What if they all suck

[batmagadanleadoff]

=Centerfield post_id=193458 time=1747954622 user_id=65]
=kcmets post_id=193452 time=1747938472 user_id=53]
I was just sorting the Team RISP for a minute, I know that

can be scary, and the Mets have the 7th worst OPS in the NL.

The Dodgers are best and their OPS is a whopping .272 points

higher. Can one say that considering the two teams have the

'same' record that the Mets are pretty damn lucky so far?

[Centerfield]

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=193463 time=1747973851 user_id=68]


Batting with RISP is a junk stat. First off, it's not repeatable because clutch hitting is a myth, an old wive's tale. If players could turn it on at will, they'd bat .700 and hit 150 HRs a year. But we've been through this. RISP is also a junk stat because mainly, there's no correlation between RISP and team wins or team runs. In fact, the teams that leave the most runners on base tend to be the best teams because if nothing else, high LOB rates demonstrate an ability to get men on base.



A baserunner is not likely to score and this is the most normal thing about baseball: Don't expect your baserunners to come around and score; don't have a shitfit everytime that runner is stranded on second base. The best hitters, the MVP and all-star caliber players, the Hall of Fame bound hitters at their very peak, the batters that strike the most fear into an opposing pitcher's heart are going to make an out about 60% of the time. And then it gets worse as the quality of the hitter decreases.

[kcmets]

I did preface this by saying it could be scary.



Here we are today:



CHW suck

TEX mediocre

KCR mediocre

BAL suck

PIT suck

COL suck

NYM playoff contender

SDP playoff contender

MIL mediocre

ARI mediocre



suck/mediocre up 8-2...

[Edgy MD]

Well, Baty is out of The Sub-.700 Club with alacrity.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

Pissed off now.

[kcmets]

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Pissed off now.

Wait until late Sunday evening after they get swept.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

That remark belonged in the game thread but I was too pissed off to put it there

[batmagadanleadoff]

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=193463 time=1747973851 user_id=68]
=Centerfield post_id=193458 time=1747954622 user_id=65]
=kcmets post_id=193452 time=1747938472 user_id=53]
I was just sorting the Team RISP for a minute, I know that

can be scary, and the Mets have the 7th worst OPS in the NL.

The Dodgers are best and their OPS is a whopping .272 points

higher. Can one say that considering the two teams have the

'same' record that the Mets are pretty damn lucky so far?

[kcmets]

Are runners on first included in that percentage? If so, it

is not RISP but rather just plain old LOB.



I watch a lot of baseball, but really only 'pay attention' to

the Mets. They kinda suck many games, despite being really

good. Micro/macro, I dunno... They really could/should have

at least another 7-8 wins and it's only the end of May.



As Zvon used to say, 'assa baseball.'

[batmagadanleadoff]

=kcmets post_id=193720 time=1748285753 user_id=53]
Are runners on first included in that percentage? If so, it

is not RISP but rather just plain old LOB.

[Centerfield]

Updating after three wins this weekend.



The Mets are 9th overall in MLB in OPS (.730), but are 13th in runs scored. Their 4.31 runs per game is exactly league average. With RISP, the Mets' OPS drops to .676, good for 22nd in MLB (but higher than the 24th ranking they had when we started this discussion). That statistic is probably why they're league average in runs scored, despite a better than average OPS. Of note, their BABIP with RISP is a league worst .236. Which suggests they're getting really unlucky, or not hitting the ball hard, or likely both. Their overall BABIP is .286 (19th in MLB).



If you don't believe that clutch hitting is some repeatable trait, these numbers are encouraging. Hopefully the Mets numbers with RISP will trend toward their overall numbers, and the offense will gradually improve.



For what it's worth, the Mets OPS with RISP in 2024 was .809, tied for 2nd in MLB.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Updating after three wins this weekend. The Mets are 9th overall in MLB in OPS (.730), but are 13th in runs scored. Their 4.31 runs per game is exactly league average. With RISP, the Mets' OPS drops to .676, good for 22nd in MLB (but higher than the 24th ranking they had when we started this discussion). That statistic is probably why they're league average in runs scored, despite a better than average OPS. Of note, their BABIP with RISP is a league worst .236. Which suggests they're getting really unlucky, or not hitting the ball hard, or likely both. Their overall BABIP is .286 (19th in MLB). If you don't believe that clutch hitting is some repeatable trait, these numbers are encouraging. Hopefully the Mets numbers with RISP will trend toward their overall numbers, and the offense will gradually improve. For what it's worth, the Mets OPS with RISP in 2024 was .809, tied for 2nd in MLB.

I'm not sure what your point here is. Of course, teams should hope to drive in baserunners that are in scoring position. Teams should strive to score as many runs as possible. But RISP BAs are not repeatable skills, and not predictive of anything. RISP BAs are not comsistent from year to year. BAs with RISP are nothing more than a fancy term for the nonsensical and non-existing old wive's tale that is "clutch hitting". Teams that hit well with nobody on base will come around to hit well with RISP, given enough time (i.e., given a larger sample size). Good hitting teams will eventually hit well with RISP. Good hitting teams will hit well.



It's just as important to hit well with nobody in scoring position so that those batters that reached base with nobody on can, in turn, become the runners ISP that are driven in and come around to score. With two outs and nobody on base, two players hit back to back ground rule doubles to produce a run. Each of the two hits in that sequence is as equally important as the other. Without the first double, there is no run and no RBI.



This is all nothing more than randomness. You might as well be writing long posts concluding that teams that score the most runs tend to win the most games.

[MFS62]

Speaking of sucking, remember during the last free agent signing period when there were posts about wanting Anthony Santander? (mine included)

I just checked him out to see if not signing him was a good decision.

His slash line is .189/ .274/ .320/ .594 with 6 HR and 18 RBI in almost 200 AB.

He'd be right there on our suck list.

Later

[Centerfield]

I'm not sure what your point here is.

I spell it out. It's right there, two sentences, standalone paragraph.

If you don't believe that clutch hitting is some repeatable trait, these numbers are encouraging. Hopefully the Mets numbers with RISP will trend toward their overall numbers, and the offense will gradually improve.

I mean. Honest question. Do you really not understand this point? I can't tell if you're trying to be antagonistic, or if your reading comprehension skills have drastically declined.

Of course, teams should hope to drive in baserunners that are in scoring position. Teams should strive to score as many runs as possible. But RISP BAs are not repeatable skills, and not predictive of anything. RISP BAs are not comsistent from year to year. BAs with RISP are nothing more than a fancy term for the nonsensical and non-existing old wive's tale that is "clutch hitting".

Batting with RISP is a junk stat. First off, it's not repeatable because clutch hitting is a myth, an old wive's tale. If players could turn it on at will, they'd bat .700 and hit 150 HRs a year.

You keep making this counterargument that RISP is not a repeatable trait. Literally no one is making this argument. No one is making this case, but you feel compelled to speak out against it anyway. Multiple times. Are you imagining these conversations? If you read my quoted text above, I'm saying exactly the opposite. Again. Reading comprehension.



This is why your posts are so confusing. I can't tell if you're arguing with me, or someone else, or just voices in your head.



OPS with RISP is not a "junk stat". Whatever that means. It's a measure of real results that have taken place. No one ever said it's predictive of future results, but it is absolutely a record of what has taken place so far. And it matters because performance with RISP obviously affects results. Getting one hit each inning is going to result in less runs than getting nine hits in a row.



OPS with RISP is useful. It's unquestionable that the Mets, in 2025, have been dreadful in "clutch" situations. But I think you and I both agree, that there's no reason to think that this will continue. This bodes well for the Mets. As their OPS with RISP eventually trends toward their overall OPS, they should score more runs.

[Lefty Specialist]

(Runs to store to buy more popcorn)

[rchurch314]

OPS with RISP is not a "junk stat". Whatever that means. It's a measure of real results that have taken place. No one ever said it's predictive of future results, but it is absolutely a record of what has taken place so far. And it matters because performance with RISP obviously affects results. Getting one hit each inning is going to result in less runs than getting nine hits in a row. OPS with RISP is useful. It's unquestionable that the Mets, in 2025, have been dreadful in "clutch" situations. But I think you and I both agree, that there's no reason to think that this will continue. This bodes well for the Mets. As their OPS with RISP eventually trends toward their overall OPS, they should score more runs.

It's HIGHLY subjective. Even for actual results. Is it real? Are the Mets actually failing in "clutch" situations? Maybe. Certainly some subset of them, at times. They were 1-6 with RISP yesterday. They scored 6 runs.



It's a subset, you can use it as a small part of a bigger story you want to tell, but particularly in this instance, I'm not so sure what story it's telling. Mostly just that the Mets maybe have had some bad luck/sequencing of some of their hits at times.





Also of note you infer that you understand it's not predictive but then suggest that it is predictive by saying they should score more going forward.

[batmagadanleadoff]

OPS with RISP is not a "junk stat". Whatever that means. It's a measure of real results that have taken place. No one ever said it's predictive of future results, but it is absolutely a record of what has taken place so far. And it matters because performance with RISP obviously affects results. Getting one hit each inning is going to result in less runs than getting nine hits in a row. OPS with RISP is useful. It's unquestionable that the Mets, in 2025, have been dreadful in "clutch" situations. But I think you and I both agree, that there's no reason to think that this will continue. This bodes well for the Mets. As their OPS with RISP eventually trends toward their overall OPS, they should score more runs.

Batting with RISP is randomness. Players can't hit "better" whenever they feel like it. If they could, they'd hardly ever make outs. The only times they'd make outs is when some outfielder pulls a Ron Swoboda-like World Series highlight reel catch. That you can measure something doesn't make the measurement meaningful. I could care less if the book I'm reading weighs 32 ounces when all along, I thought it weighed 28 ounces.



If you flip a coin six times and it comes up "heads" all six times, the coin is not suddenly due to come up tails on the next flip. The coin is just as likely to come up either heads or tails on the seventh flip.



This is all just randomness.



Juan Soto has been OPSplussing in the 150s and higher in each if his last few full seasons. But he's currently at 118 OPS+ one third into this season. It's unlikely that Soto will match his recent OPS+s this year. He's already too deep in a hole. He's not "due" to overcompensate the rest of the way to match his more recent production. That might happen, could happen, but it's extremely unlikely. A 118 OPS+ is nothing to sneeze at, but that's not who Juan Soto is.



The Mets offense hasn't been as efficient as expected. So you went and found out that they're not hitting in the clutch. Big deal. That's randomness. Of course the Mets aren't hitting. What did you think you were gonna find? That the Mets are at the top of most hitting categories?



I remain unimpressed.

[Centerfield]

Batting with RISP is randomness. Players can't hit "better" whenever they feel like it. If they could, they'd hardly ever make outs. The only times they'd make outs is when some outfielder pulls a Ron Swoboda-like World Series highlight reel catch.

It's comical. No matter how many times I tell you that no one is arguing with you on this, you still feel compelled to make this argument. Will you reply with another full-throated argument against "clutch"? I'm guessing yes.

If you flip a coin six times and it comes up "heads" all six times, the coin is not suddenly due to come up tails on the next flip. The coin is just as likely to come up either heads or tails on the seventh flip.

Uhh. Yeah.



Let's say you get $1 for every time the coin comes up tails. You get nothing if it comes up heads. Flip it six times in a row, you get heads every time. You've made no money. Flip it six more times, odds are you'll make $3. Because the odds suggest you'll do better than 0%. If the past was a statistical oddity, chances are you'll do better going forward. I never said there would be six tails in a row. Again, you're arguing points no one is making.



The Mets OPS .676 with RISP. Oh no, it's terrible. Sky is falling. But going forward, their expected OPS with RISP is .730 (same as their overall OPS). So chances are, the Mets will score more runs going forward. If the past results were a statistical oddity, the likelihood is that the future will be closer to the expected probability.

I remain unimpressed.

Educate me again how clutch is not repeatable. I feel like I missed that.

[MFS62]

Lefty Specialist wrote: (Runs to store to buy more popcorn)

Got any more of that popcorn?

Later

[rchurch314]

=Centerfield post_id=193904 time=1748455660 user_id=65]


Let's say you get $1 for every time the coin comes up tails. You get nothing if it comes up heads. Flip it six times in a row, you get heads every time. You've made no money. Flip it six more times, odds are you'll make $3. Because the odds suggest you'll do better than 0%. If the past was a statistical oddity, chances are you'll do better going forward. I never said there would be six tails in a row. Again, you're arguing points no one is making.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Let's say you get $1 for every time the coin comes up tails. You get nothing if it comes up heads. Flip it six times in a row, you get heads every time. You've made no money. Flip it six more times, odds are you'll make $3. Because the odds suggest you'll do better than 0%. If the past was a statistical oddity, chances are you'll do better going forward. I never said there would be six tails in a row. Again, you're arguing points no one is making.

But you don't need a whole analysis of past results to figure this out. Your findings are irrelevant. Expecting three heads in the next six coin flips has nothing to do with past results. The expected outcome of any future coin flip is independent of past results and so, has nothing to do with the results of past coin flips. Are you saying that the Mets will hit well with RISP going forward because up until now, they've been hitting crappy with RISP? If so, that's wrong. IF the Mets hit well with RISP going forward, it will be because the Mets are a good hitting team, period. Not because "they're due".

Educate me again how clutch is not repeatable. I feel like I missed that.

So then you do think that clutch hitting is a skill, and that batters could hit better whenever they fucking feel like it.

[Centerfield]

It's HIGHLY subjective. Even for actual results. Is it real? Are the Mets actually failing in "clutch" situations? Maybe. Certainly some subset of them, at times. They were 1-6 with RISP yesterday. They scored 6 runs.

It's not subjective. In any sense. The Mets OPS with RISP is a statistic. It's irrefutable. Whatever conclusions you may wish reach may be subjective, but the stat is the stat.

It's a subset, you can use it as a small part of a bigger story you want to tell, but particularly in this instance, I'm not so sure what story it's telling.

The story it tells is that the Mets OPS has been worse with RISP than their overall OPS.

Mostly just that the Mets maybe have had some bad luck/sequencing of some of their hits at times.

Yes. That's my takeaway as well.

Also of note you infer that you understand it's not predictive but then suggest that it is predictive by saying they should score more going forward.

Their past performance is not predictive. Their unlucky results that have already happened are not indicative of any result we'll see in the future. Their overall OPS is predictive. The Mets will likely perform in future situations just as they perform overall.



Flipping a coin heads six times in a row is not indicative in anyway, what the next flips will be. The only predictive indicator are the overall odds. 50%. Going forward, the likelihood of tails will be 50%. Which is better than the 0%, already in the books.

[rchurch314]

=Centerfield post_id=193938 time=1748463411 user_id=65]




Their past performance is not predictive. Their unlucky results that have already happened are not indicative of any result we'll see in the future. Their overall OPS is predictive. The Mets will likely perform in future situations just as they perform overall.

[Edgy MD]

I know how many sides a coin has, but that's me.

[Lefty Specialist]

Lefty Specialist wrote: (Runs to store to buy more popcorn) Got any more of that popcorn? Later

Keeping the Redenbacher family in business.

[whippoorwill]

=MFS62 post_id=193805 time=1748382533 user_id=60]
Speaking of sucking, remember during the last free agent signing period when there were posts about wanting Anthony Santander? (mine included)

I just checked him out to see if not signing him was a good decision.

His slash line is .189/ .274/ .320/ .594 with 6 HR and 18 RBI in almost 200 AB.

He'd be right there on our suck list.

Later

[MFS62]

Sorry to hear that.

Later

[Centerfield]

=Centerfield post_id=189208 time=1744207081 user_id=65]
All the young guys. Baty is kinda the poster boy right now. But Acuna's not far behind. Mauricio and Gilbert never recover. Sproat got knocked around in his first start.



Even Vientos looks lost. Alvarez is hurt.



They can't all suck right?

[ashie62]

There is a two headed sucking monster



Bayientos

[kcmets]

And his little brother, Alvarexsos.