Great New Resource, Saber Archive

Click here to go to the sight. It is searchable by topic and author. Looks like it has at least 150 articles. Tom Tango says "Out of all efforts I’ve seen to create a SABR library, this is the best one I’ve seen."

Some Clutch Correlations

For all players with 5000+ PAs from 1987-2001. 71 players.

	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS
Total-CL	0.817	0.928	0.884	0.89
Total-RISP	0.842	0.928	0.932	0.93
CL-RISP	0.767	0.893	0.86	0.87
CL-NONCL	0.739	0.896	0.847	0.85
RISP-NONRISP	0.728	0.846	0.881	0.871
NONE ON-ROB	0.781	0.882	0.936	0.919
RISP2(W/2 OUTS)-TOTAL	0.609	0.829	0.774	0.783
RISP2-NONRISP2	0.535	0.786	0.728	0.736
RISP2-CL	0.599	0.826	0.747	0.762
ROB-TOTAL	0.931	0.971	0.98	0.977
MAY-NONMAY				0.903

	Major	league	totals	1991-2000
	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	OBP/with NO IBB
Total	0.266	0.334	0.416	0.75	0.329
ROB	0.272	0.346	0.422	0.768	0.334
NONE ON	0.261	0.322	0.411	0.735	0.322
RISP	0.267	0.359	0.414	0.773	0.334
NONRISP	0.266	0.325	0.416	0.741	0.325
CL	0.256	0.334	0.388	0.722	0.317
NONCL	0.268	0.334	0.421	0.755	0.329

 
 The correlation between non-close & late (CL) AVG and the difference between it and actual CL AVG is -.076. So the better hitters see an even bigger dropoff than the lesser hitters, although the effect is slight. For SLG it was -.443. So the guys with higher SLGs normally see a big dropoff in CL cases. Maybe because they are facing good relievers or don't often have the platoon advantage.

The correlation between non-close & late (CL) AVG and the difference between nonCL SLG and actual CL SLG is -.078. The correlation between non-close & late (CL) SLG and the difference between nonCL AVG and actual CL AVG is -.309. So sluggers see a big drop in their AVG when it is CL.

 The correlation between non-runners on base (ROB) AVG and the difference between it and actual ROB AVG is -.229. For SLG it was -.053. Not a surprise since that this is low because the correlation between ROB SLG and non-ROB SLG is very high (.936).

The correlation between non ROB AVG and the difference between non ROB SLG and actual ROB SLG is -.154. The correlation between non ROB SLG and the difference between non ROB AVG and actual ROB AVG is -.134. So sluggers see a big drop in their AVG when it is CL.

 The correlation between non-runners in scoring position (RISP) AVG and the difference between it and actual RISPAVG is -.292. For SLG it was -.279.

The correlation between non RISP AVG and the difference between non RISP SLG and actual RISP SLG is -.284. The correlation between non RISP SLG and the difference between non RISP AVG and actual RISP AVG is -.158.

How Fluky Was The 2005 White Sox Pitching Staff?

Very fluky. That is based on their team ERA+ in the year they won the World Series (2005), in the year before and in the year after. There have been seven World Series winners since then for whom we can do this kind of comparison (we can't do the 2013 Red Sox, since their year after has just started). So I looked at the 2005 White Sox, the seven teams to win the series before and the seven since.

The table below shows ERA+ for the World Series winners in their year, the year before and after. ERA+ is relative to the league average and is adjusted for park effects. Over 100 is better than average so 110 means your team was about 10% better than the league average.

Table 1: ERA+ in World Series year, 

the year before and the year after.

Year	Team	Before	WS Year	After
1998	Yankees	117	116	113
1999	Yankees	116	113	102
2000	Yankees	113	102	112
2001	D-Backs	110	121	116
2002	Angels	107	120	103
2003	Marlins	92	105	101
2004	Red Sox	104	116	96
2005	White Sox	96	125	103
2006	Cards	122	98	95
2007	Red Sox	99	123	116
2008	Phillies	97	112	101
2009	Yankees	103	108	107
2010	Giants	120	117	109
2011	Cards	109	99	103
2012	Giants	109	96	84

The White Sox improved by 29 in the year they won and then fell by 22 they year after. Only three other teams saw a gain of at least 10 and then a dropoff of at least 10 (2002 Angels, 2004 Red Sox, 2008 Phillies). The 2000 Yankees and the 2011 Cardinals actually did worse in their year than both before and after.

As an index of "flukiness" I multiplied the difference in ERA+ in the year before times the after difference. So the White Sox get a flukiness score of 638. The 2004 Red Sox were 2nd with 240. 9 of the 15 teams were less than 100 (including some that were negative).

I also looked at all the teams that had the best record in each league over this time period that did not win the World Series. Here is the AL

Table 2: ERA+ in AL best record year, 

the year before and the year after.

Year	Team	Before	WS Year	After
2000	White Sox	100	108	102
2001	Mariners	101	117	105
2002	Yankees	112	114	110
2003	Yankees	114	110	96
2004	Yankees	110	96	94
2006	Yankees	94	103	101
2007	Indians	101	112	95
2008	Angels	107	112	99
2010	Rays	100	103	105
2011	Yankees	107	116	110
2012	Yankees	116	110	103

Now the NL

Table 3: ERA+ in NL best record year, 

the year before and the year after.

Year	Team	Before	WS Year	After
1998	Astros	109	118	117
1999	Braves	128	123	114
2000	Giants	92	102	95
2001	Astros	92	106	108
2002	Cards	110	109	90
2002	Braves	124	133	105
2003	Braves	133	105	115
2004	Cards	90	113	122
2005	Cards	113	122	98
2006	Mets	109	106	101
2007	D-Backs	106	115	116
2008	Cubs	115	118	116
2009	Dodgers	114	118	97
2010	Phillies	101	111	127
2011	Phillies	111	127	105
2012	Nationals	107	120	106

The highest flukiness score from these two tables is the 2011 Phillies who had 352. They and only 3 other teams had gains and dropoffs of at least 10 in both years (2001 Mariners, 2007 Indians, 2012 Nationals). So again, the 2005 White Sox were much flukier than anyone else.

The next table shows the ERA+ in each of the three years for all White Sox pitchers that had at least 20 IP in 2005.

Table 4: ERA+ for White Sox pitchers, 2004-6.

Pitcher	2004	2005	2006
Mark Buehrle	121	144	95
Freddy Garcia	121	116	105
Jon Garland	96	128	105
Jose Contreras	84	125	111
Orlando Hernandez	137	88	96
Luis Vizcaino	117	121	132
Cliff Politte	108	225	55
Brandon McCarthy		112	102
Neal Cotts	83	233	92
Dustin Hermanson	96	221	123
Damaso Marte	138	121
Bobby Jenks		165	119
Shingo Takatsu	204	76

Some did much better in 2005 than before or after. Here are the IP for all of these pitchers in 2005

Mark Buehrle	236.2
Freddy Garcia	228
Jon Garland	221
Jose Contreras	204.2
Orlando Hernandez	128.1
Luis Vizcaino	70
Cliff Politte	67.1
Brandon McCarthy	67
Neal Cotts	60.1
Dustin Hermanson	57.1
Damaso Marte	45.1
Bobby Jenks	39.1
Shingo Takatsu	28.2