[h=1]Tigers will carry AL Central[/h][h=3]Despite mediocre first half, Detroit is poised to run away with division crown[/h]By Dave Cameron | ESPN Insider
The Detroit Tigers are supposed to be one of the best teams in baseball. With Miguel Cabrera and Prince Fielder anchoring the offense, and a starting rotation that is the envy of every other team in the game, this is a club that was built to crush the American League Central and play deep into October. However, as of Friday the Tigers were 51-41, just 2 1/2 games ahead of the Cleveland Indians, having lost far too many games they should have won.
Part of that is their defense, as they've exchanged range at first and third base to maximize offense, and their pitchers pay the price for that trade-off. However, even accounting for the runs that their fielders give away, the Tigers have played better than a 51-41 team would indicate. At 5.1 runs scored per game and 4.2 runs allowed per game, the Tigers' run differential suggests that they should be 55-37, which would give them the second-best record in the AL and a comfortable lead in their division.
So why are the Tigers winning fewer games than their runs scored/allowed would suggest? Put simply, they've been absolutely terrible in clutch situations.
<OFFER></OFFER>
[h=3]Not so clutch[/h]
On FanGraphs, we have a "Clutch score" for every team (and player), which is calculated by measuring the differences in a player's performance based on the score, inning and base/out situation for each play. Essentially, this statistic tells us who has performed better or worse with the game on the line than they have in less-critical situations.
By this metric, the Tigers have been the worst team in the league, coming in at a clutch score of -4.8; only the Cubs (at -4.4) are also below -4.0, and likewise, they have dramatically underperformed compared to their expected record based on runs scored and runs allowed.
You might think this is just the natural result of not acquiring a better closer over the offseason, but in reality, it's the Tigers' starting pitchers that have been the biggest culprits here: Anibal Sanchez (-1.35 clutch score), Doug Fister (-1.11 clutch score) and Rick Porcello (-0.81 clutch score) account for a vast majority of the team's rating.
Because this metric isn't separating out credit for pitching from defense, the problem could very well be the poor defenders behind those pitchers. But the point is that the Tigers' poor clutch performances have occurred with their starters on the mound, not their relievers. For all the talk about the Tigers' bullpen problems, Joaquin Benoit has actually been excellent in relief and has the highest clutch score of any Tigers pitcher; he's been even better than his overall numbers would indicate when the game is on the line.
I'm sure the Tigers would much rather not be singled out as the "least clutch" team in baseball so far, but I have good news that should give them confidence down the stretch: Clutch performance in the first half has no predictive value whatsoever.
[h=3]Historical improvement, positive signs[/h]
<!-- begin inline 1 -->[h=4]Clutch Comparison[/h]
<THEAD>
</THEAD><TBODY>
</TBODY>
<!-- end inline 1 -->
Every year, there are teams that perform just as poorly in important situations in the first half as the Tigers have this year. The table at right outlines teams over the last three years that have posted clutch scores of -4.5 or worse in the first half of the season, along with, for reference, their clutch performance in the second half of the season.
From 2010 to 2012, these five teams combined for a clutch score of -25.2 in the first half, but then went on to post a collective +2.8 clutch score in the second half. Their first-half performance in high-leverage situations did nothing to tell us about what they would do in similar situations in the second half.
And it's not just the underperforming teams for whom clutch rating shows wide variance. I took the first- and second-half clutch ratings for all 30 teams from each of the last three years, and in each season, there was no correlation to be found. A correlation of 1.0 is found when we look at two items with an absolutely perfect, positive relationship to each other, while a correlation of zero would occur if we looked at the relationship between two items that have nothing to do with each other.
From 2010-12, the correlation between a team's first- and second-half clutch scores was, in order, -0.01, -0.04 and -0.04. In other words, first-half clutch score had about as much to do with second-half clutch score as the rate of ice cream consumption in Wisconsin has to do with the length of an average commute in Florida. There's just no evidence that a team that performs poorly in high-leverage situations in the first half will continue to do so in the second half.
The numbers that are predictive and correlate well from the first half to the second half are the ones in which the Tigers are excelling, and that puts them among the very best teams in baseball. For example, they are second in the majors in OBP, third in slugging and first in pitcher strikeouts.
Those performances are far more likely to carry over, and with a more even distribution of their play across critical situations, the Tigers should be expected to post a better second-half record, even if they don't make any huge upgrades at the trade deadline.
And if they do end up landing a few more quality players for the stretch drive? Well, Cleveland and Kansas City better pray for a miracle, because despite the Tigers' mediocre first half, Detroit is going to be very difficult to catch.
The Detroit Tigers are supposed to be one of the best teams in baseball. With Miguel Cabrera and Prince Fielder anchoring the offense, and a starting rotation that is the envy of every other team in the game, this is a club that was built to crush the American League Central and play deep into October. However, as of Friday the Tigers were 51-41, just 2 1/2 games ahead of the Cleveland Indians, having lost far too many games they should have won.
Part of that is their defense, as they've exchanged range at first and third base to maximize offense, and their pitchers pay the price for that trade-off. However, even accounting for the runs that their fielders give away, the Tigers have played better than a 51-41 team would indicate. At 5.1 runs scored per game and 4.2 runs allowed per game, the Tigers' run differential suggests that they should be 55-37, which would give them the second-best record in the AL and a comfortable lead in their division.
So why are the Tigers winning fewer games than their runs scored/allowed would suggest? Put simply, they've been absolutely terrible in clutch situations.
<OFFER></OFFER>
[h=3]Not so clutch[/h]
On FanGraphs, we have a "Clutch score" for every team (and player), which is calculated by measuring the differences in a player's performance based on the score, inning and base/out situation for each play. Essentially, this statistic tells us who has performed better or worse with the game on the line than they have in less-critical situations.
By this metric, the Tigers have been the worst team in the league, coming in at a clutch score of -4.8; only the Cubs (at -4.4) are also below -4.0, and likewise, they have dramatically underperformed compared to their expected record based on runs scored and runs allowed.
You might think this is just the natural result of not acquiring a better closer over the offseason, but in reality, it's the Tigers' starting pitchers that have been the biggest culprits here: Anibal Sanchez (-1.35 clutch score), Doug Fister (-1.11 clutch score) and Rick Porcello (-0.81 clutch score) account for a vast majority of the team's rating.
Because this metric isn't separating out credit for pitching from defense, the problem could very well be the poor defenders behind those pitchers. But the point is that the Tigers' poor clutch performances have occurred with their starters on the mound, not their relievers. For all the talk about the Tigers' bullpen problems, Joaquin Benoit has actually been excellent in relief and has the highest clutch score of any Tigers pitcher; he's been even better than his overall numbers would indicate when the game is on the line.
I'm sure the Tigers would much rather not be singled out as the "least clutch" team in baseball so far, but I have good news that should give them confidence down the stretch: Clutch performance in the first half has no predictive value whatsoever.
[h=3]Historical improvement, positive signs[/h]
<!-- begin inline 1 -->[h=4]Clutch Comparison[/h]
| Year | Team | 1st-half clutch score | 2nd-half clutch score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | Astros | -5.5 | -0.7 |
| 2011 | Dodgers | -5.3 | +1.2 |
| 2012 | Phillies | -5.2 | +4.3 |
| 2010 | D-backs | -4.7 | -0.1 |
| 2012 | Red Sox | -4.5 | -1.9 |
<THEAD>
</THEAD><TBODY>
</TBODY>
<!-- end inline 1 -->
Every year, there are teams that perform just as poorly in important situations in the first half as the Tigers have this year. The table at right outlines teams over the last three years that have posted clutch scores of -4.5 or worse in the first half of the season, along with, for reference, their clutch performance in the second half of the season.
From 2010 to 2012, these five teams combined for a clutch score of -25.2 in the first half, but then went on to post a collective +2.8 clutch score in the second half. Their first-half performance in high-leverage situations did nothing to tell us about what they would do in similar situations in the second half.
And it's not just the underperforming teams for whom clutch rating shows wide variance. I took the first- and second-half clutch ratings for all 30 teams from each of the last three years, and in each season, there was no correlation to be found. A correlation of 1.0 is found when we look at two items with an absolutely perfect, positive relationship to each other, while a correlation of zero would occur if we looked at the relationship between two items that have nothing to do with each other.
From 2010-12, the correlation between a team's first- and second-half clutch scores was, in order, -0.01, -0.04 and -0.04. In other words, first-half clutch score had about as much to do with second-half clutch score as the rate of ice cream consumption in Wisconsin has to do with the length of an average commute in Florida. There's just no evidence that a team that performs poorly in high-leverage situations in the first half will continue to do so in the second half.
The numbers that are predictive and correlate well from the first half to the second half are the ones in which the Tigers are excelling, and that puts them among the very best teams in baseball. For example, they are second in the majors in OBP, third in slugging and first in pitcher strikeouts.
Those performances are far more likely to carry over, and with a more even distribution of their play across critical situations, the Tigers should be expected to post a better second-half record, even if they don't make any huge upgrades at the trade deadline.
And if they do end up landing a few more quality players for the stretch drive? Well, Cleveland and Kansas City better pray for a miracle, because despite the Tigers' mediocre first half, Detroit is going to be very difficult to catch.
