Wait, what?

[redssince75]

Thank you for helping us get 1/2 game closer to the Pirates, Mr. Young, but haven't you heard from the sabermetrics guys that there's no such thing as "clutch"?

Ruiz, Jimmy Rollins and Delmon Young each had two hits.

"It's not so much the raw number of hits you have but when you get them," Young said. "We were playing the best team in baseball with the Pirates. Their pitching has been outstanding and their offense has been lagging but they're winning because they hit in the clutch. That's what we did today, and what we need to continue to do."

[BCubb2003]

Sabremetrics is the art of explaining statistical analysis to someone who thinks he's giving 110 percent.

[dougdirt]

Thank you for helping us get 1/2 game closer to the Pirates, Mr. Young, but haven't you heard from the sabermetrics guys that there's no such thing as "clutch"?
[/I]

No, we don't say that.

We say there is no such thing as clutch players. Incidents can happen at clutch times, but that players generally hit what they always hit over the long haul. Good hitters tend to be good in "clutch situations" and bad hitters tend to be bad hitters in "clutch situations". The statement that there is no such thing as clutch is very different than there is no such thing as a clutch player.

And with that said, there are a few guys who have had better numbers "in the clutch" than others, but the guys who do are very few and far between.

[Tom Servo]

This board is getting worse.

[LoganBuck]

Nice thread.

Delmon Young has now spoken, we can put down our battle axes, and disarm the trebuchet.

[dougdirt]

This board is getting worse.

Huh?

[dougdirt]

Also, here are the numbers for the Pirates, who "are hitting in the clutch"

RISP: .231/.320/.339
Men On: .250/.325/.393
Empty: .237/.298/.393
Overall: .242/.309/.393

[Tom Servo]

Huh?

It appears we are getting to the point where those who have determined that they don't like "the sabermetrics guys" are drawing a line in the sand and declaring a pre-emptive war against them. It's essentially a form of trolling; saying things to get a rise out of posters and cause arguments. I think we're better than it.

[redssince75]

It appears we are getting to the point where those who have determined that they don't like "the sabermetrics guys" are drawing a line in the sand and declaring a pre-emptive war against them. It's essentially a form of trolling; saying things to get a rise out of posters and cause arguments. I think we're better than it.

Perhaps it's just a by-product of heavy participation in a baseball board, but "sabermetrics" is discussed and believed in about 1,000% more on this board than it is among baseball fans I know in real life. (And yes, that's a made-up stat, and I know 1,000% isn't a real thing).

I find the OPSs and the WARs and all that stuff very tiresome, it seems no one here just talks the enjoyment and art of baseball. So occasionally I'll take a little potshot across the bow to relieve the pressure.

[dougdirt]

Perhaps it's just a by-product of heavy participation in a baseball board, but "sabermetrics" is discussed and believed in about 1,000% more on this board than it is among baseball fans I know in real life. (And yes, that's a made-up stat, and I know 1,000% isn't a real thing).

I find the OPSs and the WARs and all that stuff very tiresome, it seems no one here just talks the enjoyment and art of baseball. So occasionally I'll take a little potshot across the bow to relieve the pressure.

1000% more is absolutely possible.

At the end of the day, every baseball fan uses stats. Sabermetric stats are just more accurate ones than the ones on the back of a baseball card.

[marcshoe]

Yeah, I was wondering if I would come across as a jerk if I pointed out that 1000% means ten times as much. The problem with saying that you are giving 110% is that it means you are giving more than you have, which is impossible.

fwiw, I do believe that some players are more clutch than others just as some people in real life handle pressure better than others. While some say that those who can't handle pressure are weeded out by the time they reach the majors, I don't see this, and even if it is true, there's always a continuum.

However, clutch is incredibly overused when analyzing players and situations and is too often misused in order to vent against a particular loss or failure. It ain't as easy to measure as many 'baseball people' seem to think.

[LoganBuck]

Perhaps it's just a by-product of heavy participation in a baseball board, but "sabermetrics" is discussed and believed in about 1,000% more on this board than it is among baseball fans I know in real life. (And yes, that's a made-up stat, and I know 1,000% isn't a real thing).

I find the OPSs and the WARs and all that stuff very tiresome, it seems no one here just talks the enjoyment and art of baseball. So occasionally I'll take a little potshot across the bow to relieve the pressure.

Then go post on another board.

[texasdave]

1000% more is absolutely possible.

At the end of the day, every baseball fan uses stats. Sabermetric stats are just more accurate ones than the ones on the back of a baseball card.

It seems to me they are much more difficult to compute as well. To figure batting average I simply need at-bats and hits. To figure something like wOBA, well I can't. I admit that. To figure ERA I need earned runs and innings pitched. To figure xFIP, well I can't. I admit that. (And I think they figure xFIP incorrectly but that is another story).

So, if I am watching a game with friends or in a game thread, I am more likely to stick with the older stats, simply out of convenience.

[membengal]

So occasionally I'll take a little potshot across the bow to relieve the pressure.

So, that's less than optimal.

[membengal]

It seems to me they are much more difficult to compute as well. To figure batting average I simply need at-bats and hits. To figure something like wOBA, well I can't. I admit that. To figure ERA I need earned runs and innings pitched. To figure xFIP, well I can't. I admit that. (And I think they figure xFIP incorrectly but that is another story).

So, if I am watching a game with friends or in a game thread, I am more likely to stick with the older stats, simply out of convenience.

Indeed. But I don't view those who use them with the hostility so many seem to. I don't care to take the time to figure out how to calculate them, and, frankly, don't rely on the newer stats to make points. But I sure do read carefully those who do and seek to learn from them why they do and take what value I can from them. Its the open and weird "us v. them" mentality that has arisen over this that I simply do not understand.