An esteemed friend invited me along to quite an event last night -- a dinner and conversation with Jeff Wilpon and Omar Minaya, respectively the owner and GM of the New York Mets.
In the Q&A I managed to make a bit of a fool of Minaya. Some kid asked him who he thought was the most clutch hitter on the Mets. He started talking about how it's probably Moises Alou. I then piped in (our table was right next to Minaya and Wilpon so if I said something it was right in their ear) and asked if there even is such a thing as a clutch hitter or are there just good hitters and bad hitters? To that he brought up David Eckstein and how much he loves his grittiness and clutch hitting. He also alluded to Arod not being clutch. Then I asked him, if he had a choice, who he'd rather have up to bat in a key Game 7 situation. He said Eckstein all the way. I responded: "Well, that's crazy."
And it is crazy. How these images of players get created and then people stick to them with absolutely no evidence other than the one time they saw the guy have a big hit to win a game. Does anyone know the stats behind these assertions of "clutchness"? No way. Over a season or a career you know how many home runs a guy hits, rbi's, stolen bases, etc. but no one knows off hand a player's average in close games. And if you do know that Eckstein is 5 for 12 in the 8th and 9th innings of playoff games (hypothetical stats here), those are small samples anyways that are bound to change with the next few high pressure at bats the guy has. Especially when this particular guy in question sucks at hitting. This is Stats 101: small sample sizes, the mysterious line between correlation and causation, oh, and don't get me started about kurtosis!
Another dude we were with froze when he had the chance to ask a question and proceeded to ask what we were all waiting for, Wilpon and Minaya's thoughts on Xavier Nady. And not one update on Pedro. The new stadium is gonna be sick though, so I'm told.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment