LOB/clutch hitting/situational hitting

[Herm]

I need some help, with a personal motive: I have 50 bowls of Real Chili at stake due to a wager with my bro who is convinced the Brewers are a horrible "clutch hitting" team. He based the wager on the Brewers total of runners left on base.

 

I couldn't find team LOB stats anywhere, so I tried this for a reasonable estimate: Hits + walks - runs. That should be pretty close -- it does not take into account HBP, on by error, double plays, caught stealing and I'm sure some other situations but I'd think it would be reasonably close. If there are major flaws in this formula please correct me, or if anyone knows of where to find team LOB #s please point me in that direction.

 

Using MLB.com team stats, I sorted all teams by on base percentage, then looked at the top 5 teams, the Brewers, and the bottom 5.

 

 

Top 5 by OBP - estimate of left on base:

1. Cubs 962

2. Red Sox 969

3. Rangers 930

4. Cards 1008

5. Yankees 908

 

Bottom 5 by OBP - est of LOB:

30. Padres 899

29. Giants 859

28. Royals 842

27. Mariners 890

26. As 885

 

Brewers - 20th in OB:, est of LOB: 833

 

I also checked the teams right above and below Brewers in OBP

19. D Backs - 849

20. Astros - 850

 

 

So that's 12 teams that all have apparently left more runners on than Milwaukee.

As another way to look at it, the Brewers are 15th in the majors in runs scored (right in middle of the pack), while being 20th in hits, 21st in walks, and 20th in OBP (slightly below middle of the pack).

Power seems to be the major variable -- Brewers are 7th in MLB in slugging %, 4th in HR, 4th in doubles, and 10th in triples, so clearly they are a top shelf team in terms of power hitting.

Conclusion: despite a perception of the Brewers not hitting "in the clutch" and not being good situational hitters, their runs scored is a bit better than might be expected because their team power helps overcome a team weakness in OBP

Secondary conclusion: that's a lot of free Chili.

[1992casey]

There's a problem with using LOB as a measure of ineffective clutch hitting. The issue is that good hitting teams will likely have high LOB totals. If a team has a big inning, it still eventually has to end, and chances are that it'll end with runners on base.

[jjfanec]

There's a problem with using LOB as a measure of ineffective clutch hitting. The issue is that good hitting teams will likely have high LOB totals. If a team has a big inning, it still eventually has to end, and chances are that it'll end with runners on base.

That may be true but the stats do seem to show the bottom end teams being the really bad hitting teams dont they? If I am reading correctly the Padres, Giants, Royals, Mariners, and A's are at the bottom and the Cubs, Red Sox, Rangers, Cards, and Yankees are the top teams. So, they do seem to add up. Although, I am slightly confused with what stats are exactly being observed so I could be wrong

 

[Fatter than Joey]

I think you would want to normalize the LOB by runs scored or total baserunners...

 

A DP helps lower the LOB, but certainly is not an optimal offensive result.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

How about doing a similar study on batting average or OPS with RISP? That might be a better indicator.

[1992casey]

The problem with RISP is that it totally ignores any 'clutchness' involved in getting on base with the bases empty.

 

I think that when JohnStumpyPepys ties the perception of lack of clutch hitting to OBP, he's on the right track. I have to qualify my statement by using the word, "perception," though. There's so much statistical noise that has to be weeded out that I wouldn't even know where to start in determining whether clutch hitting is an issue or not.

[endaround]

It depends what the question is. If its to prove that the FSN driven LOB count is stupid measure of offense because good teams will have high LOB total because they get on base soemthing tht Brewers aren't very good at.. If its to measure "clutchiness", well thats different.

[rluzinski]

(LOB is one of those stats that people love to use but don't understand. Generally, higher scoring offenses have the higher LOB, contrary to what Tom H and everyone else suggests. Also, the type of offense matters has well. Like you pointed out, a high SLG, low OBP, like the Brewers, are going to have a lower LOB. That doesn't mean they are better, of course. A team with a .800 BA, .800 OBP and .800 would score a millions runs but have an insanely high number of LOB. Does that make them a bad offense?

 

LOB also rewards teams that ground into double plays and make outs on the basepaths. Does that make any sense?

 

You want to know how efficient a team is at scoring baserunners? Look at the % of them that have scored.

 

# baseruners = TBR = H + BB + HBP + ROE (reached on error) + CI (catchers interference)

 

Score% = (TBR - Runs) / TBR

 

I haven't verified this but I think you will find that high SLG teams will beat out small ball teams easily.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

I haven't verified this but I think you will find that high SLG teams will beat out small ball teams easily.

Tell that to the Minnesota Twins, although, I think a lot of it is luck in their case.

[rluzinski]

What % of their baserunners have the Twins scored?

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm going to buy you a Twins hat, TWR. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Herm]

Suggestions for best source for team data -- I've looked at mlb.com, espn.com, baseball-reference.com and have not found team stats for thing like HBP, GIDP, BA w/RISP, etc.

[sbrylski]

I like Russ's solution, but know that its still not a description of clutch hitting. The problem with your bet is you didn't define (or didn't define properly) what clutch hitting is.

[TheRealMattKain]

Good start, but I'm skeptical of your method. There are too many important factors that you leave out:

1. Your method should deal with percentage left of base not total left on base - otherwise you're unjustly punishing teams that hit well.
Scenario: Brewers get shutout by Dempster and in the process have 3 walks and 3 hits for a total of 6 runners (by your method) left on base. However, they stranded 100% of their runners. The Cubs demolish the Crew and score 13 runs on 20 hits. The Cubs left more on base (7) than the Brewers, but scored more runs and stranded only 35% of their runners. Obviously the Cubs did better in driving in their players despite leaving more on base.

2. Your method counts homeruns as potential baserunners. An at bat that results in a homerun is a hit, but can never result in that player being "on base" after the at bat. I *think* you need to subtract homeruns out of the equation.

3. Your method doesn't take into account if multiple hitters stranded the same runner. Take the follwing scenarios that your method treats the same:
Scenario 1: Gabe Kapler hits a double with 2 outs. Next batter strikes out. Kapler was stranded by one batter (i.e., only one batter missed a chance to bring Kapler in).
Scenario 2: Rickie Weeks gets a lead-off double and then the next three Brewers strikeout. Weeks was actually left on base 3 times by each of the three subsequent batters.

4. Your method doesn't take into consideration what base the stranded runner was on. The follwoing scenarios should be treated very differently since in one case the runner is in scoring position and was stranded (I would think we might want to penalize a team more for this) and in the other the runner was not in scoring position and was stranded:
Scenario 1: Ryan Braun gets lead-off walk. Next three Brewers strikeout.
Scenario 2: Ryan Braun gets lead-off triple. Next three Brewers strikeout. This case seems much worse when talking about clutchiness and stranding runners.

Just some thoughts. I'll have to have a closer look at Rluz's equation.

MK

[GoudaBrew]

This site seems to give LOB per game. And it seems up to date with the other stats they offer.

 

7.1 LOB per game * 115 games played thus far = 816

 

edit: oops link

 

http://www.sbrforum.com/MLB+Betting+Stats.aspx

[TheRealMattKain]

This guy uses the same method as the original poster (he does, however, factor homeruns out of the equation), but determines LOB as a percentage. He has the Brewers ranked below average in LOB% at the All-Star Break:

 

http://reconditebaseball.blogspot.com/2008/07/mlb-lob-data-through-all-star-break.html

[yount19.u]

Ok, all you statheads and math wizs please feel free to correct or upgrade my little attempt at trying to figure out offensive efficiency with men on base. What I did is compared the Brewers' offense to the Cubs' offense. The former generally regarded as inefficient and the latter as efficient.

 

I took the total hits, walks, hbp and ibb for each team and added them together minus the home run total. I then took the number of runs scored minus the home run total and divided it into the first number. The higher the number is, in theory, the more efficient the offense should be. The Brewers came out to be just shy of 30% and the Cubs just shy of 32% -- not much of a difference. Home runs were deducted in order to eliminate the batter that hit them.

 

If men were on base, that will still be counted, but this essentially eliminates the solo shot. I was unable to find stats like reaching on an error or strike out but I'm sure they are not enough to affect the final results much. I am also fully aware that this does not factor in teams that score a lot and leave more men on base as a result of that. This is very rough and probably not a very good measurement, but I was expecting the Cubs to have a much higher percentage than the Brewers.

 

 

(edit: added paragraph divisions --1992)

[Ennder]

You aren't going to be able to show anything useful from one season of data based on two teams. The sample is going to be too small to be really meaningful.