Clutch hitting

[supertyphoon]

"SABR types" will debate endlessly whether clutch hitting is real or just our imagination. But sometimes you really do have to ignore the raw numbers.

There's no doubt in my mind after watching David Freese in the past two series vs. the Brewers and the Rangers that he hits better when the pressure is on than than when there's not, and also he hits better in the clutch than almost anyone else would in the same circumstances.

I'm sure someone can trot out stats and graphs that clearly demonstrate that Mr. Freese has been really lucky the past month, and his past history shows he's not substantially better in the clutch than at other times, and he falls close to the league average in clutch situations. But eyes don't lie. When the game is on the line, I believe Freese would get a hit or do something to help his team win the game more often than superstars like A-Rod or Bonds.

[PotKettleBlack]

It's also possible that he sees the ball better when someone is holding a runner. Clearer field of vision.

But I like the small sample size argument. NLCS + WS, close and late is a small sample size.

In defense of clutch (which I think might exist, but hard to detect) Freese-frame has a good approach with two strikes. You see him put together pretty professional at bats (read: patient and deep into the count) before putting the wood to the ball. Have noticed, he looks bad on the first couple pitches of an AB, but when there are two K's he shortens up a bit, but still delivers good line drive power. If he could stay healthy, I suspect he's gonna be a big part of the future in St. Lou.

[Ragnarokpc]

Just to throw in my two cents about the small sample size . . . NLCS and WS close and late are some pretty serious samples! If you can maintain that approach in these most stressful situations, I'd say that's the definition of clutch. Maybe he was lucky, but maybe he just wasn't panicked. Maybe the pitcher was. It's impossible to say but it's kind of what makes baseball (and all sports) great.

[Guynick]

[quote:f3b580fbed="Ragnarok69"]Just to throw in my two cents about the small sample size . . . NLCS and WS close and late are some pretty serious samples! If you can maintain that approach in these most stressful situations, I'd say that's the definition of clutch. Maybe he was lucky, but maybe he just wasn't panicked. Maybe the pitcher was. It's impossible to say but it's kind of what makes baseball (and all sports) great.[/quote:f3b580fbed]

This is close to right, in my opinion. If clutch means you step up your performance under pressure, it means you are underperforming the rest of the time, at immense cost to your team. It makes a lot more sense to assume that clutch hitters and pitchers are really those who continue to execute while others fail.

[Guynick]

Which also means that SOM's clutch rating also gets it wrong, by the way.

[PotKettleBlack]

The leverage of the situation does not alter the sample size.

The dismissal/misunderstanding of statistical concepts is why there is a divide between the Sabermetric crowd and the old school crowd.

Seriously: Freese has a small number of close, late, playoff at bats. It doesn't matter how close or how late, the small number of them means that anything we say about his general ability in close late playoff at bats is very very very prone to error and wild swings.

Consider, take 30 PA as an absolute minimum. Freese has had maybe 10 late close ABs. So, a third of the way. If he got hits in all 10 (he has not), there's still the possibility that he'd bring down his average to something more approaching who he really is in those situations.

There's a psychological side to this as well. It's called Positive Attribution Bias. You tend to remember things that are unexpected more than things that are expected. Outliers pop out, so are more memorable. So, Freese delivers a few big hits, and all of the outs don't mean anything. I'm not saying that's what's happened here. But I am saying, that if the Cards make it to the post season next year, and Freese comes up like average Freese, you will not remember it because it's flatline. If he comes up big, you remember the big spots and spread them over all of his PA, even though that's not true.

[paige91]

The more I think about it, there has to be a better way to judge clutch hitters and choke artists. Just throwing it out there, maybe a points system that gives (subtracts) extra bonus points depending on the situation.

+10 points for home run or hit that drives in the tying AND winning run when down to the last out. In other words, make an out and the game's over.
+8 points driving in the tying run when down to the last out.
+7 points for home run or hit that drives in the tying AND winning run, less than two outs.
+6 points for walk-off winning hit, tie game, two outs.
+5 points for walk-off winning hit, tie game, less than two outs.
+4 points for hit in one-run game when down to last out.
+3 points for walk, HBP or error when down to last out.
+2 points getting on base, two outs and RISP.
+2 points for hit, behind by more than one, down to last out.
+1 point getting on base, less than two outs and RISP.
+1 point getting on base, two outs.
0 points getting on base, less than two outs.
-1 point making an out, less than two outs.
-2 points making an out, two outs.
-3 points last out of the game.
-4 points, last out of an inning, RISP.
-5 points last out of the game, winning run ISP.

[gfg001]

[quote:4386ca51d8="Ragnarok69"]Just to throw in my two cents about the small sample size . . . NLCS and WS close and late are some pretty serious samples! If you can maintain that approach in these most stressful situations, I'd say that's the definition of clutch. Maybe he was lucky, but maybe he just wasn't panicked. Maybe the pitcher was. It's impossible to say but it's kind of what makes baseball (and all sports) great.[/quote:4386ca51d8]
I agree, it is not just a dice roll . Anecdotally in HS the higher the stakes the better I played in football, (adrenaline?)...but in skill sports baseball..throwing a discus always worse in tight situations.. much better in practice...(adrenaline was negative for these). I wasn't clutch.
The high stakes clutch performer must be able to control himself better . He's probably not better, just not worse.
Always wondered about about Billy Beanes A's... great regular season but bow out in playoffs. Just statitically abberation...or did the adrenaline kick in to lower there performance in tight situations,,, and modify their "dice rolls"?

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:def0b67736="gfg001"][quote:def0b67736="Ragnarok69"]Just to throw in my two cents about the small sample size . . . NLCS and WS close and late are some pretty serious samples! If you can maintain that approach in these most stressful situations, I'd say that's the definition of clutch. Maybe he was lucky, but maybe he just wasn't panicked. Maybe the pitcher was. It's impossible to say but it's kind of what makes baseball (and all sports) great.[/quote:def0b67736]
I agree, it is not just a dice roll . Anecdotally in HS the higher the stakes the better I played in football, (adrenaline?)...but in skill sports baseball..throwing a discus always worse in tight situations.. much better in practice...(adrenaline was negative for these). I wasn't clutch.
The high stakes clutch performer must be able to control himself better . He's probably not better, just not worse.
Always wondered about about Billy Beanes A's... great regular season but bow out in playoffs. Just statitically abberation...or did the adrenaline kick in to lower there performance in tight situations,,, and modify their "dice rolls"?[/quote:def0b67736]

Like a true theory master, I have an idea about Beane's A's and the playoffs. Since a lot of it was predicated on patience and "counting cards" it tends not to work against better pitchers who tend to work in the zone as well as it works against average and below pitchers, which is most of what you see in the post season. It's not a non-clutch issue. It's that good pitchers don't give walks as easily, and undervalued batters don't work the kind of 8-12 pitch PAs you do to get playoff walks on top pitchers.

That's my theory on why Beane's stuff doesn't work in the playoffs. Nothing about the sanctity of the sac bunt or the stolen base. We just saw a WS where the winning team stole zero bases and the losing team's lead off runner was caught four times. Yes, he stole a key base, but by the standard math of SB, he created a third of a run with the steal and gave back 2.67 runs by getting caught 4 times. Was large in game 7, for sure.

[gfg001]

Good point Kettle, the better the pitcher the less advantage a Billy Beane batter gets .