PDA

View Full Version : "Clutch" statistic



dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 01:03 PM
There are some that say there is no way to measure "clutch" and some who claim it is 100% luck. I just stumbled across this on Hardball Times and found it interesting. I'm wondering if someone more proficient in the statistical arts can help me discern what I should make of this particular set of numbers. One thing I do think is a negative is that the stat makes no allowances for game situations, ie "late and close," etc.


Clutch http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/statpages/glossary#clutch
"Clutch" is the name we've given to the portion of Bill James's Runs Created formula that includes the impact of a batter's batting average with runners in scoring position and the number of home runs with runners on. The specific formula is Hits with RISP minus overall BA times at bats with RISP, plus HR with runners on minus (all HR/AB) times at bats with runners on. This stat is not a definitive description of "clutch hitting," just one way of looking at it.

This year's Reds, ranked by "Clutch"

Year Last First Tm Clutch
2006 Griffey Jr. Ken CIN NL CF 3.0
2006 Encarnacion Edwin CIN NL 3B 2.8
2006 Womack Tony CIN NL 2B 1.3
2006 Olmedo Ray CIN NL 3B 1.1
2006 Ross Cody CIN NL LF 0.8
2006 Ross Dave CIN NL C 0.4
2006 Lopez Felipe CIN NL SS 0.2
2006 Phillips Brandon CIN NL 2B 0.1
2006 Castro Juan CIN NL 3B 0.0
2006 Abad Andy CIN NL DH 0.0
2006 Valentin Javier CIN NL C -0.0
2006 Denorfia Chris CIN NL CF -0.5
2006 Aurilia Rich CIN NL 3B -0.6
2006 McCracken Quinton CIN NL LF -0.9
2006 Hatteberg Scott CIN NL 1B -1.7
2006 Freel Ryan CIN NL CF -2.5
2006 LaRue Jason CIN NL C -2.8
2006 Kearns Austin CIN NL RF -3.8
2006 Dunn Adam CIN NL LF -5.3


2006 NL Leaders in "Clutch"

Year Last First Tm Lg Pos Clutch
2006 Pujols Albert STL NL 1B 11.0
2006 Berkman Lance HOU NL 1B 8.7
2006 Abreu Bobby PHI NL RF 6.7
2006 Helton Todd COL NL 1B 5.7
2006 Castillo Jose PIT NL 2B 5.4

pedro
06-19-2006, 01:07 PM
I find it interesting that Griffey doesn't show up on that lis, despite his relatively high number of RBI for his AB's.

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 01:09 PM
When I first copied it over, I just had the "qualified" guys... edited and now all better.

Highlifeman21
06-19-2006, 01:23 PM
That's it, Q should be starting over Kearns, and we need to get Abad back up ASAP to replace Dunn.

I'm sure they both have some options left....

And whew, I'm glad we went out and brought Juan Castro back...

Interesting metric though, dabvu2498

flyer85
06-19-2006, 01:27 PM
that data does not provide insight into "clutch" as a skill. To see "clutch" as a definable skill you would need to have historical data that shows a player consistently producing better in "clutch" situations than his overall hitting numbers.

Johnny Footstool
06-19-2006, 01:29 PM
that data does not provide insight into "clutch" as a skill. To see "clutch" as a definable skill you would need to have historical data that shows a player consistently producing better in "clutch" situations than his overall hitting numbers.

It has been done, but I can't find the link.

BTW - According to the criteria, Mark Grace is one of the best clutch hitters of all time.

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 01:29 PM
that data does not provide insight into "clutch" as a skill. To see "clutch" as a definable skill you would need to have historical data that shows a player consistently producing better in "clutch" situations than his overall hitting numbers.
Agreed... the only situation that's being evaluated here is with men on base. Which by some measure is part of anyone's definition of "clutch."

And still some would argue that "clutch" does not exist at all (Moneyball). Others would say the only way to know it is to "smell" it.

Handofdeath
06-19-2006, 01:43 PM
Agreed... the only situation that's being evaluated here is with men on base. Which by some measure is part of anyone's definition of "clutch."

And still some would argue that "clutch" does not exist at all (Moneyball). Others would say the only way to know it is to "smell" it.

I'm sorry I have to take anything from Moneyball with a grain of salt. The Division titles are nice but Billy Beane hasn't accomplished very much honestly. Number of playoff series won? Zero.

pedro
06-19-2006, 01:47 PM
Just curious if you two have read Moneyball?

flyer85
06-19-2006, 01:53 PM
The Division titles are nice but Billy Beane hasn't accomplished very much honestly. Number of playoff series won? Zero.

"it's better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all"

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 01:56 PM
Just curious if you two have read Moneyball?
Yes... read it a couple times.

Johnny Footstool
06-19-2006, 01:58 PM
I'm sorry I have to take anything from Moneyball with a grain of salt. The Division titles are nice but Billy Beane hasn't accomplished very much honestly. Number of playoff series won? Zero.

I guess the non-Moneyball Braves didn't accomplish much either, then. Only one World Series title.

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 01:59 PM
I'm sorry I have to take anything from Moneyball with a grain of salt. The Division titles are nice but Billy Beane hasn't accomplished very much honestly. Number of playoff series won? Zero.
How much would us Reds fans pay for a division title right about now???

Probably less than Oakland's combined payroll for those years. I'll start the collection.

pedro
06-19-2006, 02:02 PM
Yes... read it a couple times.


Cool. It's just that sometimes it seems to me that it is talked about more by people that haven't read it.

TOBTTReds
06-19-2006, 02:09 PM
I guess the non-Moneyball Braves didn't accomplish much either, then. Only one World Series title.

Yeah because not winning a playoff series, period, compares to making it to the World Series five times in the 90's.

westofyou
06-19-2006, 02:15 PM
3rd best team record in baseball since 1999.

Shoot, that's worth my respect. I'll save the disdain for crap franchises that wallow like the Royals.



WINS W L PCT
1 Yankees 680 450 .602
2 Braves 674 458 .595
3 A's 658 475 .581
4 Cardinals 650 483 .574
5 Red Sox 642 491 .567
6 Giants 634 498 .560
7 Astros 614 520 .541
8 Mariners 604 530 .533
9 White Sox 602 531 .531
10 Indians 593 541 .523

RedsManRick
06-19-2006, 02:28 PM
For what it's worth, I would like to again reiterate the point that there is a HUGE difference between saying there is no such thing as clutch, and saying there is no such thing the ability to predict clutch. Performances, even careers, can be "clutch".

However, we have not yet been able to prove that there is a skill such as clutch. This means that while Ken Griffey Jr. may have performed the best in clutch siutations to date (he has been clutch), this says nothing about his likelihood to be clutch tomorrow.

As for this model, what you could interpret it as is this: the player gets hits when they matter.

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 02:33 PM
As for this model, what you could interpret it as is this: the player gets hits when they matter.
I disagree slightly because your assessment is a bit too simplistic... does a 3-run HR when a team is up by 5 runs in the 9th matter as much as a 3-run walk off HR? This model thinks so.

oneupper
06-19-2006, 03:23 PM
I disagree slightly because your assessment is a bit too simplistic... does a 3-run HR when a team is up by 5 runs in the 9th matter as much as a 3-run walk off HR? This model thinks so.

Absolutely. And there are many shades of RISP.

That's why I love WPA (Win Probability Added). It's a counting stat (you could make derivate averages, but that's another story) and measures how the player contributed each game to increasing or decreasing the team's probability to win.

Unfortunately, its a lot of work to generate the data (and as of yet no real standard procedure).

People here will tell you its useless because it has no "predictive" characteristics. But that takes you back to the discussion as if "clutch" is a skill or not. And no one is really sure about that.

But even as a counting stat and of a forensic nature, I like knowing which players have contributed to the team's wins (and losses) in a more direct and specific way.

Johnny Footstool
06-19-2006, 03:35 PM
Yeah because not winning a playoff series, period, compares to making it to the World Series five times in the 90's.

Ah, but what difference does a World Series *appearance* make if you don't win? The only thing that matters is a world championship -- according to the Anti-Beane crowd, anyway.

If you're using that kind of logic to discount the A's division titles as meaningless, you've got to consider any non-championship playoff appearances as failures, too.

dabvu2498
06-19-2006, 03:36 PM
That's why I love WPA (Win Probability Added). It's a counting stat (you could make derivate averages, but that's another story) and measures how the player contributed each game to increasing or decreasing the team's probability to win.
Where can one find WPA stats???

Johnny Footstool
06-19-2006, 03:39 PM
Absolutely. And there are many shades of RISP.

That's why I love WPA (Win Probability Added). It's a counting stat (you could make derivate averages, but that's another story) and measures how the player contributed each game to increasing or decreasing the team's probability to win.

Unfortunately, its a lot of work to generate the data (and as of yet no real standard procedure).

People here will tell you its useless because it has no "predictive" characteristics. But that takes you back to the discussion as if "clutch" is a skill or not. And no one is really sure about that.

But even as a counting stat and of a forensic nature, I like knowing which players have contributed to the team's wins (and losses) in a more direct and specific way.

Game-Winning RBIs was just as valuable a statistic and held about as much predictive power as WPA.

oneupper
06-19-2006, 03:42 PM
Where can one find WPA stats???


Ta Da! Well, you can't. Dave Studeman from the HT has a spreadsheet which you can download and will log games (and calculate this).

Some bloggers have done this:

http://soxwatch.blogspot.com/

Last year, I contracted him to log these games for the REDS, but it turned out to be too cumbersome so we shelved it.

wheels
06-19-2006, 03:58 PM
Please, no more mentions of clutch.

Mine's gonna cost me 1,500 samoloeans.

Cyclone792
06-19-2006, 04:24 PM
For what it's worth, I would like to again reiterate the point that there is a HUGE difference between saying there is no such thing as clutch, and saying there is no such thing the ability to predict clutch. Performances, even careers, can be "clutch".

However, we have not yet been able to prove that there is a skill such as clutch. This means that while Ken Griffey Jr. may have performed the best in clutch siutations to date (he has been clutch), this says nothing about his likelihood to be clutch tomorrow.

Quoted for truth.

Rick's two paragraphs above sums up the clutch debate pretty well, IMO.

vaticanplum
06-19-2006, 04:41 PM
Yeah, I agree. Clutch is baseball's ghost stories. Superfun and worthwhile to talk about around the campfire, but kind of pointless to try to prove in any intellectual discussion. There's a better analogy out there somewhere, by the way.