Phillies Mets Gamethread Tuesday.

[Omar 382]

After this last half-inning I am now 100% fully determined to stage a fight between Jeff Francoeur and David Wright at Madison Square Garden

 

[Omar 382]

I'm getting tired of Ruf's bad clutch appearances.

Oh come on, everyone knows there's no such thing as being "clutch"

EDIT: I just checked Fangraphs and Darin's career clutch is -2.06. Fuck you Ruf!!!!

 

[Omar 382]

Juan Uribe. When will this fucker retire? He was on the '05 White Sox World Championship roster that they won against the HOUSTON ASTROS. This guy has seen that franchise go from great to horrible and back to great again

 

[jvett77]

Howard just missed that.

 

[jvett77]

Oh come on, everyone knows there's no such thing as being "clutch"

EDIT: I just checked Fangraphs and Darin's career clutch is -2.06. Fuck you Ruf!!!!

What stat is the -2.06? A derivative of RISP and runners on, etc.?

 

[jvett77]

2 on and we've beat Clippard before. Brown is up. one out, 2 on.

 

[jvett77]

Hit a double, you big prick.

 

[jvett77]

Another laggard likely with a lifetime -2.06 clutch. lol.

 

[jvett77]

They're letting Ruiz hit. I'd go with Rupp. Morons.

 

[jvett77]

Morons!

 

[Retroram52]

LOL!!

 

[jvett77]

Blowen against Wright? I don't like it.

 

[jvett77]

Oh come on, everyone knows there's no such thing as being "clutch"

EDIT: I just checked Fangraphs and Darin's career clutch is -2.06. Fuck you Ruf!!!!

I get it You're right!

 

[jvett77]

Last chance!

 

[jvett77]

We're almost out of bench power.

 

[jvett77]

Last hope Galvis.

 

[jvett77]

Without a wimper.

 

[Omar 382]

What stat is the -2.06? A derivative of RISP and runners on, etc.?

It's derived from using this formula: (WPA/pLI)-(WPA/LI). That may seem overly complicated, and I don't pretend to be an expert on the stat, but my understanding is that it measures how much better or worse a player does in a high leverage situation (i.e. a "clutch" situation) than in a context neutral (or normal, or "not clutch") environment.

Clutch measures a player's performance against himself, and it compares one's performance in clutch situations solely against performance in not clutch situations. So if Ruf has a .900 OPS in clutch situations against a .600 OPS in unclutch situations, he will have a higher Clutch rating than if somebody like Maikel Franco puts up a .900 OPS in both clutch and unclutch situations.

As you can see, the stat is clearly flawed, as anyone can determine that Franco in the hypothetical situation above is producing better than Ruf, despite having a lower Clutch rating. That's why I made the joke about Ruf having a low Clutch. I just find it funny that for years every sabermetrician dogs the talk of "clutch" as flawed and misleading- and then they produce a Sabermetric stat that is flawed and misleading. Clutch has no predictive validity, and often changes year to year. For example, David Ortiz is often cited as one of the "clutchest" hitters of this era. His year to year Clutch ratings from '02-'07
2002: -0.49
2003: 0.50
2004: -0.15
2005: 3.31
2006: 1.50
2007: -1.71

I realize that this is just one player and one example, but nearly every study that has been conducted on the matter concludes that "clutch" hitting is very rarely a repeatable skill. Just look at Ortiz. In his prime, he was split 50/50 on having "clutch" and "unclutch" years. In his prime, Tony Gwynn didn't hit .350 half the time, and .220 the other half.. And Roger Clemens sure didn't have half of his seasons in his prime with a FIP of 2.50 and a 5 FIP in the other half. I'm not saying that "clutch" performance doesn't exist. But I do think that our thought of clutch hitters and what their performance entails is not always in line with each other (who do we think is more clutch: a player who hits a three-run home run in the first inning or someone who hits a walk-off solo home run in the ninth? Who actually produced more?) and I don't think there is yet enough evidence to say that clutch hitting is a teachable, learnable, and repeatable skill. I'm not saying that day will never come, I just don't think it's here yet.

 

[Retroram52]

Same result.

 

[jvett77]

It's derived from using this formula: (WPA/pLI)-(WPA/LI). That may seem overly complicated, and I don't pretend to be an expert on the stat, but my understanding is that it measures how much better or worse a player does in a high leverage situation (i.e. a "clutch" situation) than in a context neutral (or normal, or "not clutch") environment.

Clutch measures a player's performance against himself, and it compares one's performance in clutch situations solely against performance in not clutch situations. So if Ruf has a .900 OPS in clutch situations against a .600 OPS in unclutch situations, he will have a higher Clutch rating than if somebody like Maikel Franco puts up a .900 OPS in both clutch and unclutch situations.

As you can see, the stat is clearly flawed, as anyone can determine that Franco in the hypothetical situation above is producing better than Ruf, despite having a lower Clutch rating. That's why I made the joke about Ruf having a low Clutch. I just find it funny that for years every sabermetrician dogs the talk of "clutch" as flawed and misleading- and then they produce a Sabermetric stats that is flawed and misleading. Clutch has no predictive validity, and often changes year to year. For example, David Ortiz is often cited as one of the "clutchest" hitters of this era. His year to year Clutch ratings from '02-'07
2002: -0.49
2003: 0.50
2004: -0.15
2005: 3.31
2006: 1.50
2007: -1.71

I realize that this is just one player and one example, but nearly every study that has been conducted on the matter concludes that "clutch" hitting is very rarely a repeatable skill. Just look at Ortiz. In his prime, he was split 50/50 on having "clutch" and "unclutch" years. In his prime, Tony Gwynn didn't hit .350 half the time, and .220 the other half.. And Roger Clemens sure didn't have half of his seasons in his prime with a FIP of 2.50 in half of his prime seasons and a 5 FIP in the other half. I'm not saying that "clutch" performance doesn't exist. But I do think that our thought of clutch hitters and what their performance entails is not always in line with each other (who do we think is more clutch: a player who hits a three-run home run in the first inning or someone who hits a walk-off solo home run in the ninth? Who actually produced more?) and I don't think there is yet enough evidence to say that clutch hitting is a teachable, learnable, and repeatable skill. I'm not saying that day will never come, I just don't think it's here yet.

Heavy but very interesting. That Ruf-Franco comparison doesn't make sense. Franco should have the highest clutch rating since he's consistently better in the example. Generally, it seems like the best clutch hitters should be guys with huge RBI totals. I'll have to check Howard's stats.