Jump to content

Who were the best Oriole clutch hitters?


Frobby

Recommended Posts

These are two very different questions.

Question #1: Frank

Question #2: Eddie

I agree with this. Frank treated every at bat like it was the 7th game of the World Series, while Eddie cranked it up. I always thought you could see it in Eddie's eyes when the focus went up.

Both were great but IMO #20 was the best to ever put on an Oriole uniform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Aside from Frank and Eddie, I remember being confident in Brooks, Jim Dwyer (!) and Ken Singleton--although I think that in memory this type of thing is often based on one or two particular seasons. I mean when someone like Cal in 1991 or Melvin in 2003/2004 came to the plate, chances were he was going to produce because he was having a fabulous year in general. I think there are two categories of clutch, one negative and one positive: someone having a good season who doesn't choke and someone who repeatedly rises from obscurity to deliver in crucial situations. And even the latter can often be explained away as proper placement in those situations by Earl Weaver, e.g. the case of Benny Ayala.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most clutch is definitely Eddie.

BRob may actually be the least clutch hitter on the current O's. There's nobody better in baseball leading off an inning in my opinion, but aside from offensive zeros like Izturis, Roberts is the last guy I want to see coming up with 2 outs and the bases loaded. For some reason, Roberts underperforms with men on base in clutch situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best hitters. Frank, Eddie, Cal, Singleton, selected years of Brooks, Mora, Boog, Raffy, Lowenstein, Markakis. I'm sure I'm missing a few.

I really think you have touched on something that really defines clutch hitting.

A confident player can not wait to get to the plate with runners on base. Cal, Mora, Raffy had years and streaks where they could not miss with runners on base. I like everyone else here am a big Ripken fan and there were years where he was deadly. His 2 MVP years, he was money with men on base. His streak of clutch hitting when he was getting ready to break the Gehrig record was astounding. There were also times were he was not the guy I wanted to see coming up with the game on the line. The same goes for Raffy, Melvin and others. It gets down to the mindset of the player at the time as well as the pitcher on the mound. The pitcher is also performing and trying in the same clutch situation.

Frank and Eddie were two of the greatest hitters ever and they were more consistent. Brooksie, in his prime was always a better late game hitter. The other guy who IMO stood out consistently in the clutch was Robbie Alomar. He seemed to stick to his approach and have good at bats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most clutch is definitely Eddie.

BRob may actually be the least clutch hitter on the current O's. There's nobody better in baseball leading off an inning in my opinion, but aside from offensive zeros like Izturis, Roberts is the last guy I want to see coming up with 2 outs and the bases loaded. For some reason, Roberts underperforms with men on base in clutch situations.

Roberts overall, career: .776 OPS

RISP: .800

RISP, 2 outs: .739

High Leverage Situations: .852

Low Leverage: .788

Bases Loaded: .997

Seems like pretty typical splits to me, pretty good in the clutch if you think that means something. And he's basically an MVP with the bases loaded. If he's the least clutch hitter on the O's were in pretty good shape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but Frank's clutch OPS were all in the .900 range where Eddie's were in the upper .800 range. Also the more the game got close and late, the better Frank got. Not so with Eddie. Eddie may have hit better in clutch situations than he did normally, but he wasn't a better clutch hitter IMO. If I had to choose between Eddie and Frank in the clutch, I'd choose Frank, and I certainly wouldn't regard him as a distant second to Eddie

Eddie Murray, close & late, 1978-1985

1978: .307/.381/.574, 8 HR, 22 RBI (119 PA, 101 AB, 31 H, 14 BB)

1979: .357/.439/.694, 9 HR, 27 RBI (115 PA, 98 AB, 35 H, 15 BB)

1980: .295/.346/.484, 4 HR, 10 RBI (104 PA, 95 AB, 28 H, 7 BB)

1981: .296/.400/.500, 3 HR, 12 RBI (65 PA, 54 AB, 16 H, 10 BB)

1982: .338/.459/.545, 4 HR, 19 RBI (98 PA, 77 AB, 26 H, 19 BB)

1983: .342/.451/.618, 5 HR, 19 RBI (91 PA, 76 AB, 26 H, 15 BB)

1984: .374/.500/.736, 9 HR, 34 RBI (116 PA, 91 AB, 34 H, 24 BB

1985: .380/.427/.747, 7 HR, 27 RBI (89 PA, 79 AB, 30 H, 8 BB)

That's an 8 year span of .337/.428/.617, 49 HR, 170 RBI (797 PA, 671 AB, 226 H, 112 BB). Considering that a normal season for Eddie was about 680 PA, that would be the equivalent of about 42 HR, 145 RBI in a season's worth of close & late ABs.

I realize those 8 years weren't Eddie's entire career, or even his entire Orioles career. But that's the period that forged his reputation as an amazing clutch hitter.

Now here is Frank's career as an Oriole:

1966: .329/.473/.553, 5 HR, 13 RBI (110 PA, 85 AB, 28 H, 23 BB)

1967: .215/.326/.405, 3 HR, 11 RBI (92 PA, 79 AB, 17 H, 13 BB)

1968: .232/.426/.362, 1 HR, 4 RBI (94 PA, 69 AB, 16 H, 23 BB)

1969: .350/.444/.570, 6 HR, 21 RBI (117 PA, 100 AB, 35 H, 14 BB)

1970: .299/400/.563, 6 HR, 18 RBI (105 PA, 87 AB, 26 H, 14 BB)

1971: .323/.432/.508, 3 HR, 14 RBI (81 PA, 65 AB, 21 H, 12 BB)

Altogether that's .295/.419/.501 with 24 HR and 81 RBI in 599 PA. That's good, but it isn't close to as good as Eddie in his prime 8 years. And I'm pretty sure I could add in Eddie's other Orioles seasons and he'd still be better late & close than Frank was as an Oriole.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of FRobby, as my screen name suggests. He was my childhood idol, and a great, great player. But late in the game, game on the line, Eddie's my guy.

BTW to Old#5Fan: look how many walks Frank was taking in these late & close situations. 99 walks in 599 plate appearances (25 were intentional). Good hitters take their walks, even when the game is on the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eddie Murray, close & late, 1978-1985

1978: .307/.381/.574, 8 HR, 22 RBI (119 PA, 101 AB, 31 H, 14 BB)

1979: .357/.439/.694, 9 HR, 27 RBI (115 PA, 98 AB, 35 H, 15 BB)

1980: .295/.346/.484, 4 HR, 10 RBI (104 PA, 95 AB, 28 H, 7 BB)

1981: .296/.400/.500, 3 HR, 12 RBI (65 PA, 54 AB, 16 H, 10 BB)

1982: .338/.459/.545, 4 HR, 19 RBI (98 PA, 77 AB, 26 H, 19 BB)

1983: .342/.451/.618, 5 HR, 19 RBI (91 PA, 76 AB, 26 H, 15 BB)

1984: .374/.500/.736, 9 HR, 34 RBI (116 PA, 91 AB, 34 H, 24 BB

1985: .380/.427/.747, 7 HR, 27 RBI (89 PA, 79 AB, 30 H, 8 BB)

That's an 8 year span of .337/.428/.617, 49 HR, 170 RBI (797 PA, 671 AB, 226 H, 112 BB). Considering that a normal season for Eddie was about 680 PA, that would be the equivalent of about 42 HR, 145 RBI in a season's worth of close & late ABs.

I realize those 8 years weren't Eddie's entire career, or even his entire Orioles career. But that's the period that forged his reputation as an amazing clutch hitter.

Now here is Frank's career as an Oriole:

1966: .329/.473/.553, 5 HR, 13 RBI (110 PA, 85 AB, 28 H, 23 BB)

1967: .215/.326/.405, 3 HR, 11 RBI (92 PA, 79 AB, 17 H, 13 BB)

1968: .232/.426/.362, 1 HR, 4 RBI (94 PA, 69 AB, 16 H, 23 BB)

1969: .350/.444/.570, 6 HR, 21 RBI (117 PA, 100 AB, 35 H, 14 BB)

1970: .299/400/.563, 6 HR, 18 RBI (105 PA, 87 AB, 26 H, 14 BB)

1971: .323/.432/.508, 3 HR, 14 RBI (81 PA, 65 AB, 21 H, 12 BB)

Altogether that's .295/.419/.501 with 24 HR and 81 RBI in 599 PA. That's good, but it isn't close to as good as Eddie in his prime 8 years. And I'm pretty sure I could add in Eddie's other Orioles seasons and he'd still be better late & close than Frank was as an Oriole.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of FRobby, as my screen name suggests. He was my childhood idol, and a great, great player. But late in the game, game on the line, Eddie's my guy.

BTW to Old#5Fan: look how many walks Frank was taking in these late & close situations. 99 walks in 599 plate appearances (25 were intentional). Good hitters take their walks, even when the game is on the line.

Good stuff, for those who look at 67/68 and question Frank, he was injured in 1967 crashing into Al Weiss at second base and suffered a serious concussion and double vision which affected him for a a long while. I can still see the SI cover in 1967, titled Birds fall down on Broken Wings. Frank getting hurt was certainly part of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good stuff, for those who look at 67/68 and question Frank, he was injured in 1967 crashing into Al Weiss at second base and suffered a serious concussion and double vision which affected him for a a long while. I can still see the SI cover in 1967, titled Birds fall down on Broken Wings. Frank getting hurt was certainly part of the problem.

To this day, Al Weis is one of my most hated players. In addition to that injury, the guy killed us in the 1969 World Series, hitting .455/.563/.727. This from a guy who was a .219/.278/.275 career hitter.

Nah, I really don't hate the guy, he was just doing his job. But he caused O's fans a lot of heartache.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am writing from my blackberry so I can't look stuff up right now. But I don't think Frank's clutch numbers were better than his overall numbers. He was just a great hitter in all situations. Eddie was not as good an overall hitter but he was noticeably much better in clutch situations than he was overall.

This is probably why we remember this:

I  	Year  	G  	GS  	PA  	AB  	R  	H  	2B  	3B  	HR  	RBI  	SB  	CS  	BB  	SO  	BA  	OBP  	SLG  	OPS  	TB  	GDP  	HBP  	SH  	SF  	IBB  	ROE  	BAbip  	tOPS+  	sOPS+1977 	75 		112 	100 		25 	7 	1 	6 	20 	0 	0 	11 	24 	.250 	.321 	.520 	.841 	52 	4 	0 	0 	1 	5 	2 	.268 	107 	1331978 	91 		119 	101 		31 	3 	0 	8 	22 	1 	1 	14 	15 	.307 	.381 	.574 	.956 	58 	1 	0 	1 	3 	4 	1 	.284 	127 	1721979 	80 		115 	98 		35 	6 	0 	9 	26 	3 	0 	15 	14 	.357 	.439 	.694 	1.132 	68 	4 	0 	1 	1 	2 	2 	.342 	165 	2121980 	75 		104 	95 		28 	6 	0 	4 	10 	0 	1 	7 	7 	.295 	.346 	.484 	.830 	46 	4 	1 	0 	1 	3 	3 	.282 	91 	1361981 	46 		65 	54 		16 	2 	0 	3 	12 	0 	0 	10 	4 	.296 	.400 	.500 	.900 	27 	3 	0 	0 	1 	5 	2 	.271 	105 	1561982 	73 		98 	77 		26 	4 	0 	4 	19 	1 	1 	19 	13 	.338 	.459 	.545 	1.005 	42 	0 	0 	0 	2 	8 	2 	.355 	117 	1881983 	72 		91 	76 		26 	4 	1 	5 	19 	2 	0 	15 	8 	.342 	.451 	.618 	1.069 	47 	1 	0 	0 	0 	4 	1 	.333 	130 	1991984 	88 		116 	91 		34 	4 	1 	9 	34 	2 	0 	24 	14 	.374 	.500 	.736 	1.236 	67 	1 	0 	0 	1 	11 	2 	.362 	166 	2561985 	72 		89 	79 		30 	8 	0 	7 	27 	0 	1 	8 	6 	.380 	.427 	.747 	1.174 	59 	0 	0 	0 	2 	4 	0 	.338 	154 	228

Until about 1985, Murray was a beast late and close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brooks was not a great hitter..but he was a big CLUTCH hitter. Not only just in big games and All star games..but in clutch situations.He could get into a hot streak and no one could get him out.

Lots of examples, but the best one of course is the 70 World Series,

I totally agree with you Roy. I can recall attending anywhere from 5-10 games per year when Brooks was in his heyday in the 60's and invariably he would get the big gamewinning homer or clutch hit in most of them. Especially late in the game he almost always came through. This is what annoys the bejeezus out of me when some of these stats gurus here who weren't even a glint in their father's eyes when Brooks was in his prime claim he wasn't that clutch. I would love to take them back in time to wipe that smug know-it-all look off their faces when Brooks would prove them otherwise.:clap3: BTW, I was actually going to put him right up there with Frank as being clutch (although Frank was a much better hitter otherwise) but didn't want to hear the grief I would get from those who weren't around.:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you Roy. I can recall attending anywhere from 5-10 games per year when Brooks was in his heyday in the 60's and invariably he would get the big gamewinning homer or clutch hit in most of them. Especially late in the game he almost always came through. This is what annoys the bejeezus out of me when some of these stats gurus here who weren't even a glint in their father's eyes when Brooks was in his prime claim he wasn't that clutch. I would love to take them back in time to wipe that smug know-it-all look off their faces when Brooks would prove them otherwise.:clap3: BTW, I was actually going to put him right up there with Frank as being clutch (although Frank was a much better hitter otherwise) but didn't want to hear the grief I would get from those who weren't around.:(

When's the wedding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you Roy. I can recall attending anywhere from 5-10 games per year when Brooks was in his heyday in the 60's and invariably he would get the big gamewinning homer or clutch hit in most of them. Especially late in the game he almost always came through. This is what annoys the bejeezus out of me when some of these stats gurus here who weren't even a glint in their father's eyes when Brooks was in his prime claim he wasn't that clutch. I would love to take them back in time to wipe that smug know-it-all look off their faces when Brooks would prove them otherwise.:clap3: BTW, I was actually going to put him right up there with Frank as being clutch (although Frank was a much better hitter otherwise) but didn't want to hear the grief I would get from those who weren't around.:(

Like most players he was good sometimes, not so good others.

I  	Year  	G  	GS  	PA  	AB  	R  	H  	2B  	3B  	HR  	RBI  	SB  	CS  	BB  	SO  	BA  	OBP  	SLG  	OPS  	TB  	GDP  	HBP  	SH  	SF  	IBB  	ROE  	BAbip  	tOPS+  	sOPS+1955 	2 		3 	3 		1 	0 	0 	0 	1 	0 	0 	0 	2 	.333 	.333 	.333 	.667 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1.000 	632 	871956 	7 		9 	8 		1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	1 	.125 	.222 	.125 	.347 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	.143 	23 	-1I 	1957 	12 		16 	16 		3 	1 	0 	0 	1 	0 	0 	0 	1 	.188 	.188 	.250 	.438 	4 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	.200 	35 	221958 	65 		88 	80 		16 	7 	0 	0 	6 	0 	0 	4 	8 	.200 	.235 	.288 	.523 	23 	5 	0 	3 	1 	0 	0 	.219 	75 	471959 	41 		65 	64 		22 	3 	0 	1 	7 	0 	1 	1 	9 	.344 	.354 	.438 	.791 	28 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	1 	.389 	123 	1181960 	89 		119 	109 		34 	4 	3 	3 	17 	0 	0 	4 	18 	.312 	.330 	.486 	.817 	53 	4 	0 	4 	2 	0 	2 	.344 	111 	1271961 	76 		110 	101 		28 	4 	3 	0 	10 	0 	0 	6 	16 	.277 	.315 	.376 	.691 	38 	4 	0 	2 	1 	2 	2 	.326 	89 	871962 	86 		128 	112 		30 	1 	2 	1 	8 	0 	0 	9 	15 	.268 	.315 	.339 	.654 	38 	2 	0 	4 	3 	2 	2 	.293 	62 	831963 	78 		107 	97 		33 	4 	1 	3 	13 	0 	2 	7 	18 	.340 	.381 	.495 	.876 	48 	2 	0 	2 	1 	4 	2 	.390 	160 	1581964 	87 		120 	105 		26 	5 	0 	5 	18 	1 	0 	10 	13 	.248 	.319 	.438 	.757 	46 	3 	1 	4 	0 	4 	0 	.241 	71 	1211965 	84 		122 	112 		37 	7 	0 	2 	11 	1 	0 	10 	9 	.330 	.385 	.446 	.832 	50 	5 	0 	0 	0 	4 	1 	.347 	110 	1461966 	82 		119 	110 		30 	5 	1 	3 	11 	0 	0 	7 	4 	.273 	.322 	.418 	.740 	46 	5 	1 	1 	0 	3 	0 	.262 	91 	1141967 	88 		121 	110 		25 	4 	0 	5 	11 	0 	0 	6 	9 	.227 	.269 	.400 	.669 	44 	6 	1 	2 	2 	1 	0 	.204 	74 	1031968 	80 		117 	98 		21 	5 	0 	3 	10 	0 	1 	13 	8 	.214 	.298 	.357 	.655 	35 	3 	0 	3 	3 	7 	4 	.200 	84 	1081969 	83 		120 	99 		24 	5 	1 	4 	10 	0 	0 	17 	11 	.242 	.359 	.434 	.793 	43 	3 	1 	3 	0 	6 	2 	.238 	130 	1271970 	84 		120 	107 		28 	4 	0 	4 	14 	0 	0 	12 	9 	.262 	.336 	.411 	.747 	44 	3 	0 	1 	0 	2 	2 	.255 	96 	1081971 	73 		104 	96 		36 	6 	0 	4 	20 	0 	0 	7 	7 	.375 	.417 	.563 	.980 	54 	3 	0 	1 	0 	3 	0 	.376 	159 	1871972 	95 		131 	116 		27 	5 	0 	1 	9 	0 	0 	10 	9 	.233 	.297 	.302 	.599 	35 	4 	1 	3 	1 	2 	0 	.243 	86 	781973 	77 		110 	97 		35 	3 	0 	1 	15 	0 	0 	9 	7 	.361 	.421 	.423 	.843 	41 	4 	1 	3 	0 	3 	0 	.382 	152 	1401974 	84 		129 	109 		24 	4 	0 	0 	8 	0 	0 	15 	12 	.220 	.312 	.257 	.569 	28 	3 	0 	4 	1 	7 	1 	.245 	57 	641975 	77 		113 	101 		24 	4 	0 	4 	17 	0 	0 	9 	7 	.238 	.300 	.396 	.696 	40 	0 	0 	3 	0 	4 	1 	.222 	157 	961976 	39 		54 	50 		10 	1 	1 	0 	2 	0 	0 	2 	5 	.200 	.231 	.260 	.491 	13 	1 	0 	2 	0 	0 	0 	.222 	81 	451977 	12 		14 	13 		2 	0 	0 	1 	3 	0 	0 	1 	1 	.154 	.214 	.385 	.599 	5 	1 	0 	0 	0 	0 	0 	.091 	152 	66

Overall, Brooks was about the same in the clutch as otherwise:

I  	Split  	     G  	GS  	PA  	AB  	R  	H  	2B  	3B  	HR  	RBI  	SB  	CS  	BB  	SO  	BA  	OBP  	SLG  	OPS  	TB  	GDP  	HBP  	SH  	SF  	IBB  	ROE  	BAbip  	tOPS+I 	2 outs, RISP 	1239 		1543 	1359 		340 	50 	12 	33 	449 	4 	2 	176 	142 	.250 	.340 	.377 	.717 	513 	0 	8 	0 	0 	53 	16 	.259 	100I 	Late & Close 	1501 		2139 	1913 		517 	82 	12 	45 	222 	2 	4 	160 	199 	.270 	.326 	.396 	.722 	758 	62 	6 	45 	15 	54 	21 	.280 	100I 	Tie Game 	1997 		3400 	3041 		813 	141 	16 	73 	366 	13 	11 	261 	280 	.267 	.326 	.396 	.722 	1205 	87 	16 	53 	29 	55 	45 	.272 	100I 	Within 1 R 	2573 		6427 	5779 		1560 	268 	40 	146 	719 	17 	15 	485 	553 	.270 	.326 	.406 	.732 	2346 	148 	27 	76 	60 	89 	89 	.275 	102I 	Within 2 R 	2750 		8448 	7618 		2067 	361 	53 	197 	977 	22 	19 	627 	730 	.271 	.326 	.410 	.737 	3125 	206 	36 	86 	81 	99 	114 	.276 	103I 	Within 3 R 	2818 		9750 	8804 		2373 	409 	59 	228 	1133 	26 	20 	711 	839 	.270 	.324 	.407 	.731 	3584 	239 	44 	96 	95 	105 	137 	.274 	102I 	Within 4 R 	2843 		10539 	9518 		2561 	440 	63 	245 	1217 	26 	23 	774 	886 	.269 	.324 	.406 	.730 	3862 	264 	46 	99 	102 	114 	141 	.273 	102I 	Margin > 4 R 	699 		1242 	1135 		287 	42 	5 	23 	141 	2 	2 	86 	108 	.253 	.306 	.359 	.666 	408 	38 	7 	2 	12 	6 	14 	.260 	85

Shocking as this may be, your memory isn't the historical record, O5F.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...