Teixeira: Stats Don’t Tell The Whole Story
Via Bob Klapisch yesterday -
Ask New York Yankee infielders what they thought of Mark Teixeira’s defense in 2009 and you get one of those “are you kidding” smirks. The answer is so obvious to Teixeira’s teammates, they won’t even bother with a long explanation. Alex Rodriguez says, “The guy played at another level,” and leaves it at that.
Only that’s not the last word on Teixeira’s glove, at least not according to Ultimate Zone Rating, a metric used to measure runs saved relative to the average fielder at that position.
Judged by UZR, Teixeira had his best season in 2008, with a 10.7 rating that was No. 1 in the majors. And despite what the Yankees say, UZR practically flunked Teixeira in 2009: He was 16th in the big leagues with a minus 3.6, the second-worst year of his career.
Teixeira repeated an oft-heard complaint among ballplayers and old-school scouts — that when it comes to evaluating talent, nothing replaces an experienced set of eyes.
Numbers, they’ll admit, are helpful because they’re theoretically free of prejudice and human error. But to say 15 first basemen suddenly were better than Teixeira underscores the argument that sabermetrics are blind to the game’s subtleties.
If you wonder which side you belong to, ask yourself: Is baseball art or science? Is it beautiful or just data for the spreadsheet?
You’d be right if you said “both,” but most ballplayers, including Teixeira, reject the notion that UZR and other metrics are better evaluators than those who are on the field.
“Look, if computers could run the game, why bother having general managers?” Teixeira said.
Teixeira admits he’ll miss Johnny Damon and Hideki Matsui, and not just for the usual nostalgic reasons. He says it won’t be easy replacing their late-inning clutch quotient.
But here’s the kicker: Sabermetrics don’t acknowledge a phenomenon known as “clutch.” Derek Jeter’s “intangibles” similarly are dismissed.
“Oh, come on,” Teixeira said. “You can’t say Derek isn’t different than a lot of hitters when the game is on the line. Or that Johnny wasn’t able to put up great at-bats against the toughest closers. Matsui was the same way. He was a monster when it counted.
“Certain players can say to themselves, ‘It’s time to step it up,’ ” Teixeira said, although he knows UZR doesn’t quite get that.
For the record, Damon had a BA/OBP/SLG line of .312/.424/.649 in “Late & Close” situations last season. And, in “High Leverage” situations last year, Damon’s “slash” line was .333/.448/.637 (in 126 PA). How about during innings 7 through 9 of a game in 2009? Damon’s mark was .298/.394/.536 (in 176 PA). Lastly, when Damon faced a relief pitcher for the first time in a game last year, he went .303/.405/.514 (in 206 PA).
So, maybe sabermetrics do acknowledge a phenomenon known as “clutch”? Or, at the least, in the case of Damon last season, they did…
I wonder what Teixeira would say if he were asked about his .614 OPS during World Series play. Is he as “unclutch” as this statistic suggests, or is it simply a combination of small sample size plus randomness of the game of baseball?
There is an argument that Tex is underrated by UZR, however it has nothing to do with clutch or anything else. It has to do with the shortcomings of UZR, especially when concerning a first baseman… something I am sure even the most hardlined sabermetricians would be willing to admit. All UZR does is show the numbers of balls in play, in his zone, that Tex gets to. There are other factors involved in playing 1st base including throwing to 2nd, picking bad throws, and other things. Also, there are complications with what constitutes the 2nd base zone versus the 1st base zone.
These are arguments that could be made to show that UZR underrates Tex. Things such as “clutch” are not good arguments. As obvious as it is to say this… just look at what A-Rod did to disprove “clutchness” and “non-clutchness.”
@ thenewguy:
so his game winning homer vs minny doesnt count? and his huge at bat vs ana wasnt clutch?
he might not have had a ton of hits but the ones he did have were clutch.
i dont see how any yankee fan who has watched this team the past 15 yrs doesnt think there is a thing as clutch.
As far as UZR and 1B go, it depends on what you value in a first basemen. If you value a guy who can cover his share of the hole in right along with guarding the baseline, then you like at UZR. For a guy like Tex, a lot of his defensive value comes with his ability to scoop up and catch bad balls. (Or at least knock them down). This, as far as I know at this time, doesn’t have a statistic.
Jake1 wrote:
If there were such a thing, then the Yankees would never lose a game, using their clutch hitting/pitching and their knowing how to win grittiness to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
@ Raf:
Well-said.
Sabremetrics doesn’t say that clutch-hitting doesn’t exist. What it says is that there’s very little evidence that shows that individual hitters do better than others in what are commonly considered clutch situations, year after year. The number of “clutch-hitters” by that standard is a lot less than fans think there are.
For example, Matsui was very clutch last year, but over his career, his career tOPS+ in high leverage (meaning: his OPS+ in high leverage situations for his whole career as compared to his total OPS+ for all situations) is 101 for his whole career, which means he’s been 1% clutcher than the average hitter in high leverage situations for his career. With two outs and RISP, Hideki’s lifetime OPS is .724 comared to his career total of .852.
And like that.
Was Matsui clutch in the post-season and especially Game 6 of the Series? You bet; nobody ever clutcher.
What studies show is that this effect cannot be shown to persist in the overwhelming majority of players’ careers, regular season or post-.
Anybody clutcher than Bucky Dent in the 7th inning in Boston that sunny October day?
Clutch exists; however, it thus far defies all attempts to measure and quantify it or prove that it is a persistent trait of the huge majority of major league players.
i cant stand majority of these sabermetrics. just like tex said it doesnt take in consideration of the intangibles or the little things that you can see with your eyes. i dont need stats to tell me if someone hits on the clutch or not ill just watch the games.
Another quick example:
Popular perception of Postseason A-Rod before the PS last year: Very unclutchy.
Popular perception of Postseason A-Rod after the PS last year: Very clutchy.
A-Rod’s career stats in the PS after last year’s PS? Almost exactly in line with his total career stats.