Myth Busting: How Has Joe Mauer Fared in the Clutch?

Interesting spin on this topic, which is one I researched myself about 3 years ago, though in a different way.

Now, I'm not saying I wouldn't define Mauer as "clutch," but I would call him "not as clutch as you'd expect for a hitter of his caliber."

My research was based on what I called "RBI percentage."

Pretty simple: how many guys had he driven in divided by how many possible runners had he had to drive in (including himself with a HR).

I compared him to the primary 1B #3 hitter of every team at the time from the prior season and the results for him were decidedly... (drum roll) ... below average.

If I remember correctly he barely slotted in front of Adam Dunn, who barely hit above the Mendoza line that year.

Easy to explain, and also correlates easy to the idea and data you present here: Mauer just doesn't alter his approach in those situations. He'll take your walk and leave it up to the next guy.

I'll always argue I want him to be more aggressive in "clutch" situations. He's too good of a hitter to leave it to the next guy if he gets a hittable pitch.

Granted, that doesn't always happen. But it's my observation and my data and yours, whether you believe it or not, says so (in my opinion).

Good stuff!

Edit: I found my data, it wasn't 1B-man, it was the primary #3 hitter for each team.

Nice job, Andrew.  I think this is an unfair criticism of Mauer.

I would be interested to see his BA/OBP/SLG in the 7th - 9th inning, 3 run or less game, with runners in scoring position.  I know that anytime you have RISP or RISP w/ 2 outs it takes some clutch factor to get those guys in, but that's very different in the 1st inning than in the 9th inning with the game truly on the line.  I also wonder how he fares as compared to other players in the MLB (2004-curent), rather than historically compared to players in the Twins organization.

Also, his postseason OPS is awful...we have to be honest about that.  Sometimes I think the irrational "hate" that Mauer gets is defended by irrational "love".

I'll always argue I want him to be more aggressive in "clutch" situations. He's too good of a hitter to leave it to the next guy if he gets a hittable pitch.

This. This is correct.

Nice job, Andrew.  I think this is an unfair criticism of Mauer.

 

I would be interested to see his BA/OBP/SLG in the 7th - 9th inning, 3 run or less game, with runners in scoring position.  I know that anytime you have RISP or RISP w/ 2 outs it takes some clutch factor to get those guys in, but that's very different in the 1st inning than in the 9th inning with the game truly on the line. 

Literally what you described here are the high leverage situations that I pointed out in the article. So to answer your question he has a .287/.413/.408 slash line in those situations.

This. This is correct.

He ends up walking, and leaves it up to Sano, against a RH pitcher like Kluber, to get the job done.

How do you suppose that ended up?

I don't think that's good baseball. I think a "good hitter" has to be attacking that 2-0 pitch. I don't give a darn if his "clutch" OBP went up.

If that was an isolated incidence, ok. It wasnt.

I will concede that Mauer isn't "clutch" in the sense that he'll take that walk all day long if the pitcher gives it to him.

 

But is it really fair to compare him to the rest of first basemen when RBI are so homerun-driven and Mauer doesn't hit homeruns?

 

We all love home runs but I thought one of the sticking points of the Moneyball era was "don't get out". I'm not dogging home runs but if you gave me a choice of Wade Boggs or Jim Rice, I'd choose the former.

I actually found my data, I recalled incorrectly.

It was a comparison to the primary #3 hitter of each team

Literally what you described here are the high leverage situations that I pointed out in the article. So to answer your question he has a .287/.413/.408 slash line in those situations.

Not trying to open a can of worms here or attack your work.

Unless I am missing it, you reference the phrases "high leverage", "medium leverage", and "low leverage" without ever defining what those actually mean.  I know those definitions aren't exactly static, but some general explanation of what those means could be helpful.

I interpreted this statement, "In his career, Mauer has a career .946 OPS, or a tOPS+ of 127 in 808 plate appearances with two outs and runners in scoring position", as you further proving he is clutch because he hits well with RISP + 2 outs.  I wouldn't call it "clutch" if that happens in the first inning, but would might call it "clutch" if that happens in the 9th inning depending on the situation.

It's not "clutch" if the game is out of reach in either direction.

It is "clutch"if that happens in the 9th inning, we are losing, and he ties the game. 

It's even "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are tied, and it wins the game. 

It's EVEN "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are losing, and and it wins the game.

I guess my point is what defines "clutch"?  What defines low leverage v. medium leverage v. high leverage?

Not trying to open a can of worms here or attack your work.

 

Unless I am missing it, you reference the phrases "high leverage", "medium leverage", and "low leverage" without ever defining what those actually mean.  I know those definitions aren't exactly static, but some general explanation of what those means could be helpful.

 

I interpreted this statement, "In his career, Mauer has a career .946 OPS, or a tOPS+ of 127 in 808 plate appearances with two outs and runners in scoring position", as you further proving he is clutch because he hits well with RISP + 2 outs.  I wouldn't call it "clutch" if that happens in the first inning, but would might call it "clutch" if that happens in the 9th inning depending on the situation.

 

It's not "clutch" if the game is out of reach in either direction.

It is "clutch"if that happens in the 9th inning, we are losing, and he ties the game. 

It's even "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are tied, and it wins the game. 

It's EVEN "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are losing, and and it wins the game.

 

I guess my point is what defines "clutch"?  What defines low leverage v. medium leverage v. high leverage?

The leverage stuff is based on hard numbers. Here's some more info from B-Ref on win expectancy and leverage index. I believe they define a high-leverage situation as anytime the leverage index is 1.5 or higher.

Only 19.2 percent of Mauer's career plate appearances fall into that high leverage bucket, so it's not like they're casting a very wide net.

In a 5-1 game in late innings against a top pitcher, I absolutely want him to take a walk. Every statistical model you would look at would say the same thing. The way you can tell that is that Cleveland didn't intentionally walk Mauer when it was 2-0. They wanted him to swing.

 

Getting Sano up to bring the game within a run is 100% the right call. If he swung away on 2-0 and grounded out, you'd be wasting the opportunity. Putting more guys on base late it always a good idea. If the guy after Mauer doesn't get it done, that's not Mauer's fault.

 

Sometimes the Mauer hate seems to be just for the sake of complaining. 

The score was 0-0 in the bottom of the 3rd. Grossman on base. Kluber on the mound.

And for the record, I don't hate Mauer.

I just don't think he's nearly as valuable as he gets credit for around here. And I personally don't think his approach to hitting is the most effective way to play baseball.

The way you can tell that is, really good hitters don't take 2-0 pitches in situations that call for an extra base hit. And that situation SCREAMED for sitting on a pitch and trying to make the game 2-0. 

Again...if this was an isolated incident, I wouldn't have this opinion. But it's not. 

Not trying to open a can of worms here or attack your work.

 

Unless I am missing it, you reference the phrases "high leverage", "medium leverage", and "low leverage" without ever defining what those actually mean.  I know those definitions aren't exactly static, but some general explanation of what those means could be helpful.

 

I interpreted this statement, "In his career, Mauer has a career .946 OPS, or a tOPS+ of 127 in 808 plate appearances with two outs and runners in scoring position", as you further proving he is clutch because he hits well with RISP + 2 outs.  I wouldn't call it "clutch" if that happens in the first inning, but would might call it "clutch" if that happens in the 9th inning depending on the situation.

 

It's not "clutch" if the game is out of reach in either direction.

It is "clutch"if that happens in the 9th inning, we are losing, and he ties the game. 

It's even "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are tied, and it wins the game. 

It's EVEN "more clutch" if it's in the 9th inning, we are losing, and and it wins the game.

 

I guess my point is what defines "clutch"?  What defines low leverage v. medium leverage v. high leverage?

It mostly depends on how much the game is impacted from a win probability prospective. Obviously there are more volatile changes in win probability late in close games, than there are early in games. So those would be defined as high leverage situations.

Something like 2nd and 3rd with 1 out in a 2 run game in the 2nd might be defined as a medium leverage situation. Still could be defined as a big moment, but won't have as drastic impact as it would late in the game.

While things like Joe batting with 1 out and no one on in the top of the first might be a low leverage situation, since whatever he does (even if its a home run) wont have too big of an impact on the result of the game.

The score was 0-0 in the bottom of the 3rd. Grossman on base. Kluber on the mound.

 

And for the record, I don't hate Mauer.

 

I just don't think he's nearly as valuable as he gets credit for around here. And I personally don't think his approach to hitting is the most effective way to play baseball.

 

The way you can tell that is, really good hitters don't take 2-0 pitches in situations that call for an extra base hit. And that situation SCREAMED for sitting on a pitch and trying to make the game 2-0. 

 

Again...if this was an isolated incident, I wouldn't have this opinion. But it's not. 

Every situation calls for and extra base hit, but they are very hard to do and can't just be created out of thin air. Often times as a hitter you have to take what is given to you, and against a pitcher like Corey Kluber, extra base hits are very rarely given to you.

Every situation calls for and extra base hit, but they are very hard to do and can't just be created out of thin air. Often times as a hitter you have to take what is given to you, and against a pitcher like Corey Kluber, extra base hits are very rarely given to you.

Concur.

Which is why it's important to attempt to take advantage of situations where you have a better than ordinary chance.

Mauer--regarded as a "great hitter" by many here--bats left handed and has a fairly predictable pitch coming at 2-0, against a tough RH hitter. He takes the pitch. Ultimately, he leaves it to Sano, a strikeout prone RH hitter who was, I believe, something like 1 for 20 against Kluber coming into the game, to drive in the run(s).

Very few "great" hitters take that pitch in that situation. For a good reason. It's a bad approach.

In that situation it is probably only a home run that will score Grossman and who is more likely to hit a home run, Mauer or Sano?   Sano is way more likely to and it would be a three run homer vs a less likely two run homer from Mauer in the third inning  Even given the 2-0 count it is pretty much a push. Plus the best odds of scoring a run is having Grossman on 2nd because Sano is still way more likely to get a single or double than either is of hitting a home run.    The only argument for Mauer swinging away is your belief that somehow Mauer is more likely to hit a home run than Sano is to get a hit of any kind.  Its playing the odds because the eye test lies.       Do you give a damn about Mauer's clutch OBP when it has contributed to rallies and close wins because those are not isolated instances either.   He's Wade Boggs.   He's not Mike Schmidt.    Do you value him for being like Boggs (HOFer) or do you find him wanting because he's not Mike Schmidt (also HOFer)?    

Wade Boggs doesn't take that 2-0 pitch.

But you're right about one thing...I don't give a damn about "clutch OBP." 

And BTW since teams abandon right field against Mauer, even a double to right scores Grossman, with two out, easily.

If a batter doesn't make an out, he gives the hitters after him a chance to hit - with a chance to score even more runs since more guys are on base. Since Mauer generally hits #2 or #3, that's a pretty good hitter after him (you could make an argument that a guy hitting 7th should swing away more since the guy after him is likely weaker). He should get some credit for the success of guys who hit after him.

Fun part about evaluating your idea here, is you can actually throw some Run Expectancy stuff at it, and your "chance to score even more runs since more guys are on base" comment is, well, not actually true.

Straight from Tom Tango, and tables for "the chance that a run will score at some point in the inning, from each base/out state":

With 2-outs and a runner on 2B, chance to score a run is: 0.216.

With 2-outs and runners on 1B and 2B, chance to score a run is: 0.222.

Basically, it doesn't affect that chance to score runs at all.

When you take into account Mauer's hitting ability, individually, to that situation you're not going to convince me passing it on to the next guy is the better option. That's what my "I'll always argue I want him to be more aggressive in "clutch" situations. He's too good of a hitter to leave it to the next guy if he gets a hittable pitch" comment gets at.

That's scoring *A* run, meaning 1 single run. What about the chances for scoring multiple runs? That's probably the important one, being that we were down 4 runs in 7th inning at the time.

 

Although I'm not ragging on Mauer here. He was facing LHP Andrew Miller, a walk to bring up RHB Sano is probably just fine.

The AB in question is the bottom of the 3d, vs Kluber.

Down 5-1, against Miller, working a walk is absolutely the right approach.

And for the record, IMO "run expectancy tables" are a pretty bad way to manage a baseball game.   Very few individual situations are exactly the same as the aggregate of thousands of situations.

Mike Trout against Taylor Rogers isn't the same as Adrianza vs Andrew Miller. But a run expectancy table treats them both the same.

P.S. "you're not going to convince me" is a bad way to contribute to a discussion. It ends the inquisitive process and makes it about forcing other people to agree with you.

Don't take it personal I've had this discussion many times. I want my best hitter in that situation to be that best hitter, that's all this is getting at. It's my opinion, and that statement is not meant to discourage any other discussion.