SG, now you have a new narrative to hate on Derek Jeter, after he has improved on defense and passed Gehrig and all? Not cool. Also, this spreadsheet must be thrown into East River (or a river of your choice), because I cannot find the “Most clutch player in the Red Sox history (aka history of baseball)” on the top of this list.

More seriously, I was not surprised by Cano, that’s for sure. Jeter kind of surprised me. But what a fluky season Jason Bay has had! This is going to get him some serious money, only for him to regress later. Matsui is clutch God and all, but I thought Melky was more clutch than Speedy Brett!

Also, SG, are the linear weights historical, or are they derived specifically for this season? I.e., is the run value of a single calculated only using this year’s data, or are you calibrating this with historical data?

Oh my God!  A-Rod is a cancer!  He has made Teix unclutch just by hitting after him in the batting order!  The two guys he took under his wing are now unclutch too.  In fact, Cano is now the most unclutch player in baseball!  He’s even infected Jeter just by standing near him in the field for so many years!  He’s now the 2nd most unclutch player in baseball!

I want this cancer off my team at all costs!  Leave him off the post season roster than release his ass in the off-season!

(I did start typing this up in all caps but that was too much even for me).

I understand it’s not necessarily a matter of a player’s skill, but a lot of people seem pretty convinced that Cano, for example, must be doing something different with runners on base in order to generate the kind of RISP numbers he’s put up this year.  I don’t know enough about hitting to know if that’s even plausible.  If he IS doing something different with runners on base, shouldn’t somebody be able to identify specifically what that is?

Also, SG, are the linear weights historical, or are they derived specifically for this season? I.e., is the run value of a single calculated only using this year’s data, or are you calibrating this with historical data?

Tangotiger has a cool run modeler that calculates the linear weights values based on offensive parameters you feed it.  So I use that, inputting league totals to get the proper linear weights.

Markov run modeler.

I think, if anything, it’s the pitcher who does something different, and Cano’s usual approach (hackery) is particularly poorly suited for dealing with that.  Of course, Cano *has* hit into some crappy luck RISP, at least until recently.  So a lot of it is probably just noise.

Jason Bay = grutty; Cano = lazy

If I understand this correctly, it will be biased against leadoff hitters who will, on average, bat in less favorable base states (looking at base/outs would mitigate this since the first PA of the game is always with 0 outs).

[5] - If it was something the pitcher was doing differently, wouldn’t the scouting reports be able to pick that up?  Why wouldn’t they use the same approach in non-RISP situations then?  I think it’s some combination of Cano really being worse in those situations so far (but something that he could probably change) and just dumb-luck which has made his line worse than what it should be.

There’s also possibly a contribution of the defense doing something differently.  Pitcher in the stretch and defense holding runners generally advantage the batter, but perhaps Cano doesn’t see the ball as well when the pitcher is in the stretch and perhaps his batted ball tendencies favor DP positioning.  Of course, if the latter were the case, then you would expect the league to adjust the defensive positioning in non-RISP situations eventually, along the lines that DaPuj suggests fro pitchers.  But maybe it takes a long time for the scouting reports to catch up with reality.

Or maybe it’s all just random.

Jason Bay = <strikethrough>grutty</strikethrough>Canadian; Cano = <strikethrough>lazy</strikethrough>Dominican

Ah crap.  I even meant to hit the preview button.

Jason Bay = <strike>grutty</strike>Canadian; Cano = <strike>lazy</strike>Dominican

No?

Markov Run Modeler.  That sounds like something from on 80’s movie involving the Soviet Military…

Lieutenant: “Comrade Captain!  The Americans have broken through the forward line!”
Captain: “Deply the Markov Run Modeler!”

[7] I had thought of that but then noticed Brian Roberts is one of the players on the +5 side.  I can’t identify all leadoff hitters of the top of my head so…

Cano’s definitely hit into bad-luck.  I remember several LD or FB hit to the wall with runners on that were caught.  What I *don’t* know is if he’s hit into more bad luck than an average batter would in those circumstances.  That would probably take a detailed analysis of the PBP data.  Anybody have a couple of free months?  Anyone?

I’m not asking you to do this SG because it’s probably too much work, but I would like to see A-Rod’s month by month cBR - cnBR.

It seems that Huff doesn’t get a whole lot of hits when men aren’t on base.

Does anyone recall yesterday I quoted a piece out of an article penned by John Kruk (his name was on it, I’m not sure if he’s litereate), where the point of the article was to point out weaknesses in playoff teams?  Pete Abe rebutted Kruk’s “arguments” today on the Yankee rotation.  Check it out; both amusing and (generally) correct.  I like in particular that he closed with this:

Friends don’t let friends drive drunk. And ESPN.com should not let John Kruk write for them.

Thanks for calling attention to that, Mike K.  Good to see Pete Abe not being a tool.  One thing he mentioned that I hadn’t realized (but maybe I’m not paying enough attention)...

Girardi says he plans on starting Joba in the PS.  Really?  What if he lays another egg tonight?  I was under the impression he was on the fence for even a bullpen slot, but maybe sometimes I mistake RLYW consensus opinion for reality.

Papi… surely he rated a bit in some past seasons. We’ll always have Paris.

As for Bay, holy crap! Hopefully the Sox see these numbers before they go out and bungle Bay while futilely trying to sign Holliday.

[16] NJ.com:

“He needs to declare himself,” general manager Brian Cashman told The Record this week, saying there were no assumptions about certain October roster spots. “He might not realize it, but he’s in a competition with any number of guys to take the ball,” Cashman said.

After Chamberlain gave up seven runs in three innings Sunday at Seattle, manager Joe Girardi admitted that the right-hander “has got to step it up. Joba needs to pitch better, and he knows that.” Over his last five starts, Chamberlain has pitched just 16 innings, with 14 earned runs (7.87 ERA) and 23 hits allowed.

[15] Mike K - Kruk got ripped by just about every Yankee blogger yesterday.  One has to assume ESPN has an editing department.  Assuming that, you’d think they might want to exercise that department’s function.  Especially on someone who’s analytical “skill set” is little more than loud, frothing-at-the-mouth opinions with very little basis in reality.

Related topic: isn’t ESPN “Boston” a bit redundant?

[16 & 18]  Yeah, I think there are a lot of facets to it.  I think Joba (and Gaudin who seems to be the other candidate right now) will each get two more starts.  I think if both pitch well, Joba starts game 4.  If one pitches well and the other doesn’t, the one who pitches well is in the rotation and the other in the bullpen.  If both pitch poorly…we’ll just hope it is 3-0 Yanks in the series by that point, okay?

But Joba’s been a starter the whole year, and if he still has a shot at starting there, sure, tell the press he’s starting.  Why not?  It isn’t a lie, and projecting confidence is a good thing.  As long as Joe makes sure Joba understands he has to *deserve* that spot.

[19] You’d think they would want to edit him wouldn’t you?  Or at least, not make him the front-page story on the MLB section.  But, as you noted ESPN “Boston” is redundant, and the article criticized every team EXCEPT for Boston, so…

The majority of people who read ESPN.com probably saw that Kruk thing and were like, “Now here’s a fella who GETS it!”

Sad but true.

Aaaaaaaaaaand. The absolute best part of that kruk thing is that the dipwad at Was Watching pasted essentially the whole article, (not really sure how bloggers get away with doing that) and then said, “Funny, wasn’t it just about six weeks ago where everyone was saying that the Red Sox starting pitching was a mess and the Yankees were steam-rolling their way towards a ring? Things can change pretty quickly, I guess…” as if Kruk had made some real good points.

Gah.

[20] I think the words that Cashman and Girardi used were to dispute Joba’s claim that he had been pitching very well of late, and that it was “one or two pitches” that was distorting his overall line. Clearly they disagree with that self-assessment by Joba, and they let it be known publicly. And I agree with this. Their handling of Joba is proof enough that they believe long-term, they think really, really highly of him. But in the short term, winning games is the priority, and if Joba cannot let his performance dictate that he deserves a roster spot in the post-season, then he will not find a spot in the post-season roster.

From Cashman’s words, it seems to me that he is not certain that Joba is aware of this, and just wanted to reiterate that point.

Well here’s how some people still overvalue the bullpen.  A commentator on Neyer’s blog responding to an entry about how the Phillies should set up their bullpen for the playoffs (I don’t normally read the comments but there were only three of them):

I would much prefer Hamels as the closer, think he’d be terrific! Just for the playoffs, of course, then get a closer over the offseason if Lidge is deemed unacceptable. In-season Hamels is most valuable as a starter….

“Joba’s claim that he had been pitching very well of late, and that it was “one or two pitches” that was distorting his overall line”

I disagree that Joba made that a claim.

s/a //.

If he IS doing something different with runners on base, shouldn’t somebody be able to identify specifically what that is?

[3]I’m going to see if the specific splits give us any more information that may be helpful.

If I understand this correctly, it will be biased against leadoff hitters who will, on average, bat in less favorable base states (looking at base/outs would mitigate this since the first PA of the game is always with 0 outs).

[7]Not really, because it’s based on the actual base states that the batter is presented with.  I suppose you could say that Jeter will have a smaller sample size of run producting base states due to who hits in front of him, which would magnify any poor performance.

Cano’s definitely hit into bad-luck.  I remember several LD or FB hit to the wall with runners on that were caught.  What I *don’t* know is if he’s hit into more bad luck than an average batter would in those circumstances.

[13]If we are willing to at least consider the fact that Cano’s 2008 was in large part a product of bad luck, it doesn’t take a huge leap to think that in a smaller sample of PAs with runners on this year he’s suffering from the same thing.

I’m not asking you to do this SG because it’s probably too much work, but I would like to see A-Rod’s month by month cBR - cnBR.

[14]Actually, the spreadsheet is designed to let me use selective end dates so that shouldn’t be too hard to calculate.

As for Bay, holy crap! Hopefully the Sox see these numbers before they go out and bungle Bay while futilely trying to sign Holliday.

[17]The thing is, this isn’t necessarily indicative of Bay having some kind of innate skill with runners on, so it’s not necessarily a good idea to consider these numbers when looking at re-signing someone.

It would be cool to look at the location of pitches Cano put in play w/RISP vs w/o.  And even more his pull tendency as indicated by opposite-field or not.

[26]  I remember when I first read/heard it I took it as him saying he was *throwing* well of late.  That is, previously he didn’t have good action on his his pitches, and his velocity was down as well, and due to a change in mechanics he felt he was throwing the ball better. 

But I thought he couched that by saying he needed to make better pitches.  E.g. pitch selection was poor based on count, location (where he chose to throw at as opposed to missing his location) was poor, etc.  IOW, he just had to make better decisions on the mound.  It’s been so dissected, only snippets reported, etc. since then I’m not sure what he was really saying any more. 

So it’s anywhere from he’s delusional about how he’s pitching and is a head case (better story) to he’s very analytical about his problems and is willing to step back and put it in perspective (bad story).  Probably somewhere in between.

SG, if you find yourself having trouble coming up with, “this game is important because” taglines for the weekend…Pete Abe quotes David Ortiz (on the Sox breaking out the champegne this week-end):

“Oh, we will … hopefully,” David Ortiz told Ian Browne of MLB.com. “So we don’t have to get our clubhouse dirty. Oh, we have to. Of course. We have to roll like that. That’s how we do it.”

Sox magic number is 3.  If Yanks sweep Texas only has to win one.  Sox not celebrating in Yankees’ clubhouse: important!

“only snippets reported”

I’ve seen the full transcript posted in RAB comments, will try to dig it up.

If Yanks sweep Texas only has to win one.  Sox not celebrating in Yankees’ clubhouse: important!

More importantly, if the Yankees sweep Boston has to watch them celebrate the division title.

[33]  Good point.  So if Yanks win the first two would Sunday be most important game of the decade, or of all time?

  So if Yanks win the first two would Sunday be most important game of the decade, or of all time?

Obviously we need to get there, but if it happens I think it will be the most important game of the millenium at the very least.

Jim Kaat on OTL talking about Joba.

but if it happens I think it will be the most important game of the millenium at the very least.

We should see if they can move the Giants/KC game to 4:15…

Google doesn’t do a great job indexing the comments at RAB.
But here is a transcript:

“Jones: Are you disappointed today?
Joba: Oh, yeah, I mean, I let my teammates down; uh, it’s pretty much embarrassing, you know, in what I did, you know, not being able to pick my team up; we’re trying to get out of here with a series win, so, you know, that’s the frustrating part–letting my teammates down.
Jones: What wasn’t working?
Joba: Uh, actually, it was all working, um, surprisingly; um, you know, all the sequences; just a couple of pitches–he, uh, that ball came back up the middle to, uh, to Griffey, and he put a good swing in, you know, just, um, that was, um, that was one I wanted back.
Jones: You say it was all working, but you give up seven runs; how does that work in your mind?
Joba: Just certain pi–i mean, just certain pitches, I mean, you take away two pitches, you know, and that may be one run or two runs, so… you know, but the long and short of it is, you know, going out and trying to help this team win and, you know, letting them down is frustrating.
Jones: Joe talked before the game about wanting to see you out there so you could factor into a win, which would be five innings, of course; do you look at this as a step back? You were only able to go the three.
Joba: Um, no, you take a positive out of everything; um, you know, it’s gonna take a lot more than this to, uh, get me down and to, uh, you know, to beat myself up; I know I’ve still got work to do and we’ve got a a long ways to go so you’ve gotta just get back out there and, you know, look at what you did this day and try to take from it and build on your next one and, uh, just do the things you need to do to be successful.
Jones: Two starts left; what do you have to do to be ready for October?
Joba: Uh, just, you know, just better sequences, um just–maybe reading a little–swings better, but, you know, like I said, delivery’s a lot better, so we just gotta continue to make those pitches.
Unidentified Reporter: Joba, you said you want to take a positive out of everything; what’s the positive you take from today?
Joba: Um, my delivery was great; um, I threw some great changeups, um, you know, my slider velocity was great, my fastball velocity was more consistent, and, you know, like I said, just those couple pitches, so, uh, it’s a great… not saying great, you know, in my delivery form, you know, but we’ve still got a lot of work to do.
Reporter: In the last month and a half ago you haven’t pitched like you’re capable of; is that something that you’re concerned about yourself?
Joba: No, uh, it’s going to take a lot more than this to get my confidence level down, I’ll tell you that much, you know, you can kick me as much as you want but I’m going to come back fighting every time, so, you know, that’s what I’m gonna do, that’s the way I live this life, that’s the way I play this game of baseball, so, it’s gonna take a lot more than this and I’d be letting my teammates down if I didn’t.
Reporter: No, not really asking about your confidence, but more, how you’re pitching.
Joba: No, I’m fine, man. Yeah. I’m fine.”

I’m hearing a claim that his secondary pitches were good and his fastball velocity was more consistent - not that his command/control were where they should be, or that he was mixing pitches well or keeping the hitter deceived about what was coming.  He says his performance was embarrassing and that he still has a long way to go in getting back to form.  Maybe it wasn’t sufficiently grovelly for some.

Girardi says he plans on starting Joba in the PS.  Really?

Yes, really.  But not in round one, assuming that the Yankees do secure the right to pick the series with the extra off day.  They’ve been making that pretty clear for several weeks now.

From Cashman’s words, it seems to me that he is not certain that Joba is aware of this, and just wanted to reiterate that point.

I think that Cashman is in a position to be as certain as he needs to be about what his players are and are not aware of.  I also think that Cashman would take the opportunity to do any necessary clarifying or reiterating directly to the player(s) in need of said clarification or reiteration.  Consequently, I believe that it is best to interpret what Cashman says to the press as being intended for the press.

I think that Cashman is in a position to be as certain as he needs to be about what his players are and are not aware of.  I also think that Cashman would take the opportunity to do any necessary clarifying or reiterating directly to the player(s) in need of said clarification or reiteration.  Consequently, I believe that it is best to interpret what Cashman says to the press as being intended for the press.

I am not sure what the phrase “intended for the press” really means. Does it mean “it is NOT intended for Joba”?

Here is what Cashman said:

”He might not realize it, but he’s in a competition with any number of guys to take the ball,” Cashman said.

I see no ambiguity in this statement. We don’t know the personality of these players; what if Joba is very stubborn and Cashman and Girardi have had a tough time getting him to understand what is at stake in their private conversations? Cashman has every reason to defend Joba in front of the press as a GM (something of the variety of “We are not concerned, he will pitch for us in the post-season”), and he decided to send a message to him through the media. And I don’t think he is BSing. So I think it is perfectly logical to infer that he meant everything he said.

“He might not realize it”

“I see no ambiguity in this statement”

“Might” is per se conditional.  E.g..

“So I think it is perfectly logical to infer that he meant everything he said.”

What?  You have an argument that x is possible, then you say not not x, then you say therefore x.  That might be logical, but it’s not the logic I was taught in school.

[17]The thing is, this isn’t necessarily indicative of Bay having some kind of innate skill with runners on, so it’s not necessarily a good idea to consider these numbers when looking at re-signing someone.

If the numbers aren’t indicative of a skill, then are they just random curiosities?

If the numbers aren’t indicative of a skill, then are they just random curiosities?

Sometimes they are also called luck.

“If the numbers aren’t indicative of a skill”

I suspect e.g. Cano is low on this for his career, which suggests an anti-skill.  Anti-clutch makes some sense to me, but it’s harder to see positive clutch - if player P hits better with a guy on second, why doesn’t he hit better without the guy on second?  Maybe with the bases empty he always swings for the fences or something, but that assumes poor coaching.