Post by sharksrog on Jun 20, 2013 10:20:54 GMT -5
Doesn't it seem that Gregor Blanco just keeps getting key hit after key hit? Yesterday's pinch triple that put the Giants ahead to stay was yet another example.
It brought to mind the old question: Are their truly clutch hitters -- or are the best hitters usually the best clutch hitters as well?
Blanco has been a terror in clutch situations this season. Last season he was a dud. That's a factor that makes it appear hitters who are truly a lot better in the clutch rarely if ever exist. The top clutch hitters one year may be average or worse the following season.
To be sure, part of that would be due to the small sample of clutch at bats in a single. But think of the best clutch hitters you can think of -- not the best hitters, but those who seem to perform a lot better in the clutch than otherwise. Over their careers, how did their clutch hitting compare with their hitting overall?
Bengie Molina is a Giant who is often viewed as clutch. Overall, he was a decent hitter, but not a particularly good one. So how did his clutch hitting compare with his hitting overall?
His career numbers were .274/.307/.411/.718.
With RISP: .284/.326/.426/.752
Late & Close: .288/.317/.409/.726
High leverage: .295/.321/.459/.780
In over 5000 plate appearances, Bengie Molina hit better in the clutch. He didn't hit a whole LOT better, but he did hit better.
So what do we think about this question: Would we rather have at the plate an average hitter who is "clutch" or a good hitter who isn't considered to be particularly clutch for as good a hitter as he is?
Related to clutch hitting, a thought on my part: I would EXPECT hitters to be slightly better in clutch situations than they are overall. Why?
Generally speaking, is a pitcher pitching better when he allows lots of runners and thus more RISP and high leverage situations or when he allows few runners, limiting the RISP and high leverage occurrences? Clearly the former is the case. Thus, on average a batter faces pitchers pitching worse in these "clutch" situations than when they are pitching well and allow fewer "clutch" situations. Wouldn't we expect batters to hit somewhat better when they are facing pitchers who aren't pitching well than when they're facing pitchers who are on their game?
How about in late and close situations? I would expect a batter to hit a little worse in such situations, since the chance increases that they will face a tough set up man or closer. The advantage enjoyed by relievers has increased over time, so one would expect the difference to show up more and more over time.
In Bengie's case, he did hit better with RISP and in high leverage situations. He also hit better in late and close situations, but not by much (.726 OPS compared to .711 overall). Bengie hit for a higher average late and close, but less power.
I would think a hitter who would most suffer in late and close situations would be one who was a catcher or played almost every day and thus might tire as the game goes on. And a hitter who feasts on finesse and average pitchers but has a much harder time hitting power pitchers. Also a top hitter who is more likely to be caught in a platoon split. Also older players who might be more prone to tiring. And players who do a lot of pinch hitting and thus are likely to have a higher percentage of their late and close at bats while coming off the bench cold.
Not sure how all that would work out, but I'll bet there is a correlation.
By the way, I've always wondered why so-called "clutch" hitters couldn't get motivated in all situations. If they are "clutch," are they slacking in their other at bats?
It brought to mind the old question: Are their truly clutch hitters -- or are the best hitters usually the best clutch hitters as well?
Blanco has been a terror in clutch situations this season. Last season he was a dud. That's a factor that makes it appear hitters who are truly a lot better in the clutch rarely if ever exist. The top clutch hitters one year may be average or worse the following season.
To be sure, part of that would be due to the small sample of clutch at bats in a single. But think of the best clutch hitters you can think of -- not the best hitters, but those who seem to perform a lot better in the clutch than otherwise. Over their careers, how did their clutch hitting compare with their hitting overall?
Bengie Molina is a Giant who is often viewed as clutch. Overall, he was a decent hitter, but not a particularly good one. So how did his clutch hitting compare with his hitting overall?
His career numbers were .274/.307/.411/.718.
With RISP: .284/.326/.426/.752
Late & Close: .288/.317/.409/.726
High leverage: .295/.321/.459/.780
In over 5000 plate appearances, Bengie Molina hit better in the clutch. He didn't hit a whole LOT better, but he did hit better.
So what do we think about this question: Would we rather have at the plate an average hitter who is "clutch" or a good hitter who isn't considered to be particularly clutch for as good a hitter as he is?
Related to clutch hitting, a thought on my part: I would EXPECT hitters to be slightly better in clutch situations than they are overall. Why?
Generally speaking, is a pitcher pitching better when he allows lots of runners and thus more RISP and high leverage situations or when he allows few runners, limiting the RISP and high leverage occurrences? Clearly the former is the case. Thus, on average a batter faces pitchers pitching worse in these "clutch" situations than when they are pitching well and allow fewer "clutch" situations. Wouldn't we expect batters to hit somewhat better when they are facing pitchers who aren't pitching well than when they're facing pitchers who are on their game?
How about in late and close situations? I would expect a batter to hit a little worse in such situations, since the chance increases that they will face a tough set up man or closer. The advantage enjoyed by relievers has increased over time, so one would expect the difference to show up more and more over time.
In Bengie's case, he did hit better with RISP and in high leverage situations. He also hit better in late and close situations, but not by much (.726 OPS compared to .711 overall). Bengie hit for a higher average late and close, but less power.
I would think a hitter who would most suffer in late and close situations would be one who was a catcher or played almost every day and thus might tire as the game goes on. And a hitter who feasts on finesse and average pitchers but has a much harder time hitting power pitchers. Also a top hitter who is more likely to be caught in a platoon split. Also older players who might be more prone to tiring. And players who do a lot of pinch hitting and thus are likely to have a higher percentage of their late and close at bats while coming off the bench cold.
Not sure how all that would work out, but I'll bet there is a correlation.
By the way, I've always wondered why so-called "clutch" hitters couldn't get motivated in all situations. If they are "clutch," are they slacking in their other at bats?