Quote:
Originally Posted by One Great Matrix
I sort of agree and can laugh along with you on your first reaction...alright, but ...hey, we do have two different points of view. I'll admit mine's some variation of biased or off most of the time, but I rarely see anything else from people.
|
Sure
It's nigh impossible to totally remove one's bias. But, we should all try to be aware of it.
Quote:
|
...the rest is a matter of total resources...Maybe he could have hit somewhere BETWEEN .280 & .310 or so if he just gave 100%...maybe instead he chose to give 100% and then 110% in clutch situations, though.
|
How can he give 110%?
And if he could give 110% why didn't he give 110% all the time?
And if he could give 110% all the time, wouldn't that just be 100%
I can get that a player doesn't give 100% all the time
They probably shouldn't
Run to first on a pop up. Don't all out sprint. Not if you want to have a long and healthy career.
But if a hitter isn't giving their 100%, their full focus, on low and medium leverage plate appearances, but does in high-leverage, is that what we want to call clutch? And how would we ever be able to test for it?
The point about "BETWEEN" is important.
No matter how we divide up his performance (splits) we'll find some areas he hit better or worse
He hit better in high leverage situations, sure
Maybe he hit better on Tuesdays than any other day of the week. But we wouldn't suggest he was a "Tuesday hitter".
People used to make fun of analytics by talking about how a player hit on a Tuesday after a full moon when they had orange juice for breakfast. These are the same people, often, who proclaim "clutch!" while forgetting or not knowing that weeding out this small sample noise is one of the goals of analytics.
Quote:
|
I'll admit I don't know but some lament in hindsight ...I would say Hernandez had the foresight to put together his MLB career.
|
Some foresight, sure
Mostly natural talent for which he was not responsible.