BP Comment Quick Links
| Home | Unfiltered | Articles | Newsletter | Statistics | Fantasy | Events | Radio | Glossary | Search |
![]() |
|
|
|
April 7, 2005 Crooked NumbersOn the Run
One of the major themes in performance analysis of batters is context independence, the idea that a batter hits just as well whether his team is tied in the bottom of the ninth or up by nine in the eighth. This idea is at the core of the clutch hitting argument and is borne out by statistics: while clutch hitting exists, there are no persistent clutch hitters. Great hitters are great clutch hitters; terrible hitters are terrible clutch hitters. Context independence can also be applied to situations involving the interaction between baserunners and the batter at the plate. The idea that a runner on a particular base can consistently influence the batter's performance is contrary to the idea of context independence. But listen to a ballgame and you're almost guaranteed to hear discussion of baserunners disrupting a pitcher's timing, rhythm, focus...maybe even his hairdo. While context independence governs a great deal of batting performance, the presence of runners does affect a noticeable change in the opposition. Pitchers typically go to a stretch delivery instead of the windup. Defensive players position themselves differently, preparing for a possible double play or playing deeper in the outfield to give up a single while preventing a double. The first baseman is assigned to cover the bag and keep the runner from stealing rather than playing back and off the line. The immediate results of this can be seen in the performance of batters broken down by the baserunner situation in 2004: YEAR RUNNERS PA AVG OBP SLG ISO MLVR 2004 2nd & 3rd 4292 .275 .414 .451 .176 .179 2004 3rd 5644 .287 .384 .450 .163 .136 2004 1st & 3rd 6379 .291 .342 .454 .163 .074 2004 1st 38136 .280 .338 .440 .160 .039 2004 2nd 17210 .247 .367 .394 .147 .004 2004 Loaded 5041 .276 .314 .443 .167 -.002 2004 Empty 103422 .262 .325 .426 .164 -.018 2004 1st & 2nd 14083 .258 .327 .415 .157 -.032The highest situations, as measured by MLVr, are those in which a runner is on third: second and third, third, and first and third. However, the isolated power in these situations is similar to those when the bases are loaded or empty, so much of the difference of MLVr may be a result of intentional walks, a decision element that should be removed in order to better maintain context independence. Removing intentional walks, the numbers for 2004 now look like this: YEAR RUNNERS PA AVG OBP SLG ISO MLVR 2004 3rd 5644 .287 .361 .450 .163 .097 2004 1st & 3rd 6379 .291 .337 .454 .163 .066 2004 2nd & 3rd 4292 .275 .347 .451 .176 .065 2004 1st 38136 .280 .337 .440 .160 .037 2004 Loaded 5041 .276 .314 .443 .167 -.002 2004 Empty 103422 .262 .325 .426 .164 -.018 2004 1st & 2nd 14083 .258 .327 .415 .157 -.032 2004 2nd 17210 .247 .340 .394 .147 -.045While the OBP with runners on second and third dropped from .414 to .347 (and thus MLVr from .179 to .065), the three situations with a runner on third, excluding when the bases are loaded, remain at the top of the list. More importantly, batters perform better in general with runners on base than when the bases are empty. While this may not be as conclusive looking at the 2004 numbers, batters hit worse with the bases empty in 2003 than in any other situation, even when removing intentional walks. In 2002, only with runners on first and second were batters less adept than with the bases empty. Batters do better when there are runners on base and the year-to-year consistency of offensive performance given a particular combination of baserunners is high. Thus, it can be said with confidence that baserunners do alter batter performance slightly.
|