Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Owners Vote to Change Trade Deadline

Sunday Rockpile: Rockies ostrich issues continue

Just in case you're wondering, no, the issue isn't that we don't have enough scrappy bunting guys like David Eckstein.

In breaking down the issues of last night's game, Dave Krieger zeroes in on the major weakness, the fact that the Rockies weren't able to put together any runs after the sixth inning, and were only able to manufacture one significant threat, in the 14th, when three of the first four batters reached safely, but was squashed thanks in large part to a crippling double play inducing groundout by Troy Tulowitzki. To quote Krieger:

In other words, when things got tight, so did the Rocks. Which is pretty much what they did a year ago about this time. They are supposed to be past all that, older now, more mature, more ready to handle the clutch moments.

This isn't just something that's a mirage of being close to the team, either, but instead seems to be a real phenomenon and a problem for the Rockies. Despite having a top five NL offense overall in 2010, the Rockies rank dead last in hitting in high leverage situations so far. In 2009, the offense ranked 9th in the NL in sOPS+ in high leverage situations despite ranking first in total offense.

However, while we recognize this as a problem, coming up with a solution is a little more tricky, as we know what the issue is, we just don't know why. Is the team changing its approach at the plate late in the game? Are they pressing or are they just getting tired? Are they being outmanaged with personnel switches? Or is it just a random blip that will fix itself with time? How much more time can we afford to wait?

Historically, there's zero evidence in numbers to support the commonly held idea that some players are just better in the clutch than others, so this actually would suggest that whatever issues the Rockies are dealing with are fixable. That's a big plus. We just need to see the fix happen, and soon if the Rockies are to reach their full potential.

Comment 40 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

just a quick glossary definition of sOPS+ for those stat newbies around here

OPS+ is the park adjusted OPS (slugging plus on base percentage) rate compared to league average, so a 108 OPS+ means that a player or team is 8% better than the league average. sOPS+ is the same thing, just for a specific split statistic, in this case high leverage at bats. So the Rockies sOPS+ of 24 suggests that they’re hitting is 76% worse than league average in high leverage situations thus far.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 8:56 AM MDT reply actions  

You're cutting an already small sample into an even smaller sample here

But I really understand the sentiment. It may just be a product of being a fan of a certain team, but it feels like the teams that I root for (these days only the Rockies, but in past years also the Broncos) tend to not be able to make the “clutch” plays both early and late in games to either come from behind or pad or create early leads.

I remember a game in the miserable recent years of the Rockies where they were playing the Mets. The Mets had a grand slam or some silliness in the first, and the Rockies started to mount a rally in the following half-inning (I can’t recall if the game was in Colorado or New York), which would have been a big deal. It would have given the beleaguered starter more time to rest in the dugout; it would have given the rest of the team hope that a comeback was possible; it would have changed the outlook of the whole game. But, of course, the next batter grounded into a double play, the rally was quashed, and the Rockies went on to lose. It felt so representative of the team that year – never being able to get the key hit to spark or complete the rally. Even in recent years when the Rockies have been good, I’ve still had that sinking feeling that a rally will be killed by an untimely double play or strikeout.

I’m sure most of this is confirmation bias: I forget all the big hits in wins and focus on the big misses in losses. As a sabermetrically-minded fan, I tend to write most of it off as small-sample nonsense, but it’s hard to fully put it out of my mind.

by controlled_slide on Apr 11, 2010 9:19 AM MDT up reply actions  

while she did dice up the sample size

She did mention that it matches a trend from last year, when we had mostly the same hitters. it could mean something. It might not.

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Apr 11, 2010 9:27 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

If it were just a five game sample, I'd agree,

but at a team level, high leverage situations in 2009 and 2010 have accounted for over 1200 PA’s that we’ve seen a marked decline in performance in high leverage vs. medium and low leverage situations. That’s no longer a small sample at that point.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 9:27 AM MDT up reply actions  

I misread the part about 2009, sorry

But is 1200 PAs a large enough sample for a team? Not that I disagree with the premise (as I stated above) I just wonder what the rule is for team stats.

by controlled_slide on Apr 11, 2010 9:43 AM MDT up reply actions  

I haven't done the math, but my guess is probably not quite

the issue, of course, in that situation would be that you could never then have a sufficient sample before personnel switches muddied your results and are therefore never going to find out whether the observed phenomenon is statistically notable. So if the situation was a real problem that needed a fix, and could be fixed, your stasis in waiting for a sufficient sample would cost the team.

My point would be that MLB contenders don’t really have that luxury of time. Some decisions have to be made before the statistics fully bear them out. I think this would be one of those cases. We have enough of a sample to at least strongly imply that a lack of clutch hitting has effected the team over the last two seasons. The real problem, I see, however, is that it’s not entirely clear what, if any, measures could be taken to fix this.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 9:58 AM MDT up reply actions  

I don't know.

I actually didn’t even think of him being a part of the problem this morning until you brought it up, but clearly he’d be the coach in the crosshairs with this particular issue. Overall the Rockies hitting has been decent, so I’d be hesitant to shake things up too much on the coaching staff, but let’s hope Baylor comes up with a solution to this.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 10:16 AM MDT up reply actions  

In my view this is a huge weakness of SABR

because if clutch hitting doesn’t exist, then how can we “solve” the problem? Just wait for high leverage splits to normalize?

by moomacher on Apr 11, 2010 10:44 AM MDT up reply actions  

yes, and i agree

Although it isn’t really a weakness of sabr – it is a difficult thing to accurately quantify by sabr or traditional metrics accurately. One thing we could look at us P/PA and OSwing% in high leverage situations vs overall splits. Some players may be too patient – some too aggressive

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Apr 11, 2010 11:06 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

There is no problem to solve. It's just bad luck.

My two cents.

The writer formerly known as Jabberwocky
READ and LEARN about the business of baseball at Purple Row Academy
Eschew Obfuscation!

by Jeff Aberle on Apr 11, 2010 1:05 PM MDT up reply actions  

Do you have evidence to support that it's bad luck and not a problem?

My guess is no, that you’re just basing your two cents on something you’ve read at Tango’s blog that says clutch doesn’t exist, based on studies that if they showed anything, they showed that it’s nearly impossible to say for sure one way or the other because you run into the sample issues that we’re talking about above.

Sometimes SABR seems to me to do more to kill inquisitiveness and legitimate baseball research than it does to promote it. If this is more than bad luck, it would be possible for the Rockies to squeeze more wins out of the team than they currently are. Frankly, I would think most Rockies fans would want to optimize the team as much as possible and yet your two cents seems to want to cut the discussion short, without even bothering to look into it.

I don’t mean to be too harsh here, but I do feel that you sometimes take prior SABR research too much to heart without the necessary critical skepticism that promotes further advances in our baseball understanding.

My own two cents is that it’s likely somewhere between purely bad luck and something that’s purely on the heads of the players and coaches. I think that there are probably a couple of things that could be done to improve the performance of the team, notably not change approaches that I think might be getting tinkered with late in the game, and work on concentration/focus drills as I think that’s lagging with certain players as the game goes on. I think a lot of it is luck, however, and we certainly won’t be last in this category as the season goes on, even without any changes made.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 2:19 PM MDT up reply actions  

Well, the .224 BABIP is at least indicative of bad luck/statistical noise.

I don’t particularly like your insinuation either. My primary interest is in optimizing the team, I just don’t believe that the “clutch” thing is as big as a problem as you do. It’s not that I want to quash discussion on optimizing the team, it’s that I feel this is the wrong discussion to be having.

Playing the best players and giving them the high leverage at-bats will improve the Rockies’ performance in high-leverage situations.

The writer formerly known as Jabberwocky
READ and LEARN about the business of baseball at Purple Row Academy
Eschew Obfuscation!

by Jeff Aberle on Apr 11, 2010 3:52 PM MDT up reply actions  

Er, .229 BABIP and .224 OBP, my bad. And yeah, it's 50 PAs, for 2010.

As for the larger sample size of 2009, the Rockies were still a league average offense in high-leverage situations—not too shabby.

Their OBP was .012 worse in HL situations, and SLG was .03 worse (BA .019 worse). Not significant enough for me to call it a trend.

Other teams just happened to have better stats in HL situations relative to their overall performance than the Rockies did. Sorry, I just don’t see it as much of a problem.

The writer formerly known as Jabberwocky
READ and LEARN about the business of baseball at Purple Row Academy
Eschew Obfuscation!

by Jeff Aberle on Apr 11, 2010 4:03 PM MDT up reply actions  

Your numbers make it seem more insignificant than it probably is.

maybe mine are making it seem larger, I’ll grant you that.

If the Rockies got on base at the same rate in high leverage situations as they did in low and medium leverage situations last season, they would have had twenty additional baserunners, or approximately ten more runs. That’s one win in the standings, so maybe not a huge deal, but probably about as much as I think you’ll get from benching Hawpe.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 4:46 PM MDT up reply actions  

..."this is the wrong discussion to be having"

says who? You are the all powerful one who decides which discussions have merit and which do not? This is exactly what I’m trying to say about the way you’re quashing curiosity, not insinuate, and I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear about that. I don’t mean to offend you by it even though I know it’s a direct and somewhat confrontational statement, I’m just saying that you seem to be only validated by your pet projects, and don’t engage discussion elsewhere. If people show interest in other ways the team might be improved, you seem intellectually turned off to them.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 4:36 PM MDT up reply actions  

I argue/debate about the areas I'm informed on. I'm not intellectually turned off from other discussions...

when I’m not as informed on a subject I do my best not to contribute poorly and muddy the waters. Common courtesy really.

With clutch, it’s just a pet peeve of mine to be honest—never liked the massive emphasis placed on it, never will. I’m allowed a hardline stance on a statistical gray area every now and then. So I guess I misspoke. It’s the wrong discussion to be having with me and we’ll leave it at that.

I would love, however, to see more research on the increased value of relievers and PH that improves my understanding of why clubs seem to spend so inefficiently on them. That’s another area that I just can’t understand but am interested in learning about.

The writer formerly known as Jabberwocky
READ and LEARN about the business of baseball at Purple Row Academy
Eschew Obfuscation!

by Jeff Aberle on Apr 11, 2010 5:01 PM MDT up reply actions  

okay, fair enough.

And again, I don’t mean to offend, but you know my style well enough by now to know that I like to be direct about these things. If I don’t agree with the way somebody’s approaching an argument I’ll say as much. In this case, I just felt your initial response was too casually dismissive.

I too would very much like more research, and would like to do more myself if I were capable, on PH’s and relievers, as I really think that we’re missing something rather than clubs on that front. The invisible hand should have long since corrected that if they’re truly as inefficient uses of resources as the stats suggest.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 5:13 PM MDT up reply actions  

Baseball was in the hold of a rather crappy macroculture

for a while. The invisible hand was paralyzed for a long time…

"These are thin mints. I put them in the freezer. My favorites. So good."
--Reds outfielder Adam Dunn, on the girl scout cookies he keeps in his locker

by Resolution on Apr 11, 2010 7:55 PM MDT up reply actions  

and work on concentration/focus drills as I think that’s lagging with certain players as the game goes on.

Not sure if you can answer this (or anyone else for that matter), but how often do managers actually manage the mindset of the players in midgame? Seems like it wouldn’t be too much to just reorient the players toward the situation, their priorities, their training, and the fact that they’re the top 1% of people in their domain. It seems silly to take it for granted that players have maintained 100% focus for 2-3 hours or that what their focusing on isn’t what is ideal.

Whenever I see managers they’re sitting in some corner of the dugout thinking of matchups and bullpen use and pinch hitting etc. Obviously they have to be thinking of these things but do they ever actually do what I mentioned above in-game? Is it happening and just not being shown on TV or talked about much?

"These are thin mints. I put them in the freezer. My favorites. So good."
--Reds outfielder Adam Dunn, on the girl scout cookies he keeps in his locker

by Resolution on Apr 11, 2010 7:48 PM MDT up reply actions  

Sorry this is off topic but...

Can anybody tell me what the Partner Code is for the CBS Fantasy draft so that I can get the half off deal?

Keep sippin' the Rockohol

by Jamie Hollowell on Apr 11, 2010 9:02 AM MDT reply actions  

I got there

But then when it asks for payment, it asks for a Partner Code, not sure where that is located

Keep sippin' the Rockohol

by Jamie Hollowell on Apr 11, 2010 9:05 AM MDT up reply actions  

Oye... I have no idea, I wish Russ was around,

I wanted to steer as far clear of that whole thing as possible, but he set up a league, maybe he knows.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 9:16 AM MDT up reply actions  

Go to

the miscellaneous category and click on the link in one of the league posts.

(Insert historical comment soon.)

Purple Row - Covering all your Rockies needs!
Diplomatic and Military History Book Review - My other blog where I go all historical on you.

by Russ Oates on Apr 11, 2010 9:26 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

Getting ready to head out for my first game of the year!

Excited to watch Ubaldo for the first time! Hope we win the rubber match! GO ROCKIES!

"Ninety feet between a hot dog and my mouth is too far" - Maria M (SDCAT09 is awesome for coming up with this fake quote for me!)

My Photography Website

My Photography on Facebook

by hotdoglady on Apr 11, 2010 9:41 AM MDT reply actions  

I might see you there! I'm trying to get tickets

GO ROCKIES!!!!!

Troy Tulowitzki - Best SS in the MLB - 2010 MVP
Brad Hawpe - Will prove the doubters wrong
Todd Helton - Time for his ring to come true
PLAY BALL!!!

by SDcat09 on Apr 11, 2010 11:28 AM MDT up reply actions  

is anyone else ready for Dex to give up the swtich hitting?

yeah it would be awesome if he was a capable switch hitter but i dont think we have the time to allow him to develop his LHB while in the majors.

So far this year hes LHB: .000/.000/.000 in 8 PAs and RHB: .400/.500/.500 in 13 PAs. I know small sample size but I am going to do the same thing Rox Girl is doing and spot the trend going back to last year. 2009 LHB: .240/.357/.372 in 360 PAs and RHB: .321/.377/.482 in 158 PAs.

Still a small sample but hes clearly better as a RHB but hit LH twice as often in 09. So far this year we have faced more LH pitchers which has made him hit RH more and hes producing. Maybe some of the more number savy people here will be able to provide guidance on this

Sidenote: One other thing to note about these splits is it appears everytime Dex faced a RHP he hit LH and vice versa. So I do not know what his RHB vs RHP splits are.

by purplesocks on Apr 11, 2010 10:24 AM MDT reply actions  

I think a lot of people here are in favor of him giving up the switch hitting

Several suggesting that it’s just not going to happen at this point. My own opinion is that it’s still probably too early to dump it as that will completely and unalterably cap his ceiling as a middle of the pack CF, only so good as his speed allows him to be.

I guess the question would be what’s the lowest acceptable level of production from the left side? I think it would be somewhere less than what he produced last season, a sub .700 OPS and you would have to consider him a lineup cancer, but at a .350 or better OBP he’s still pretty valuable with his speed. If he can get a few bloop hits, walks and bunt singles to keep the OBP up from the left side in the here and now, I think the ultimate reward would be worth him continuing the switch hitting thing. He just has to do better than he has in the season thus far.

by Rox Girl on Apr 11, 2010 10:40 AM MDT up reply actions  

yeah i dont actually see it happening soon

and do see the value in .350 OBP with his speed. But just talking about clutch hitting, maybe if its late in the game, Dex should hit RH no matter what

a question for you RG, are there any stats out there that show the added value of being a switch hitter?

by purplesocks on Apr 11, 2010 10:56 AM MDT up reply actions  

this is where i lie for now, though im more open to ditching his switch hitting than i was last year

There’s no guarantee his hitting vs right handed pitchers would improve greatly from the right side, and switch hitting could definitely add to his skillset eventually.

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Apr 11, 2010 11:08 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

As a two hitter...

He needs to move runners around, hit situationally, all that. The ability to strike out as a left-handed hitter makes that impossible. Could the switch-hitting thing be a Boras idea (Dex is a Boras client, right?)?

by MarshallMcCard on Apr 11, 2010 11:40 AM MDT up reply actions  

Fowler switched to Boras two months ago

He started switch hitting over four years ago, so in short, no. Boras doesn’t have the power to force such decisions on players or organizations either. It’s completely a Rockies organizational strategy.

The obvious flip side to your coin is that effective switch hitting makes being an effective 1 or 2 hole hitter even better. So if he gets there, we’re fine.

One thing everyone needs to remember – a player doesn’t have to have equal ability on both sides of the plate for switch hitting to be worth it. I suspect Dex will never bring his LH swing to the level of his RH swing – that doesn’t mean it should be scrapped though

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Apr 12, 2010 7:13 AM MDT up reply actions  

His minor league numbers don't seem to offer too much insight into the problem either

His batted ball profiles are virtually the same as both a lefty and a righty – though towards his later years in the minors he was a better line drive hitter while batting right-handed.

His strikeout rate in the minors as a right handed batter was something around 17% whereas as a left-handed batter it was 26%. However, his walk rate as a right handed batter was 8% and his walk rate as a left handed batter was 13 or 14%.

One thing that is interesting is that as a left-handed batter, his career minor league average is .299, fueled by a .390 BABIP. As a right handed batter, he averaged a .314 batting average accompanied by a .364 BABIP. Not exactly how to interpret this – his home run rates weren’t too different. I suppose it’s just the relatively high strikeout rate from the left side that necessitated a higher BABIP for a good average – not really earth-shattering news.

I guess in summation this is just saying the trends we’ve seen at the major league level (higher k rate and walk rate while batting lefty) are the same in the minors. In his limited time in the bigs, it just seems like his left-handed approach hasn’t carried over to the majors, but was pretty effective in the minors. Also, it still offers no insight into how Dex would fare batting right on right…

"These are thin mints. I put them in the freezer. My favorites. So good."
--Reds outfielder Adam Dunn, on the girl scout cookies he keeps in his locker

by Resolution on Apr 11, 2010 11:07 AM MDT up reply actions  

totally agree on the last sentence

He hasn’t batted right on right against pitching at a professional level. It is possible he could make us forget about Barmes’ issues with the down and out slider

"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious." - Albert Einstein

by Andrew T. Fisher on Apr 11, 2010 11:26 AM MDT via mobile up reply actions  

His numbers are just so good batting righty

that it seems like it’s worth a shot – it’s not that he’s just better righty than lefty, he’s batted .325/.385/.475 in the majors as a righty with an 8% walk rate and a 20% k rate. His .400 BABIP is a cause for concern however – he seems like he could still be a .350 BABIP kind of guy though…

Additionally though, we’re all only looking at one season’s worth of data so I wouldn’t really do anything until I see how he’s done after 3 months – which may be moot if he just sits all the time against righties…

Also, last year, his home/road splits were pretty big too – he batted .294 at home and .236 away and his strikeout rate jumped 12% to 33% while away – no clue what the hell that means – but it seems like we’d need another half or full season of data to really say anything with conviction…

"These are thin mints. I put them in the freezer. My favorites. So good."
--Reds outfielder Adam Dunn, on the girl scout cookies he keeps in his locker

by Resolution on Apr 11, 2010 11:35 AM MDT up reply actions  

So, no one knows what the deal is with the Extra Innings schedule today?

I’m assuming I’ll miss the first few innings of Colorado/San Diego while Cleveland/Detroit finishes up. If so, that’s lame.

by holly96 on Apr 11, 2010 11:56 AM MDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Colorado Rockies, established 28 April 2005.

Community Guidelines
RockiesRoster.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Kheditorshot_small
Sitting down with Tulsa Drillers co-closer Coty Woods
2rr10yf_small
Death By Underachievement
N63804317_31527791_2216_small
The Cause of Our Hitting Woes
Kheditorshot_small
Sitting down with Tulsa Drillers first baseman Kiel Roling
Small
This is how the Rockies should look like
Img_1229_small
PRMLB May Thread
Goatee
Purple Row Pick 6
Small
xBABIP part 2
Carloscover_small
Predicting wins with basic stats
12895243481351292663_1_f2092652_small
These guys are hard to take...

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Colorado Sports Blogs

Mile High Report (Denver Broncos)
Mile High Hockey (Colorado Avalanche)
Denver Stiffs (Denver Nuggets)
Burgundy Wave (Colorado Rapids)
The Ralphie Report (CU Buffaloes)
SB Nation Denver

Top 30 PuRPs

  1. Drew Pomeranz, LHP - AAA
  2. Nolan Arenado, 3B - AA
  3. Wilin Rosario, C - MLB
  4. Chad Bettis, RHP - AA DL
  5. Tyler Matzek, A (Adv)
  6. Alex White, MLB
  7. Kyle Parker, OF - A (Adv)
  8. Tim Wheeler, OF - AAA DL
  9. Josh Rutledge, SS - AA
  10. Charlie Blackmon, OF - AAA DL
  11. Rosell Herrera, SS/3B - A
  12. Trevor Story, SS/3B - A
  13. Edwar Cabrera, LHP - AA
  14. Tyler Anderson, LHP - A
  15. Rafael Ortega, OF - A (Adv)
  16. Peter Tago, RHP, unassigned
  17. Christian Friedrich, LHP - MLB
  18. Joe Gardner, RHP - AA
  19. Corey Dickerson, OF - A (Adv)
  20. Thomas Field, 2B - AAA
  21. Will Swanner, C - A
  22. Kent Matthes, OF - AA
  23. Albert Campos, RHP - released (4/19/12)
  24. Jordan Pacheco, C/UT - MLB
  25. Cristhian Adames, SS - A (Adv)
  26. Ben Paulsen, 1B - AA
  27. Josh Slaats, RHP - A (Adv)
  28. David Kandilas, CF - A
  29. Jayson Aquino, LHP - unassigned
  30. Hector Gomez, SS - DL
HM:
Edgmer Escalona, RHP - MLB
Dillon Thomas, OF - unassigned
Sam Mende, IF - A
Mike Zuanich, 1B - AA
Dan Houston, RHP - AA

updated 10/25/2011.


Managers

Rox_girl_small Rox Girl

35l7yvb_small Andrew Martin

Staff

Jeff_aberle_small Jeff Aberle

No_bunting_small Bryan Kilpatrick

Avatar2_small Andrew T. Fisher

Wittgenstein_small Greg Stanwood

Special Assistants to the GM

Rockies_lost_americana_small holly96

2rr10yf_small RhodeIslandRoxfan

Pic2_small CBake33

Image_small Rafael Rojas Cremonesi