Notes
Posted by Andy on June 10, 2009
Yesterday Ken Rosenthal was reminding Red Sox fans how badly Carlos Delgado started out last year.
Indeed, check out the sum from his first 43 games last year (though May 21.) He had 5 HR and 20 RBI, to go along with 36 Ks, a .217 BA, and a .650 OPS.
Through his first 43 games this year, David Ortiz had 1 HR and 18 RBI, 45 Ks, a .194 BA, and a .594 OPS. Worse numbers than even Delgado last year. But you know what else? Delgado finished 2008 with 38 HR, 115 RBI, and an .871 OPS. His slow start is nothing but a distant memory. If Ortiz can have 80% of the season that Delgado had last year, he'll be fine. That bomb he hit against the Yankees last night helps.
Speaking of the Yankees, on ESPN radio, I heard the guys talking about how much better Derek Jeter is than Alex Rodriguez during critical times in games. (I think the theory came from all the recent discussion of how much better A-rod hits when games are out of reach, i.e. how many of his homers & RBI come during garbage time.)
Thanks to the new Leverage splits that were added during the recent site update, this is quite easy to measure. Take a look at Derek Jeter's career leverage splits. For those who do not know, leverage calculations use Win Probability Added to determine how much of a swing any given situation has in the outcome of the game. It looks at how all games in the same situations have turned out historically and can therefore calculate the increased or decreased likelihood that a player's team will win that particuar game based on what the player does. It is, in my opinion, the best metric out there for measuring the true value of a player's offensive performance.
Anyway, you can see that Jeter has hit better in high- and medium-leverage situations than he has in low-leverage situations. Both his BA and OBP are significantly higher and his fractional OPS (tOPS+) shows that more of his own production comes in the higher leverage situations. In terms of RBIs, he has 0.24 RBI per PA in high-leverage, 0.10 RBI per PA in medium-leverage, and 0.07 RBI per PA in low-leverage situations. (This general trend would be expected as situations with runners on base are by definition higher leverage, so there are more RBI opportunities in high-leverage situations.)
With A-rod, the picture is a little different. He hits virtually the same in all three cases, with BA, OBP, and tOPS+ virtually identical for high-, medium-, and low-leverage situations. He has 0.37 RBI per PA in high-leverage, 0.16 RBI/PA in medium, and 0.12 RBI/PA in low. We see that his RBI production, while still shifted like Jeter's is somewhat closer to being equal in all three cases.
This supports the general argument that a greater fraction of Derek Jeter's production helps his team win games than for A-rod. That being said, A-rod produces so many more runs that he is still likely helping his team win more games than Jeter. The point being made on ESPN radio, though, was this this is why the fans adore Jeter and hate A-rod--because the perception (which really is truth) is that Jeter shines more when the game is on the line.
June 10th, 2009 at 8:52 am
What this tells me is that Jeter has the talent to be a great hitter all of the time but lacks the ability to focus unless the game is on the line, while A-Rod gives it his best all of the time no matter what the game situation is.
I've always questioned the idea of putting "clutch hitters" on a pedestal. When players like Reggie Jackson or Derek Jeter produce “in the clutch”, against the best pitchers in the game, it shows me that they are fully capable of putting up those kind of numbers. So why don’t they do it the rest of the time, when they’re generally facing worse pitchers? In my book, a “clutch hitter” has a flaw, not an asset.
If I were a manager, I’ll take Mr. Consistency (A-Rod) over Mr. Clutch (Jeter) every time. …and I’d also put him at shortstop, too!
June 10th, 2009 at 9:00 am
Tom--yes this is the logical counterargument, and this is where it gets hazy. What I hear players & managers say is that the season is a massive grind, and that no player can go all out for the full season--and that players need to know when to take it easy some time so that during more crucial situations, they can really focus and use up energy reserves. Is this true or B.S.? I have no idea.
I've also heard it said that in critical game situations, there is extra motivation (some say adrenaline) that allows any player to perform above their usual ceiling--and that this is what we see from Jeter and not from A-rod---i.e. that A-rod produces at 100% all the time but Jeter rises to 110% sometimes. Again...truth or B.S.? no idea.
The one firm conclusion I do draw is that the perception is true that Jeter produces more of his output in critical situations--for better or for worse, that's the truth--and that fans value these players more because they remember their special achievements more.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Oh, and you might notice that A-Rod's fractional OPS in high leverage situations is nearly identical to Jeters (102 to 103), but his "raw" OPS value is still significantly higher (.976 to .873). Even in Jeter's best and A-Rod's worst leverage category, medium leverage situations, A-Rod's OPS production beats Jeter's by 83 points, .959 to .876. Hard to argue that Jeter is the better - or more valuable - offensive player.
June 10th, 2009 at 9:06 am
Note that I did not argue that Jeter is more valuable....
June 10th, 2009 at 9:27 am
Andy: I was composing my addendum before seeing your response to my first comments. The follow-up was directed at the portion of the general audience who take the view that Jeter is more valuable because he is clutch, and was not meant to imply that that was your argument.
I agree that the evidence shows that Jeter does produce a larger portion of his production in the clutch as evidenced by the leverage splits, but I guess I am in the minority in viewing that as a deficit instead of an asset. It seems to me, however, that if A-Rod's production is still higher than Jeter's in high leverage situations, there should still be more “A-Rod moments” than “Jeter moments” for the fans to remember. Perhaps its just because the fans expect there to be more A-Rod moments? We expect our superstars to produce memorable moments, but when average everyday players – and especially when bench players – produce in pressure situations, they are remembered longer and more fondly because that was unexpected. (Not that Jeter is an “average everyday player”, mind you.) My guess is that the difference in the fans’ perceptions has more to do with A-Rod’s and Jeter’s personalities and off-field activities than with a fair assessment of their on-field performance.
June 10th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Tom, I remember you making that argument against "clutch" hitters before and I must disagree. First, as Andy notes, no one is capable of being at their best all the time. Not even the best baseball players in the world. It is a long season. Hell, I lose focus just watching one game. Having to play almost every day for 6 months, it is obvious there must be times when it feels like a bit of a drag. It is an unforgiving game, and if a player is "off" a bit, whether mentally or physically, the opposition will take advantage. The raw differences in ability between even the best and worst major leaguers is very slight. Furthermore, if indeed Jeter (or anyone) really has clutch ability, it is not necessarily because he is trying harder or more focused. He may just be better at maintaining his baseline, but meanwhile opposing pitchers are wilting under the pressure.
As Andy touched on a bit, people definitely have perception bias. When you make up your mind about something, you tend to remember the events that reinforce that perception and ignore those which contradict it. Jeter made his rep in NY a long time ago and it would be very difficult to change it now. Rodriguez unfortunately has established a different rep and isn't going to change that without a couple game-winning World Series homers. A-Rod has hit walk-off homers for the Yanks, but a couple days later he'll strike out in a big spot and he gets booed again. A few years back I think Jeter made the last out of the game with a potential tying run on base in something like 5 losses in a row, but no one noticed. Now, all that said, the fans are not completely "wrong." If you look at A-Rod's yearly high-leverage splits, his tOPS+ as a Yankee appears to be only a little over 90. So as a Yankee there is some truth to the rumor he does not perform quite as well in the big spots. Now even over 5+ seasons, that can still be a sample size issue, but the games have been played and it is what it is.
June 10th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
People ask which is better, the guy who hits well most of the time or the guy who rises to the occasion. I see it this way: do you want a 50 HR guy or a .350 slap hitter with speed? Why, I'll take both, naturally. If you only have guys who rise to the occasion, the occasion doesn't come up enough. If you only have guys who hit well all the time, you'll fall short in the big moments. Just like power or speed, flamethrowers or control artists, it's not about which type is better, but about making sure you have the right mix. True, you have to decide when you're looking at a trade or to make a change during the offseason, but the fact is that it depends on how they fit into your team. I've seen too many teams that weren't the sum of their parts, and so many that were more than the sum of their parts. The right pieces, when fit together, serve as multipliers--like adding Ichiro to the Mariners in 2001, or Knoblauch to the Yankees in 1998. If you fit together six guys who hit singles or fly out, you get a lot of innings with men left on base. Throw vintage David Ortiz in the middle or Carl Crawford at the top and they're dangerous.
Who is better, A-Rod or Jeter? A-Rod. Who do I want for my team? Well, that depends on what I need.
June 11th, 2009 at 9:06 am
It is interesting that you brought up Jeter in your second point, because his name came to mind when you were discussing your first point. Delgado's first 43 games in 2008: 5 HR and 20 RBI, 36 Ks, a .217 BA, and a .650 OPS; Ortiz's first 43 games in 2009: 1 HR and 18 RBI, 45 Ks, a .194 BA, and a .594 OPS.
In Jeter's first 43 games in 2004: .189 BA, 36 Ks, .249 OBP, .528 OPS, and was 3 for 5 in SBs. In the rest of his 111 games of the seasn he hit .333 with 37 2Bs, 20 HRs, 62 RBIs, 95 Rs!!, and was 20 for 22 in SBs. He finished the season with a .292 BA and a .823 OBP. And now if anyone looks only at his yearly stats, 2004 just blends right in with the other ones.
June 11th, 2009 at 10:57 am
That was a terrible stretch for Jeter. After a while, he started drawing some boos, the only time I remember that happening to him. Of course he was a younger man, and I don't remember anyone thinking it was the end for him.