plate just won't make it that far in baseball.

 

As far as unclutch in baseball goes, are you saying you don't believe players tense up ever or just in general clutch situations?

 

Because I'm with you in that I think players who tense up every time they're at the plate late in a game, down a run with a runner on second would get weeded out. But I think there's a big difference between Game 10 and Game 159 when a team is in a playoff race or a big playoff game, and I'd bet there are some players who tense up a bit in the latter situations.

 

But unless a player comes out and says, "Yes, I was nervous and tense and I just choked", there's no way to tell the difference between a guy who tensed up and a guy who just suffers from bad luck.

[Guest]

Regarding clutch, I also think its way more likely that unclutch players exist than clutch players. In other words, it would be extremely rare that a player could flip on a switch and suddenly hit better when it was needed most, but it isn't too hard to imagine that a player can tense up during a critical moment and suck. That doesn't mean everyone with poor clutch numbers is unclutch, some may just suffer from luck and a small sample size.

 

Not that I would make personel decisions based on it or anything, but some people just don't perform well under pressure.

Can you imagine the pressure of being drafted, showing up for minor league camp and trying to perform? The whole process of going through HS, college & the minors will weed out the guys who are "unclutch".

 

That's a good point. Never really thought of that because I've never spent a ton of effort trying to debunk theories formed as a result of tiny sample sizes.

 

Also, I disagree that being "unclutch" is any more likely/feasible than being clutch. They're both bogus analyst talking points used to fill space on a broadcast.

Oh, I fully believe "unclutch" exists in just about any pursuit. For example, I do a fair amount of public speaking and spend time around other people who do it as part of what they do for a living. I've seen people who are perfectly good speakers in small, comfortable groups absolutely seize up in front of a larger crowd. However, those people that seize up usually don't get invited to speak in front of yet larger crowds in the future.

 

I think it's much the same in baseball. The guys who get nervous and seize up at the plate just won't make it that far in baseball.

 

As far as unclutch in baseball goes, are you saying you don't believe players tense up ever or just in general clutch situations?

 

Because I'm with you in that I think players who tense up every time they're at the plate late in a game, down a run with a runner on second would get weeded out. But I think there's a big difference between Game 10 and Game 159 when a team is in a playoff race or a big playoff game, and I'd bet there are some players who tense up a bit in the latter situations.

 

But unless a player comes out and says, "Yes, I was nervous and tense and I just choked", there's no way to tell the difference between a guy who tensed up and a guy who just suffers from bad luck.

Sure, there's a difference there. Playoffs, too, I'm sure. But I believe the guys who are subject to tensing up badly will have been weeded out by then.

[WrigleyField 22]

To some extent I definitely agree with what you are saying Tim, but you're also going to be judged against your peers. So the top person in any profession may be in the 90 percentile of "clutch" (or rather not blowing in in high pressure situations), but when you've weeded out the field and you only have the top tenth percentile, the bottom "clutch" guys might realize the immense competition they are against and suddenly pysche themselves out.

 

Its a moot point either way because I don't think there's anyway to measure clutchness so from a personel standpoint you're just going to look for the guy who hits the best regardless of situation.

 

Edit - also with your example, its a bit more like the comparison between performing between the majors and minors. OTOH there could maybe be a speaker who speaks perfectly fine in front of thousands of people until he's they keynote speaker and he starts thinking about how much he wants to wrap it up well). Still a rough example, but closer.