Is pressure a factor for Gibson? Or is he clutch?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Check out the stats in the post above this.

 

One pitcher does not a trend make, but it might explain why Santana is considered good at his job, and Gibson is still a question mark.

 

It is amazing how fast some of you get these answers! Impressive.

[DaveW]

 

One pitcher does not a trend make, but it might explain why Santana is considered good at his job, and Gibson is still a question mark.

 

It is amazing how fast some of you get these answers! Impressive.

I added Hughes as well, looks like Pelfrey is another guy who struggles in medium/high leverage situations (shocking! I know), but his wOBA difference is about .13

 

I will look up some more data in a bit.

[DaveW]

Diving deeper into the numbers for Gibson (Career)

 

Low Leverage: 140 k, 57 BB, 13 HRin 190 IP

 

Medium/High Leverage: 132k, 83 BB, 24 in 228 IP

[DaveW]

Fun stat on Perkins career numbers:

 

High leverage: .292 wOBA

Low/Medium: .321 wOBA

 

This is why he is a great closer.

[Linus]

This an interesting tangent. Jack Morris had pedestrian stats in certain cases but was considered clutch when it counted. Perhaps what is being discovered is that equal stats aren't necessarily equal

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Fun stat on Perkins career numbers:

 

High leverage: .292 wOBA

Low/Medium: .321 wOBA

 

This is why he is a great closer.

50% of Perkins career innings so far came prior to 2011, when he was a starter or low-leverage reliever.  A full 25% of his low-leverage PA came in 2008 alone, when he had an awful .403 wOBA in such situations.

 

Since 2011 when he became a late-inning reliever, his low leverage wOBA has been roughly equal or lower than his medium/high leverage wOBA every year except 2013 when he crazy excelled at high leverage (.228 wOBA).

[REPETE]

 

Ervin Santana career numbers:
Low leverage: .323 wOBA

Medium/high leverage: .317 wOBA

 

His xFIP is neraly identical as well

 

Hughes Career numbers:

Low Leverage: .325

Medium/High: .318

 

Lower xFIP in medium/high leverage as well.

 

(FYI Gibsons career numbers are in line with his 2015 numbers, his wOBA jumps 40 points in medium/high leverage)

I'm not quite sure this is all equal. Gibson is on his 2nd year.  The other guys all have much longer careers/stats. But Gibson is what he is.  He's not a #1, any may never even be a #2.  He's a guy that'll go out, pitch lights out some nights, and get shelled others.  

​Regardless, as to the question of "should he be starting Game 163?"  IMHO, he's no worse or better than anyone else.  Santana's out, Pelfrey is Pelfrey, Milone is suddenly "Mayday Milone", and Hughes can't top 90 on the gun (which spells doom in NY where his flyballs turn into HRs).  Out of this mess, I believe Gibson gives the Twins just as good (or bad) a chance to win as anyone else in one game.  

[Mike Sixel]

 

This an interesting tangent. Jack Morris had pedestrian stats in certain cases but was considered clutch when it counted. Perhaps what is being discovered is that equal stats aren't necessarily equal

 

Let's not let this devolve into a Morris discussion, there are millions of web pages on just how clutch he was or was not......

[Otto von Ballpark]

For the record, Gibson is currently in line to start game 162, not the wild card game.  Might still be very important for the Twins, although it could be against KC's scrubs.

 

A potential game 163 tiebreaker would currently be Pelfrey on normal rest, and the wild card game could be either Pelfrey (assuming no tiebreaker) and/or Duffey.

[sane]

I'm pretty convinced that Gibson doesn't have that "it factor" or bulldog mentality that a good pitcher needs. He looks scared out there when things aren't going perfectly for him.

After whining about the lack of empirical evidence regarding Gibson's pressure issues, I am going to change sides.

I have coached high school and youth baseball for xxx years, and (with no other evidence) I have relied on my own judgement, based on reading a player's eyes.

I see the same thing in Gibson's eyes as does "bluechipper". Gibson needs to disguise whatever is making him look like a "deer in the headlights" while pitching. It does not inspire confidence in his teammates or anyone else. If one of my players had that look of doom in his eyes, I would send him home to his parents before he started crying and before we lose the game.

[jimbo92107]

Gibson had 31 starts and 179 innings last year which was an increase of 27 innings from 2013.  He's also had 31 starts in 2015, and while his innings have only increase by 9, he has thrown 3131 pitches this year compared to only 2800 last year.  That's like adding 3-4 extra starts for him. 

 

I'm not into babying pitchers, but I would expect Gibson's season long consistency to even out once his year-to-year workload evens out.

 

On a slight side note, people have been crediting Gibson for being an effective sinkerballer since he was drafted, but his slider and change up are actually rated much better.  I think if he used those pitches more he'd get more swings and misses and cut down on his number of pitches.  I know some argue that putting the ball in play is the most efficient way to cut down on pitches, but it seems to me too many batters are able to consistently foul off borderline sinkers that the contact route is actually more detrimental to pitch counts.  Any year you search, there is an undeniably high correlation between pitchers with high inning totals and high strikeout totals.

This is a very interesting topic. If Gibson's slider and change are underused, that could be just the thing he needs for early innings, when he is more likely to over-throw his sinker.

 

As for pressure, that's a slippery one. Gibson's expression on the mound is steely determination. He has excellent balance and poise, so his command should be pretty reliable. I'm fine with either Gibson or Duffey in a wild card game. Those are the two best options. I'd still pick Gibson, based on experience.

 

The Twins' patchwork rotation has done a remarkable job keeping the team afloat. First prize for milk carton and duct tape boats. Unfortunately, most playoff teams have more than two healthy starting pitchers, so the Twins probably can't go much farther than the wildcard game anyway. Making it this far has been pretty impressive.

[Mike Sixel]

It's hard to believe he could get this far in his career, and be a fraidy cat......

[Ex-Iowegian]

Maybe I missed it, but other than this year, when has Gibson been in a pressure filled run of games where the Twins were trying to make the play-offs? High leverage doesn't get much higher than that. Just my opinion, but this may be the first time we have seen him in those situations. And it doesn't appear that he has changed from his norm much, if at all.

[ashbury]

It's hard to believe he could get this far in his career, and be a fraidy cat......

Indeed. There's little question in my mind that at the high school level, there are plenty of chokers and a handful of clutch players. But the grind of the professional life is such that chokers find themselves out of jobs pretty quickly, and most players who make the Show handle the ups and downs adequately.

 

And why do I think this? Because decades of efforts to find statistical evidence of clutchness in its various guises have turned up empty. Batting average leaders in one year tend with a certain degree of reliability to be the leaders the next year too; ditto for ERA. But measures of clutchness that separate players are far less likely to carry over to the next season; players gain and lose their ability to perform in the clutch seemingly at random. At least, that is my impression of the studies (and meta-studies) I've seen.

[Mike Sixel]

I'm not arguing that no pros have trouble with pressure......but it is on a scale, not black and white.

[bluechipper]

It's a lot easier to have confidence when you're facing guys your own age in the minors, but when your best stuff and talent is just on par with the hitter's, that's when you have to have self confidence and trust your stuff.

[sane]

It's hard to believe he could get this far in his career, and be a fraidy cat......

I'm not accusing Gibson of that, but he has a look of uncertainty that may or may not reflect his actual feelings.

[Kwak]

The premise of this thread implies that Thursday's game was "high leverage" and previous games were not "high leverage".  I reject that implication.  A strong case could be made that the games in May were more important because that is the time when the Twins were winning consistently and raised their status from "cellar dweller" to "contender"--and that maintaining the winning [momentum] was most important.  Cleveland isn't the competition for Twins for the WC--they are chasing the Western division teams.  The games were "higher leverage" from Cleveland's perspective than the Twins.  Every loss by the Twins is bad--but each game counts only as "one" as opposed to a game against Houston which counted as "two".

 

Gibson stunk--but to imply it was cause by the relative importance of the game is unfounded.  Gibson has had bad games (and good ones).  Gibson's problems are more likely to occur from his reliance on "hitting bats" rather than on strikeouts.  Occasionally balls in play find holes.  Kipnis's HR is similar to most of Dozier's HRs in the first inning of games--a "get-me-over" fast by a pitcher trying to establish a groove gets pounced on by a lead-off batter that has HR power rather than the typical "punch/slash" hitter often found in the lead-off position.  Sometimes a guy gets "surprised" when he isn't properly focused.  Besides, Gibson should not have been deemed " a go-to guy" or "ace" or "stopper" anyway.  His caliber of pitcher gets nailed regularly, irrespective of "leverage value".

[Mike Sixel]

 

I'm not accusing Gibson of that, but he has a look of uncertainty that may or may not reflect his actual feelings.

 

Ya, I don't think YOU are......but others, I'm not so sure.

[DaveW]

 

 

 

And why do I think this? Because decades of efforts to find statistical evidence of clutchness in its various guises have turned up empty.

I think this is certainly the case when it comes to batters, I reject the notion of "clutch" quite a bit in terms of talking about hitters (but it does exist)

 

Pitchers...I think that is a different monster entirely, for example, baseball history has been littered with otherwise good pitchers who frankly fail pretty poorly when they become a closer. There are also a good number of pitchers who pitch poorly under pressure (playoffs etc) as well. I think this is because a pitcher has a lot more control on a game then a single batter,  the mental game is significantly more etc thus the "clutch" "non clutch" "high leverage vs low leverage" has more of an effect. Just my two cents at least.

[twinsnorth49]

Bill James wrote a pretty good article called "Responsive performance by starting pitchers", which he included in Solid Fools Gold, examining pitcher "clutchiness".

 

Lots of room for disagreement in it but he seems to believe it exists to some degree.

[stringer bell]

I find it interesting that Gibson's overall downturn in performance in the second half has been coupled with an increase in strikeouts. It seemed that every comment about Gibson before the All-Star game was that he couldn't sustain his performance without increasing his K's. He'd done precisely that, but he's struggled a lot more while so doing.

[sane]

It seemed that every comment about Gibson before the All-Star game was that he couldn't sustain his performance without increasing his K's. He'd done precisely that, but he's struggled a lot more while so doing"

That is revealing something regarding the validity of the comments.

[DaveW]

 

I find it interesting that Gibson's overall downturn in performance in the second half has been coupled with an increase in strikeouts. It seemed that every comment about Gibson before the All-Star game was that he couldn't sustain his performance without increasing his K's. He'd done precisely that, but he's struggled a lot more while so doing.

His k/9 is up, but that is because he is facing more batters (BB+H= more at bats against him)

 

His K% which is a much more telling stat IMO shows he had a 16.7% K% in the first half, and a 17.6% K% in the 2nd half, its an uptick, but not much. (One more strike out per 101 batters faced)

[Craig Arko]

Seems to be handling it well today.

[Monkeypaws]

This thread is proof that postulating a theory based on a single game is never a good idea.

[h2oface]

Pressure is a factor for everyone. That was an easy question. No studies needed. Pressure is a factor.

[DaveW]

Looked great today no doubt. Helped the twins gave him a big lead, but regardless he looked much more relaxed overall on the mound.

 

Keep it up Gibby!

[diehardtwinsfan]

He shut them down, and in quite the dominating fashion.  I think the pressure thing in baseball is largely a misnomer.  It's hard to find people who played long enough that can consistently outperform their own numbers in pressure situations.

[dougkoebernick]

Based on yesterday's game one would have to concede that there has not been too many pitchers as clutch as Kyle Gibson. He's got the bulldog mentality and the "it" factor. I want that guy in my foxhole. I want him pitching the seventh game of the World Series with a bloody sock and one days rest. He is the man.