The Captain's Blog

The Yankees’ lack of productivity with runners in scoring position has been a reoccurring theme all season. Even amid the team’s scorching 14-4 run in June, the Bronx Bombers offense has remained grounded in these crucial situations. In fact, the lineup has struggled even more during the recent hot stretch, which makes you wonder just how important hitting with runners in scoring position really is?

Yankees’ Monthly Production With Runners in Scoring Position

Note: Total games is one less than played because Yankees did not have an at bat with a runner in scoring position on May 2, 2012.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

The Yankees’ inability to come through in the clutch has not been lost on Joe Girardi or the hitters he pencils into the lineup each night. However, despite being asked about the problem after just about every game, no one seems to have any answers, at least none better than Russell Martin’s. “It just sucks,” the catcher recently replied when asked about the team’s malaise with men in scoring position.

Martin’s summation is appropriate in more ways than one. Not only has the team’s RISP struggles been a constant cause of consternation, but the underlying performance has, quite literally, been deserving of the catcher’s inadvertently harsh assessment. Need proof? The team’s .218 batting average with runners in scoring position ranks as the second worst franchise mark since 1952, only two points better than the 1967 club, which lost 90 games. By most measures, the 2012 Yankees’ performance with runners in scoring position ranks among the franchise’s worst in that category over the last 50 years, so Martin certainly wasn’t exaggerating.

Yankees RISP Performance, 1952-2012

Note: sOPS+ compares a team’s performance in a split to the league average. tOPS+ compares a team’s performance in a split to its overall performance. For both measures, a score greater than 100 is above average.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

Not every Yankee has been as blunt as Martin, and some have even tried to dismiss the importance of the split. Nick Swisher, for example, recently deflected some of the criticism of the team’s futility with men in scoring position by pointing out that the Yankees also lead the major leagues in home runs. Undoubtedly, the Yankees’ prowess in the power department has helped mitigate the fallout from the lineup’s struggles in clutch situations, but is being a prolific home run hitting team enough to compensate?

This team is more designed to hit home runs than anything. We lead the major leagues in home runs; no one talks about that. Everybody talks about the runners in scoring position thing, but I don’t stress it. I don’t think anybody else in here is, either.” – Nick Swisher, quoted by the New York Daily News, June 21, 2012.

Since 1952, the Yankees per-game run production has exhibited a strong correlation to the team’s homerun rate. However, a much stronger relationship exists between runs scored and batting performance (BA, OBP, and SLG) with runners in scoring position. In other words, a truly great offense can not live by the home run alone. However, that shouldn’t be construed to inflate the importance of hitting with runners in scoring position. After all, the strongest correlation between scoring and performance has to do with overall offensive rates, not just outcomes with men on second and third.

Relationship Between Run Production and Various Statistics, Yankees from 1952 to 2011

Note: sOPS+ compares a team’s performance in a split to the league average. A score greater than 100 is above average.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

The data above suggests that the Yankees overall performance in metrics like OBP, SLG and OPS are more important than how they do with runners in scoring position. More simply stated, you can’t score runs if you don’t have men on base in the first place, so, when it comes to scoring opportunities, there is strength in numbers. However, the Yankees’ constant failure with runners in scoring position has been extreme. Although that hasn’t stopped them from being one of the best offenses in baseball, it has led to a significant drop-off in run production versus recent seasons. Other than stolen bases, the only significant difference between the 2011 and 2012 editions of the Yankees’ offense has been the ability to convert scoring opportunities, so it stands to reason that deficiency has played a significant role in the over one-half run per game decline in production.

Comparison of 2011 and 2012 Yankees’ Offense

Note: sOPS+ compares a team’s performance in a split to the league average. tOPS+ compares a team’s performance in a split to its overall performance. For both measures, a score greater than 100 is above average.
Source: Baseball-reference.com and fangraphs.com

So, is there something the Yankees can do to improve their performance with runners in scoring position? The easiest answer is to look at the team’s extraordinarily low batting average on balls in play with runners in scoring position (BABIP with RISP for those who like tongue twisters) and conclude that it’s only a matter of time before things even out. Based on many of his post-game comments, Joe Girardi seems to be counting on that happening. Since 1973, the Yankees have been able to improve their OPS with RISP after June, but, for the most part, the gains have been incremental. On only four occasions was the team able to boost its final OPS with RISP by 50 or more points from where it stood at the end of June, so if the Yankees’ current rate is going to revert to the mean, it will wind up being a historic accomplishment.

Yankees’ OPS with RISP: First Three Months vs. Full Season, 1973-2011

Note: 1973 used as parameter because it is the first season for which full data is available.
Source: Baseball-reference.com

What’s the bottom line? The 2012 Yankees’ struggles with runners in scoring position have been epic by franchise standards, but because the team has maintained league leading offensive rates as well as a record setting home run pace, the offense has managed to score above the league average. However, the Yankees’ lineup has been used to a much higher rate of production, and it seems as if the team’s inability to cash in more of its scoring opportunities has hampered its usual output. Because the lineup does everything else relatively well, has a history of coming through in the clutch, and has been the victim of some bad luck with runners in scoring position, there’s probably a good chance that the Yankees’ RISP productivity will improve in the second half. Having said that, history suggests the uptick might not be as much as the Yankees would like. Of course, if the pitching staff can maintain some semblance of its recent performance, even a small increase in run production should keep the Yankees in the win column a lot more often than not.