On Chris Perez, Tie Games, Save Situations, and Stories

Nice article.

My issue wasnt that he brought Perez into a tie game or that it was extras, but that Hags pitched so well in the 9th. Plus why not try and give Perez an extra off day? Both he and pestano werent available on Monday because of heavy workloads….why not see if you could squeeze an extra inning out of Hags?

Perez simply has to get the job done either way though.

I was more worried last year with Perez’s K-rate drop. Still not great this year but seems to be getting more swing and misses though perhaps i am mistaken.

I agree with MrCleaveland that players must do their jobs. Let’s be honest…if Hagadone or Sipp had blown saves on Monday when Acta gave Pestano and Perez the day off, he would have been BLASTED in every media outlet imaginable. But, those guys did their jobs and saved those games. 

In good format.

Bottom Line
Perez Record 3-5   Indians Record 7-7

thank you, and this is great btw. I really wanted you to say a line like “good thing its not 2011 anymore” about the “numbers dont lie” thing in response to whatever situation it was in 2011. because you cant pick certain innings out of one year, when he has a career of innings to consider.

I love stats probably as much as anyone, but I feel a lot of people see statistics as a black and white and apply wide reaching realizations because numbers in a certain situation. honestly, its true numbers dont lie, but it depends on the question because you can find stats to say almost anything if you dilute them enough. numbers are powerful and people should be careful.

He is Bob Wickman Jr.

Gets the job done usually, but not always pretty

I’d like to see how many times Perez pitching in a tied game has COST the Indians the win. Because I’m sure it’s substantial.  Look, he’s been bad in those situations, small sample size or not.  Throw in another pitcher, and if he gets lit up in the same situation, then fine. But Perez apparently doesn’t have the right mind set to hold down a tied game.

i agree.  i like Perez’s temperament for the closer job.  he doesn’t seem to get bothered by what happens on a day-to-day basis and he seems to get extra juice from the role.    some would shrink from the pressure (and yes there is extra pressure in the role), he doesn’t.

then, you add in the advantage of him usually putting people on base and that he gets to start every opportunity with a clean slate.  that helps him too and allows us to use our power pitchers when we need the punchouts more (though Perez was one of those guys just 2 years ago. ah well)

I think teams that pay big money for closers are silly.  But, I think the idea of the closer is brilliant.  A manager gets to call upon one of this guys who might not be his “best” reliever, but someone who can have the memory of a DB in football and handle pressure well.   He gets to call upon said guy and he gets extra kudos from media/fans in what was once a thankless job.  

yes they can be correlated, and dont get me wrong 2011 is already written, if you want to say that in 2011 he wasnt good in certain situations, that will be a logical leap to make. however to transform that into 2012 like its a certainty based on those couple innings is where trouble will arise. maybe something to take a closer look at in 2012 along with velocity and k/rate and other important statistical measures, but you also have to compare it to non-save situations, then determine what you should do next. 

I may be wrong but that velocity and those other numbers are decreasing regardless of situation, now if his stuff decreased a lot more in non-save situations then its important because the difference between non-save and save is what we are talking about. Im more of the opinion that he may not be what he was before regardless of the situation and we should be more careful but i dont think its statistically there to say hes unable to perform in only non save situations.

The chat with his average fb velocity is definitely wrong. Perez’s fastball averaged about 90 mph last year and he even claimed himself that he was unable to reach full speed all last year and that he feels much better this year. Plus who cares if he’s not striking batters out? Neither did Borowski or Wickman and they were both effective closers. 

What is the deal with people focusing on the ‘lowering K rates’ recently? Yes, its nice to not have to rely on the defence and everything, but there are frankly there are more ways to get an out. Also, on the last chart, his K rate has increased over the last year, while the velocity was going down. Could it be a control issue, then? Or is it a mental thing? Or are we really just guessing when, apparently, there must be knee jerk reactions to every negative scenario?

2012 is not a certainty.  but, I maintain that his SO/9IP is on the 2011 track as is his performance in save vs. non-save situations thus far.  incredibly small sample size, but I am not going to be surprised if it continues.

Doesn’t seem logical to me therefore it must be true especially in baseball.  I love stats don’t get me wrong but I think one can find just about any statistic one wishes to justify a position when it comes to baseball. 

We’re still talking about a sample size of 23 innings! Playing Jon’s game, I bet we can find 23 inning streaks that make any great pitcher look terrible or vice versa. CC Sabathia has a 4.00+ ERA in 40 innings thus far into the season.

There’s two competing hypotheses here: one, it’s a statistical thing caused by the obviously small sample size. Two, this guy who played baseball his entire life, who has faced adversity at every level of a game where it’s “produce or go home”, has some weird mental block about pitching in situations that are supposedly slightly less stressful than the situations he regularly pitches in.

Which one seems more believable?

first, we are talking about a 59IP sample size.  you cannot ignore the 36IP he did while saving games (I prefer to look at Plate Appearances rather than IP to be honest though).    and, the problem with any “non-long” reliever is that sample size will always be compact.   as Jon demonstrates above, the velocity and K-rate have changed yearly, so how can we expect him to pitch the same as his career moves forwards?   we wouldn’t for a starter, but would have a better idea because of a bigger sample size.

as for believeability, well, it all depends on how you look at it and how you phrase it:
 
Perez is an emotional guy (see Alex Rios).  Perez is the team’s closer.  Perez pitches better in the emotional/stressful environment of a close situation for the last 13months. 
 
I already mentioned sample size, but it is a trend.   Jon’s article makes it sound like the discussion had no statistical merit.   In the long-run, perhaps that is true, but the current trend makes it look false and that is where the discussion started.
 

1.) Yes, you’re always going to run into sample size issues with closers and relievers. That’s why so few have consistently similar years.

2.) It’s unrealistic to expect a sample size of 23 innings to sync up with a sample size of 36 innings. There’s obviously going to be variance. The question is, is it enough to draw realistic conclusions from? I don’t think so. In short, it may be fun to talk about, but it’s useless as legit analysis imo.

3.) Current trends have Josh Hamilton hitting 600 HRs this season. Just because we’re saddled with small sample size it doesn’t mean when should start forming opinions based on them. Finding trends in small sample size is the definition of baseball madness.

4.) I have always found the mental explanations of sports completely unbelievable. Statistical analysis into clutchness have never found it to exist. I just don’t buy that Perez is some how less emotional/excited whatever in a 2-2 game than a 2-1 game. If you could quantify the stress, I’d have to imagine the difference would be neglible.

5.) Like Jon said, I think there are plenty of things to worry about with Perez without peering into his psyche and evaluating how he pitches in what we arbitrarily deem “extremely stressful situations” vs. “slightly less extremely stessful situations”.

Am i the only one really tired of the overuse of the word ‘narrative’?  I see it in practically every article i read nowadays, not to mention my colleagues using it constantly.  The accusation of Chris Perez being bad in non-save situations is more a ‘claim’ than an ongoing story…   but i guess that just the narrative of me having pet peeves

it appears we are going to agree to disagree here.  i understand your arguments and believe in the statistical approach as well.  we just disagree on some of the finer points here.

1. but, to discuss the players, we have to start somewhere.

2. the variance between the situations is huge in this case.  my argument is to track it in 2012 and see if that variance holds up.  if it does, then it shows there is merit to this discussion.

3. hyperbole rarely proves points.  a seasonal variance vs. career arc is probably the way I should have phrased it.

4. and anyone that plays sports know that you feel more stress/anticipation near the end of a basketball game or an AB in the bottom of the 9th of a close game.   I think it’s importance can easily be overblown, but I also think it is there.

5. as long as he’s closing games w/ a 90% success rate, then I think we actually have less to worry about than most other teams.  and really, if his peripheral numbers do start affecting that success rate, then we take him out and plug in one of the other guys.   Closers come and go and are usually pretty easily replaceable.

Also; you’d need to define “best reliever”.  Relief pitching has evolved into situation based pitching versus simply a relief pitcher that comes in and closes out the game.

The game now demands you have a “long man”, righty and left matchup specialists, setup man and closer at your disposals.

I agree that it’s best to let it go. I think we’re at the point of just going in circles.

Only thing, I have to disagree with the notion that “we have to start somewhere” on general principle. If all you have is bad evidence, it doesn’t mean one should draw conclusions from it. Being the only evidence doesn’t make the intrinsic issues go away.

For those wondering, Chris Perez in ’11: Tie games, 14.1 IP, 3W, 5L, 4.39 ERA Non-ties: 45.1 IP, 1W, 2L, 2.98 ERA. Add in 2012… Tie games: 16.1 IP, 3W, 6L, 4.96 ERA, Non-ties: 57 IP, 1W, 2L, 3.00 ERA

Glad we didn’t trade him, the fans love him, and his trade value is skyrocketing.