Why did our offense suck?

[istanbultaye]

You provided statistical evidence of "anti-clutch", which coolhandluke121 is espousing.

[homer]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

That stat is not false, it happened.

 

can you tell me where you found this? I find it hard to get splits on team stats.

[FVBrewerFan]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

That stat is not false, it happened.

 

can you tell me where you found this? I find it hard to get splits on team stats.

 

Hate to say it, but the mothership. ESPN.

[homer]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

That stat is not false, it happened.

 

can you tell me where you found this? I find it hard to get splits on team stats.

 

Hate to say it, but the mothership. ESPN.

 

Thanks.

 

Crazy stat of the day:

 

Baltimore had .747 OPS overall (19th) and .824 OPS with RISP (4th)

[tmwiese55]

Remember a few years ago when Baltimore had some kind of ridiculous record in 1 run games? Like it was almost statistically impossible.

[clancyphile]

Eric Thames hit 31 Bombs and only 63 RBI that is very weird stat.

 

Thames usually batted leadoff or second, IIRC.

 

That reduces RBI chances, especially when Villar was slumping.

[FVBrewerFan]

Crazy stat of the day:

 

Baltimore had .747 OPS overall (19th) and .824 OPS with RISP (4th)

 

Wow! They were really good in the clutch.

[coolhandluke121]

 

But there is statistical evidence, I just posted it earlier. Is it due to nerves, changing your approach at the plate, etc.? Or is it just random? I agree THAT part of it can never be proven one way or the other.

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I don't think you read my post carefully. I said there's no statistical evidence of "clutch" hitters, but there is such a thing as an "anti-clutch" hitter. It's not the same thing. There's no statistical evidence of some guys consistently being better hitters in the clutch than they are in other situations (it's all just within the normal expectated random fluctuations in data), but I'm willing to bet there are some guys who are consistently worse because of nerves and other observable variables. "Anti-clutch" has some theoretical backbone, and anecdotal evidence in the form of guys like Thames who look lost under pressure. Clutch does not.

 

As for the evidence you posted about the Brewers, I would say it's exactly the type of evidence I'm suggesting is out there, but you have to be careful to only use it in conjuction with thorough observation of guys like Thames and Weeks who visibly looked like worse hitters in RBI situations. Otherwise you're just measuring more normal randomness in data and making a story out of it.

 

A proper test might be to have scouts watch a random selection of 100's of players in 100's of random at-bats and try to find those who look like significantly different caliber hitters in the clutch. Then see if any of their stats support your observations. Not many of the players would be deemed as clutch, and those that are would probably lack the stats to back it up, because it's just a matter of staying calm and doing what you know how to do - i.e., in general their performance would be about the same as non-clutch situations. But I'm willing to bet players like Weeks and Thames would be flagged and would also have the RISP stats to back up those observations.

[homer]

Crazy stat of the day:

 

Baltimore had .747 OPS overall (19th) and .824 OPS with RISP (4th)

 

Wow! They were really good in the clutch.

 

Which leads to the question...if they were so good in the clutch why can't they do that when not in a clutch situation? Different approach? Luck?

[Brewer Fever]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

A good lineup will have a higher OPS with RISP because the pitcher is in the compromised position. Simply put, if the pitcher can't find the strike zone, a disciplined hitter will wait for his pitch or take the walk the pitcher is giving him. Taking the walk just compromises the pitcher more. Eventually he'll have to throw in the zone. Lineups full of undisciplined hitters will let a pitcher off the hook in these situations by swinging at bad pitches. As the lineup fills out with more ABs from disciplined hitters (Cain, Yelich) and less ABs from the free swingers (Broxton, Perez, Thames), teams will be forced to come in the zone more often which will result in better hitting with RISP. Strikeouts matter. Opposing teams were fully aware that you didn't have to give in versus many of these guys. Even with runners on, we had too many guys who would get themselves out.

[FVBrewerFan]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

A good lineup will have a higher OPS with RISP because the pitcher is in the compromised position. Simply put, if the pitcher can't find the strike zone, a disciplined hitter will wait for his pitch or take the walk the pitcher is giving him. Taking the walk just compromises the pitcher more. Eventually he'll have to throw in the zone. Lineups full of undisciplined hitters will let a pitcher off the hook in these situations by swinging at bad pitches. As the lineup fills out with more ABs from disciplined hitters (Cain, Yelich) and less ABs from the free swingers (Broxton, Perez, Thames), teams will be forced to come in the zone more often which will result in better hitting with RISP. Strikeouts matter. Opposing teams were fully aware that you didn't have to give in versus many of these guys. Even with runners on, we had too many guys who would get themselves out.

 

But as Homer just proved, that's not necessarily true either. Baltimore didn't have a very good line-up but was 4th in RISP.

 

Crazy stat of the day:

 

Baltimore had .747 OPS overall (19th) and .824 OPS with RISP (4th)

 

Wow! They were really good in the clutch.

 

Which leads to the question...if they were so good in the clutch why can't they do that when not in a clutch situation? Different approach? Luck?

 

That's the thing, impossible to prove why it happens. Probably more luck/randomness than anything. But it does seem there has to be something else in play when the spreads are that large one way or another for an entire season in the case of the Brewers/Os.

[Brewer Fever]

One example (Baltimore) doesn't prove anything. You want better results with runners in scoring position? Fill your lineup with disciplined hitters. Something that was severely lacking with the Brewers the last 3 years. My goodness, sometimes you guys make this way too hard. Our offense stunk because it had too many all or nothing hitters.

[FVBrewerFan]

One example (Baltimore) doesn't prove anything. You want better results with runners in scoring position? Fill your lineup with disciplined hitters. Something that was severely lacking with the Brewers the last 3 years. My goodness, sometimes you guys make this way too hard. Our offense stunk because it had too many all or nothing hitters.

 

Yes it does. It proves a team had an entire season where they hit much better w/RISP than they did otherwise. And in the case of the Brewers it was the opposite. Those "all or nothing" hitters were actually very good, expect w/RISP. People keep wanting to dismiss that just because it can't be explained.

[Brewer Fever]

If one anomaly proves something here then yeah I give up. If you're still scratching your head at the mystery of why this offense stunk last year, nothing I or anyone else says is going to help you. The Brewers apparently felt they needed hitters who do a better job getting on base, put the ball in play, maintain discipline in the zone, and flat out strike out less. And they went out and paid a heavy price to add 2 of them. I happen to agree and think they were smart to do so. Their actions tell me that's what they thought was needed to make this offense stink less.

[TJseven7]

Overall slash:

.249/.322/.429

 

RISP slash:

.239/.326/.403

 

Men on:

.256/.332/.437

 

Bases empty:

.245/.315/.424

 

Before I looked at the number I assumed the RISP slash would be terrible compared to the overall, but it was pretty similar other than the 20 point slugging drop. They actually hit better with men on than overall and with bases empty they hit pretty much the same as overall.

 

The problem is mostly second half related. They averaged 4.9 r/g in the first half and 3.9 r/g in the second. Team OPS was also 60 points lower in the second half which was mostly slugging related with a 50 point drop. OBP wasn't that much lower. To me, the fact that the OPS drop was almost completely because of a SLUG drop it seems the hitters tired out. Probably because most of them haven't played a 162 game season before. If it was because of pressing I would have expected the AVG and OBP to drop much more than they did.

 

To the post above. While I dont disagree with the premise these numbers arent strong enough to explain it as a bad ab free swinging K issue because the reality is the the abs with risp weren't that bad. Its like me with villar... i assumed the leadoff 307 obp killed the team but we scored 5.2 runs when he hit leadoff. I also checked 3bb vs 10ks per game and over 3bb under 11ks showed offensive gain but the stats v production was quite a ways off from expected.

[coolhandluke121]

Brewers were 15th in OPS last season, 26th in OPS W/ RISP.

 

A good lineup will have a higher OPS with RISP because the pitcher is in the compromised position.

 

On the other hand, you might often be facing team's better relievers in pressure situations, bringing OPS down. Or maybe you have more RISP when you're facing inferior pitchers in the first place, so it stands to reason that you have better RISP stats simply because more of those opportunities come against bad pitchers. Who knows.

 

To me, hitters are always trying to do their best. It's not like they concentrate more or dig down and decide to hit better just because there are RISP. That doesn't make sense. Every plate appearance counts for a lot, and they're always trying to get on base. They know any at-bat can start a rally, and they only get 3-5 per game in general. It just doesn't make sense that some guys would be "cluch" hitters.

 

It does make sense that being a good contact hitter is more important in those situations, but that doesn't make you a better hitter in the clutch than it does in any other situation. It just gets you more RBI's, which aren't part of your OPS and are just as much a credit to the guy who got in scoring position in the first place, if not more so.

 

I'll buying anti-clutch/nervousness, but I'm not buying clutch. It's not being a better hitter in the clutch, it's being just as good as you normally are despite the pressure. I think the same thing applies to "closers", which is not some kind of special skill or anything. Any talented reliever who performs well under pressure can do it.

[brewcrewdue80]

Maybe Baltimore had better OB guys ahead of their better hitters? Or it's just BA guys. 4 everyday players batted .282 and above with a 5th Bench player(3rd most PA of them)

 

Milwaukee had 0 Batters bat .280 last season. Yelich and Cain should solve a lot of that. No reason they shouldn't bat 1/2 every day they are healthy enough to play all season.

[BilliamdaIII]

Eric Thames hit 31 Bombs and only 63 RBI that is very weird stat.

 

He also asked for mental days off and all but admitted that the pressure of his early success had gotten to him and contributed to prolonged slumps. He bounced back when they fell way behind in the playoff chase and the pressure was off. I like the guy, but that's something to watch going forward.

I always found it interesting he had mental issues and put too much pressure on himself. After being Greek God status in korea, you'd think he'd have no issues with pressure. Maybe it was just that easy for him there.

 

He definitely had an issue with making adjustments once pitchers learned to pitch against him.

[sveumrules]

The 2017 Brewers scored 4.52 runs per game against a BaseRuns projected 4.65 runs per game. That negative 0.13 differential was 5th worst in the league behind the Reds (.14), A's (.14), Padres (.20) & Rays (.29).

 

The common elements do seem to be K% & RISP as Milwaukee, SD, TB & OAK all finished bottom 5 in each category. Reds were actually slightly above league average in both categories so I'm not sure what their excuse was, probably Votto walking too much again.

 

Cain & Yelich should help in both categories as they K less than league average & have performed better with RISP for their careers, +.038 RISP OPS for Yelich & +.033 RISP OPS for Cain. League average for RISP OPS over the last ten seasons has ranged from +.010 to +.024. Both have received the most PAs at the three spot throughout their careers so their opportunities should decrease slightly if they do bat one/two for most of the season.

 

At the same time RISP stats are fluky by their very nature given the limited sample. Even a well rounded, generational hitter like Braun (+.037 career) is a great example. From 2007 to 2011, with Fielder behind him he posted a +.007 RISP OPS. In 2012, his last elite season with no Fielder but other help it was -.026. Then from 2013-2016 a more injured, slightly less potent version of Braun went crazy & put up a +.141 RISP OPS (+.194 for just 2015-16!) before catering last year to the tune of a -.135 mark.

[Ennder]

Because baseball is a high variance sport and a lot of what happens comes down to sequencing. If you look for teams that have bad years with RISP like this, generally speaking even if they have the same basic lineup the next year they don't have that same issue again. Same thing with the great records in 1 run games, those things just aren't sustainable year to year. People hate the answer but a whole lot of the details of baseball just come down to dumb luck in small samples.

[homer]

Because baseball is a high variance sport and a lot of what happens comes down to sequencing. If you look for teams that have bad years with RISP like this, generally speaking even if they have the same basic lineup the next year they don't have that same issue again. Same thing with the great records in 1 run games, those things just aren't sustainable year to year. People hate the answer but a whole lot of the details of baseball just come down to dumb luck in small samples.

 

 

Welcome back, Ennder. Nice to see you post.