Options
Does Arod hit his home runs when it doesn't matter? Here is the asnwer...
Skinpinch
Posts: 1,531
in Sports Talk
After all the talk on Arod hitting his home runs in blowout wins or losses, or when they simply don't matter, I decided to check the reality of the situation, rather than the speculation(or emotional assessments).
Quite simply, I checked the logs of every one of Arod's home runs last year as a Yankee(being that is the time he has gotten this reputation). Did he hit a high proportion of his home runs up big or down big? Lets see.
Each home run is logged at the moment of the score. When behind, his home runs are logged as to what his home run made the score. A three run home run down by five, pulls the score within TWO. Then I logged how many pulled within two, three, etc...
Then I logged how many tied the game or took the lead, and this is the obvious BIG CATEGORY of importance. Then I logged HR up by one, two, etc... This is to see how many occured in the blowout games.
HOME RUNS....
Pull within FIVE RUNS.....1
Pull within FOUR RUNS....0
Pull within THREE RUNS...1
Pull within TWO RUNS.....4
Pull within ONE RUN........2
TO TIE OR TAKE THE LEAD......20
HR up by ONE RUN........6
HR up by TWO RUNS.....1
HR up by THREE RUNS...7
HR up by FOUR RUNS.....2
HR up by FIVE RUNS......0
HR up by SIX RUNS........0
HR up by SEVEN RUNS...0
HR up by EIGHT or MORE......3
To say he hits a high proportion of his home runs when the game is already decided is wrong.
-only three home runs in blowout games.
-two more possibly meaningless w/ four run leads
-of his home runs with three run leads, six occured before the 5th inning, two late. I don't think extending a three run lead in the third inning is meaningless at all, in fact it probably seals a victory.
-One down big
MEANINGLESS HOME RUNS...by count, I see SIX meaningless home runs last year, and by the wildest stretch of meaningless, one can possibly make it a total of EIGHT meaningless home runs. Beyond that, no way are there any more.
As with most other sluggers, most of his home runs are hit when the game is FAR FROM DECIDED. A full 20 were hit to tie the game or take the lead.
Like most slugers, most of his home runs are hit in the 1st/2nd inning, because that is the innings they are guaranteed to bat the most. A home run in the first wtih the game tied is quite valuable. A home run hit anytime the game is within a couple of runs always has meaning. If down, it brings the team back in, and if up by a couple and a HR is hit, then it usually seals a win.
Most sluggers do not hit many late inning(8th,9th) home runs to tie or take the lead. They simply aren't provided many guaranteed at bats in those situations(as they are in the first or second inning).
To note, Arod did have THREE dramatic HR to tie or take the lead in the 8th or 9th. One more to pull within one, and another to extend a one run lead. So he did have some of the Roy Hob Dramatic Home Runs.
The one thing is for absolute certain is that he did NOT hit a high proportion in blowout wins as people are seemingly claiming. This is why we must keep accurate tabulations of what really occured, in fact, IT IS WHY!@!
The basic human mind is not capable of recording each moment like it really happened. In recolecction those moments are clouded by inaccuracies....inaccuracies that stem from emotional bias, anger, or joy. What ends up happening are overblown claims resulting from the emotional accounts, and fans are quite emotional.
Some say, "yeah but even though we were up by only two, the lead 'seemed' larger and you had to be there." Yeah, maybe in your mind, but not everyone 'senses' that same feeling. One's judgement or feeling of security and 'lost causeness' is not nearly the same as everybody elses. Those feelings have nothing to do wtih reality.
This also brings to light another topic, that home runs are overrated. This is what the singles hitters' fans claim. They feel most home runs are hit when the game is decided, which of course is flat out wrong. These people seem to forget that singles can occur when the game is already decided too, and that many singles do nothing in the way of producing a run.
Most HR are NOT meaningless, and that is for ALL players. All those claims are from the clouded reaction of a sports fan.
Quite simply, I checked the logs of every one of Arod's home runs last year as a Yankee(being that is the time he has gotten this reputation). Did he hit a high proportion of his home runs up big or down big? Lets see.
Each home run is logged at the moment of the score. When behind, his home runs are logged as to what his home run made the score. A three run home run down by five, pulls the score within TWO. Then I logged how many pulled within two, three, etc...
Then I logged how many tied the game or took the lead, and this is the obvious BIG CATEGORY of importance. Then I logged HR up by one, two, etc... This is to see how many occured in the blowout games.
HOME RUNS....
Pull within FIVE RUNS.....1
Pull within FOUR RUNS....0
Pull within THREE RUNS...1
Pull within TWO RUNS.....4
Pull within ONE RUN........2
TO TIE OR TAKE THE LEAD......20
HR up by ONE RUN........6
HR up by TWO RUNS.....1
HR up by THREE RUNS...7
HR up by FOUR RUNS.....2
HR up by FIVE RUNS......0
HR up by SIX RUNS........0
HR up by SEVEN RUNS...0
HR up by EIGHT or MORE......3
To say he hits a high proportion of his home runs when the game is already decided is wrong.
-only three home runs in blowout games.
-two more possibly meaningless w/ four run leads
-of his home runs with three run leads, six occured before the 5th inning, two late. I don't think extending a three run lead in the third inning is meaningless at all, in fact it probably seals a victory.
-One down big
MEANINGLESS HOME RUNS...by count, I see SIX meaningless home runs last year, and by the wildest stretch of meaningless, one can possibly make it a total of EIGHT meaningless home runs. Beyond that, no way are there any more.
As with most other sluggers, most of his home runs are hit when the game is FAR FROM DECIDED. A full 20 were hit to tie the game or take the lead.
Like most slugers, most of his home runs are hit in the 1st/2nd inning, because that is the innings they are guaranteed to bat the most. A home run in the first wtih the game tied is quite valuable. A home run hit anytime the game is within a couple of runs always has meaning. If down, it brings the team back in, and if up by a couple and a HR is hit, then it usually seals a win.
Most sluggers do not hit many late inning(8th,9th) home runs to tie or take the lead. They simply aren't provided many guaranteed at bats in those situations(as they are in the first or second inning).
To note, Arod did have THREE dramatic HR to tie or take the lead in the 8th or 9th. One more to pull within one, and another to extend a one run lead. So he did have some of the Roy Hob Dramatic Home Runs.
The one thing is for absolute certain is that he did NOT hit a high proportion in blowout wins as people are seemingly claiming. This is why we must keep accurate tabulations of what really occured, in fact, IT IS WHY!@!
The basic human mind is not capable of recording each moment like it really happened. In recolecction those moments are clouded by inaccuracies....inaccuracies that stem from emotional bias, anger, or joy. What ends up happening are overblown claims resulting from the emotional accounts, and fans are quite emotional.
Some say, "yeah but even though we were up by only two, the lead 'seemed' larger and you had to be there." Yeah, maybe in your mind, but not everyone 'senses' that same feeling. One's judgement or feeling of security and 'lost causeness' is not nearly the same as everybody elses. Those feelings have nothing to do wtih reality.
This also brings to light another topic, that home runs are overrated. This is what the singles hitters' fans claim. They feel most home runs are hit when the game is decided, which of course is flat out wrong. These people seem to forget that singles can occur when the game is already decided too, and that many singles do nothing in the way of producing a run.
Most HR are NOT meaningless, and that is for ALL players. All those claims are from the clouded reaction of a sports fan.
0
Comments
That said - there is a lot of data/research out there that basically suggests a lot of 'clutch' hitting may simply be a) untrue or b) a random walk on the bell curve. [e.g. within one or two standard deviations of the mean]
Ortiz hit six 8th or 9th inning home runs last year to tie or take the lead. By the amount of coverage it got, most people probably though he had about 15. Arod had three of his own, yet by the amount of bashing it seems like he never did it. I haven't checked yet, but I'm pretty positive that six by Ortiz will be his best year of his career.
In 2004 Ortiz had TWO of the Roy Hobbs HR
In 2003 Ortiz had THREE of the Roy Hobbs HR (8th inning or later to tie or take lead)
I never went through all of Arod's year to see how many he has, and by looking quickly at the breakdwon of Ortiz's HR log, it will look very similar to Arod's. This is by estimation and eyeballing it, but it sure looks the same.
Another thing about "clutch"- timing is everything. I can't really think of a situation that could happen in the first inning that could be considered "clutch". To me, "Clutch" means the game is on the line, and the outcome of this play will greatly have an impact one way or the other who wins.
The talk is more toward meaningfull and meaningless home runs. Seems most are saying Arod has mostly meaningless home runs, and a first inning home run with the game tied is far from meaningless. I can't see how people can say Arod has his damage in meaningless situations.
Players just don't get into that 'clutch' late innings situations as much as we like to think, mainly because it all depends where the lineup falls when that situation occurs.
As with post season, the more late inning clutch at bats a player gets, the more it evens out to his stats. It is possible some can do it to a small degree better than most, but it is a very small degree. That is a different debate.
I wanted to focus on a claim where HR are meaningless, or a specific players HR are meaningless, and people's recolecction of clutch home runs.
It would seem to me that so many people who see him day in and day out cant all be wrong. When you watch winners year after year you get a feel for who has it and who doesnt. Hitting a home run to tie or take the lead in the first or second inning is not by any means a clutch situation. This is where myself and many others have the problem with him.
I also agree with MantleMarisFordBerra regarding what is clutch. You do not have to hit a home run to be clutch. There are definately many other aspects of the game that can be considered clutch. An example is Arod on defense. I have noticed several times that his defense can get shaky when its a big game.
There is something that gets in his head, and it shows on the field. It shows not only in his play but in his mannerism. He has had to talk to a mental coach 7 days a week, 365 days a year for 10 years now. I know many athletes use this, particularly baseball players and golfers, and they certainly have their merits. I would never denie that. But honestly, do you really need someone to pat you on the back and tell you how great you are, good job, think positive, etc. EVERY day ? That is definately something that cant be overlooked. He must be very fragile to have that need, and I think it shows on the field when crunch time hits.
-- Yogi Berra
Arod himself hit three big home runs last year. David Ortiz hit 6. By the way both those guys are portrayed, one would think Ortiz hit 20 and Arod 0.
In fact, Ortiz had only FIVE such occasions in 2003-04 combined. If you look at all sluggers HR, they will breakdwon much the way Arod's do, with the predominate amount occuring in the first couple of innings. If you have a problem with Arod hitting most of his home runs in the first couple of innings, then you must have a problem with every single slugger in the league, as they do the same thing.
No doubt that other hits besides HR are clutch, but again, the sample is so small in those situations that it can't be used to draw any meaningful conclusions. Not to mention defining clutch. How one preceives a situation is not the same as another.
Then you have to look at EVERY single season, not just one or two. One or two seasons a player can show great late inning clutch, then the next two he can be equally as bad, and in the end it tends to even out.
ANd YES, most fans do fall prey to this. The bad sticks, and the good is forgotten. Bad happens more often to any hitter than good.
I always remember this in relation to teaching....one negative demeaning thing said to a child outweighs the 50 positives things that are said.
Everyone always said that Sammy Sosa always struck out with a man on third, and in reality it just didn't happen the amount of times as claimed, not to mention seemingly forgetting the times he did come through.
Hurt lasts longer, plain and simple.
I completely agree that those numbers wouldnt be the same if you went further back and looked at other seasons. I also agree that most sluggers numbers would look the same if compared and broken down as you did with Arods.
Arod may be getting a tough deal here in NY, but hey, when you widely considered and referred to as the BEST player in the game and one of the all time greats it just comes with the territory. It may not be fair, but until he wins a few down the stretch in a big time fashion, then procedes to tear it up in the playoffs he will be looked at the way he is. Right now he is not instilling any confidence in his ability to get it done in the " big spot " and I think it is with good reason.
Nobody is saying the guy is garbage, but if asked I think most people would pick several other guys they would rather see at the plate come crunch time.
Either way, it is nice to have a civil debate or discussion without getting into a war of name calling and bashing going back and forth. Thanks for the post !
-- Yogi Berra
I personally don't like his greediness and the BS he spews(as well as many other players. Giambi seems to get a pass for some odd reason), but I want to be fair and show that it is inaccurate to say that his offensive contributions are primarily done when the game is already decided.
-- Yogi Berra
<< <i>One thing you are dead on about is the BS he spews. I have never seen an athlete whose words and actions seem so contrived. >>
I'd like to know what BS you claim he spews.
He's his harshest critic, and takes all the (undue) criticism of the unrealistic NY fans squarely on his shoulders. He's the epitome of a hard working baseball player, first one in the gym each morning, multiple MVP candidate. If there's anyone in baseball I'd want kids to look up to, it would be Arod (Pujols would be the other).
As far as his greed, please, please point me to the one person on this earth who would look $252 million and say no? Please point them out to me so I can meet them and call them a fool to their faces.
To bash Arod because he's 'greedy' making $25 million a year is a desperate attempt at bringing down one of the all time great players of this game.
In regards to bri's comment:
<< <i>Skin, very good breakdown. Maybe I overlooked something in your analysis, but did you happen to notice regarding the 20 he hit to tie or take the lead, when in the game did they occur ? If they happened in the first inning of a 0-0 game, then sure, they help get the team off to a good start, set the tone, etc., but in my eyes at least they dont add up to the same worth as doing it late in the game. >>
Please tell us of the 20 to tie or put in the lead, break that down by inning and what the score was.
For example, did he put them in the lead with a first inning HR only to go 0-fer the rest of the game in which they lost?
<< <i>Please tell me how a home run in the first inning that gives his pitcher the lead not important? How does that not give the pitcher an advantage of more relaxed and more aggressive pitching? >>
Did I say it was more or less important? No..
Since Skin already has the numbers handy, wouldn't you like to know as well? If most of his homers to tie or go in the lead are late in the game, then your arguement of him being clutch becomes more valid.
Edited to add: Also Skin, how many of those HRs you cite overlap?
That was exactly the point I was trying to make. I mentioned the positives of hitting a first inning home run to put the team up 1-0 ( obvious lead, helping the team off to a good start, setting the tone, etc ). Although a productive hit, it is still not " clutch " as one would normally define it. If indeed he does hit that early home run, but the lead changes hand 4 times during the game while he goes 0 fer the rest of the game, then that certainly would lend to the argument regarding him.
There really are so many variables to consider as this goes back and forth. What team was it against ? What point in the season ? Although a big hit or a home run counts the same when you add up the numbers at the end it doesnt mean the same when referring to a guy as clutch. Obviously there are points in a season, or even a game where it is a bigger spot, with more at stake, and more to win or lose.
-- Yogi Berra
No player hits a high number of big hits in the late innings, and if they do for a few seasons, they usually do the complete opposite for the next few, until in the end their late inning clutch numbers are the same as their regular totals. There may be a few guys who sustain it better than others.
I only looked at Arod from last year because that is what the Yankee fans are complainng about his home runs being hti in worthless times. As I showed, only six to eight were worthless.
A game winning home run does have more value than a 1st inning home run because the win expectancy after a game winning home run is, well a pure win. Whereas the win expectancy of a first inning home run certainly changes in the teams favor, but it is still in doubt as we don't know what will happen. Some turn out meaningless, most certainly not... But again, that usually evens out for players(and has a lot to do with how good his team hi).
Game tying or go ahead home runs by inning...
1st....5
2nd...4
3rd...3
4th...3
5th...1
6th...3
7th...0
8th...1
9th...2
This looks pretty much as expected for any player. Obviously the first inning will have the most as that is when the game is tied most often, and when he bats most often. The ninth should be the lowest, especially since his team won't even bat in the ninth inning for about 50 games.
Why does he have only one in the 5th, yet up to three in the sixth, back to zero in the 7th, then up to two in the 9th? It is just randomness.
I didn't do the eventual outcome, as that is out of control of the moment anyway, just like Pujols's clutch home run off Lidge. It was certainly big at the time, but it ended up not mattering. That is out of Pujols's control.
Of course, total HR don't tell the whole story, as a better offensive measure needs to be done. If it is shown to be, over many at bats that he does do bad in the late innings, it can accoutn for something negative towards his value. A season or two worth of at bats in those situations isn't enough. The entire career needs to be looked at. Anyone game for looking? Too much work for me for a small smidge in value.
I do know that Arod's overall numbers are lower from the 7th inning on. That is without regard to score.
OPS innings 1-6 is .991.....with 4400+ at bats
OPS innings 7+ is .886.....with 1,800+ at bats
Could be something. Don't know the situation breakdown though. That is a wide gap in the OPS.
<< <i> Game tying or go ahead home runs by inning...
1st....5
2nd...4
3rd...3
4th...3
5th...1
6th...3
7th...0
8th...1
9th...2 >>
There's a problem with your calculations. That equals 22 when you had posted earlier, "TO TIE OR TAKE THE LEAD......20"
Which is it?
<< <i>I do know that Arod's overall numbers are lower from the 7th inning on. That is without regard to score. >>
I think that's what people have been saying but it all depends on how one defines "clutch". Personally, I believe it means late inning heroics. Yes, a HR is a HR.. However, that's the difference between a good player and a clutch player.
There should only be TWO in each of the third and fourth innings, as opposed to THREE written in. Sorry.
Arod does have the lower numbers in the later innings, but Jeter has the same fall off. Knowing that Jeter has over a 100 point OPS fall off in the late innings, I would take an educated estimate that any late inning clutch measure will have him lower than normal too.
The late inning pressure situation has limited at bats. It tends to even out. Even the most renowned documented clutch hitter with men on and in late inning pressure(Eddie Murray) saw some leveling off as time went on. Through his first 12 years he had a lifetime LIPS w/ runners on base average of .353. Within the next four years that had dropped to the .320's(he had a few down years overall). Can a decline in ability be partly responsible? Maybe, who knows for sure!
This is the puzzle, Murray was an absolute beast with men on, in the late innings, and in the pennant drives, yet he had some poor World Series. But he had some excellent ALCS. Why didn't that carry over? This was a guy voted most feared hitter by the pitchers, and the man you would least want to face with man on and game on the line.
THe post season is a huge sample size problem. In the 1983 WS, he wasn't really healthy the first four games, and did poor. In batting practice before the fifth game, he was fine and some players noted that he would explode. He hit two homers. His overall WS numbers that year aren't great, but it is only five games. Two more games of hotness(healthiness) and it is viewed entirely different.
Arod's actually done well in some of his post seasons. Jeter on the other hand, was the guy who is known as clutch, but the ultimate clutch of POST SEASON AND RISP, Jeter was very bad. Isn't that when the clutch man should really step up, when it is post season with Runners in Scoring Position? Yet Jeter had some very rough stretches there. Does that mean he isn't clutch when it matters most?
Steve