The Giants And High-Leverage Dominance

The San Francisco Giants entered play Thursday with the best record in baseball at 38-21, a game ahead of their cross-bay rivals in Oakland and a full 3.5 games better than any other National League team. Given their recent history of World Series success, maybe this doesn’t stand out to you. If you know the team and have been following along, however, this seems more than a little surprising, because the Giants certainly don’t seem like the best team in baseball.

That’s not to disparage them – they’re a good team, to be sure, and their Pythagorean win-loss record of 36-23 doesn’t indicate that they’ve been benefitted too much from run distribution.

But that’s just based on run differential, and there’s certainly a lot of variance and good fortune that can go into how teams produce runs. For the Giants, well, being the clutchiest bunch of clutches who ever clutched is certainly helping.

The Colorado Rockies blog Purple Row wrote a bit about how the Giants have over-performed in high-leverage situations in the early parts of the season, a team-wide “skill” that doesn’t appear to be very repeatable outside of St. Louis. Chalking high-leverage performance up strictly to luck probably isn’t the best approach, but the degree to which San Francisco has outperformed every other National League team in high leverage situations at the dish is striking:

Team	PA	wOBA	wRC+	BABIP	BB%	K%	OPS
Orioles	252	0.364	129	0.362	9.9%	19.4%	0.838
Indians	287	0.361	137	0.330	8.4%	16.0%	0.834
Mariners	199	0.358	127	0.354	8.0%	22.6%	0.834
Athletics	289	0.347	123	0.296	10.7%	16.3%	0.804
Blue Jays	148	0.344	119	0.333	8.1%	20.9%	0.789
Giants	269	0.344	121	0.325	10.8%	20.1%	0.821
Tigers	179	0.343	117	0.300	10.1%	18.4%	0.796
White Sox	262	0.342	115	0.314	9.9%	26.0%	0.799
Marlins	275	0.341	117	0.337	12.7%	20.7%	0.781
Rockies	225	0.332	93	0.254	9.8%	20.4%	0.770
Reds	253	0.323	96	0.271	8.7%	19.8%	0.747
Twins	254	0.321	104	0.253	13.4%	22.4%	0.744
Pirates	312	0.321	106	0.302	8.7%	20.2%	0.725
Brewers	243	0.321	98	0.318	8.6%	23.0%	0.744
Royals	258	0.318	96	0.307	7.8%	20.5%	0.730
Rangers	207	0.313	88	0.299	11.1%	16.4%	0.730
Phillies	282	0.308	91	0.314	8.9%	20.6%	0.717
Diamondbacks	234	0.307	89	0.300	6.4%	19.7%	0.714
Yankees	217	0.305	89	0.322	9.2%	15.7%	0.695
Padres	222	0.301	92	0.228	11.3%	21.2%	0.683
Red Sox	340	0.297	84	0.286	13.5%	23.5%	0.675
Rays	280	0.295	89	0.271	10.4%	15.0%	0.669
Braves	243	0.295	84	0.312	7.4%	24.3%	0.680
Cardinals	276	0.278	77	0.250	9.1%	19.9%	0.629
Astros	200	0.271	68	0.266	7.0%	25.5%	0.601
Mets	317	0.265	67	0.262	11.4%	25.9%	0.606
Nationals	274	0.262	61	0.262	10.9%	23.7%	0.596
Dodgers	237	0.256	61	0.236	8.9%	21.5%	0.585
Cubs	257	0.246	48	0.226	10.9%	23.3%	0.553
Angels	223	0.239	50	0.220	9.9%	18.8%	0.545

While they rank tied for fifth overall in high leverage wOBA, they’re the top NL team and rank as above-average in terms of the number of high leverage plate appearances they’ve had. That is, not only have they been really good, they’ve done it over more situations than most.

The reason this stands out isn’t just that they’ve been good, though, but rather that on the whole they’re a completely average offense, ranking 16th in wOBA and sixth on the senior circuit. They’ve “saved” their best performance for when it matters, in so much as any team could possibly control that. Have a look at how their high leverage wOBA compares to their wOBA in other situations:

Team	HighLev PA	HighLev wOBA	MedLev PA	MedLev wOBA	LowLev PA	LowLev wOBA
Orioles	252	0.364	981	0.307	971	0.327
Indians	287	0.361	973	0.338	1042	0.292
Mariners	199	0.358	939	0.279	1044	0.303
Athletics	289	0.347	879	0.342	1177	0.330
Blue Jays	148	0.344	889	0.343	1264	0.346
Giants	269	0.344	876	0.340	1086	0.282
Tigers	179	0.343	845	0.321	1054	0.323
White Sox	262	0.342	977	0.328	1070	0.300
Marlins	275	0.341	844	0.310	1117	0.330
Rockies	225	0.332	921	0.372	1092	0.329
Reds	253	0.323	925	0.291	955	0.304
Brewers	243	0.321	922	0.325	1101	0.313
Pirates	312	0.321	986	0.320	980	0.306
Twins	254	0.321	899	0.304	1061	0.312
Royals	258	0.318	907	0.291	1069	0.288
Rangers	207	0.313	865	0.315	1150	0.320
Phillies	282	0.308	969	0.294	965	0.305
Diamondbacks	234	0.307	904	0.293	1186	0.326
Yankees	217	0.305	880	0.321	1134	0.305
Padres	222	0.301	927	0.274	1030	0.286
Red Sox	340	0.297	996	0.299	981	0.329
Braves	243	0.295	961	0.314	939	0.291
Rays	280	0.295	906	0.275	1126	0.326
Cardinals	276	0.278	934	0.322	1100	0.295
Astros	200	0.271	877	0.317	1167	0.309
Mets	317	0.265	998	0.309	1018	0.292
Nationals	274	0.262	847	0.340	1070	0.307
Dodgers	237	0.256	954	0.321	1164	0.332
Cubs	257	0.246	863	0.306	1010	0.295
Angels	223	0.239	847	0.337	1195	0.332

That’s a lot to sort through, so what we can do for a rough gauge is compare high leverage performance with low and medium leverage performance, simply looking at the percentage change when the heat gets turned up:

Team	% of PA hiLev	HiLev/LowLev	HighLev/MedLev	HighLev/Other
Mariners	9.1%	118.2%	128.3%	122.8%
Indians	12.5%	123.6%	106.8%	114.9%
Orioles	11.4%	111.3%	118.6%	114.9%
Giants	12.1%	122.0%	101.2%	111.7%
Royals	11.5%	110.4%	109.3%	109.9%
White Sox	11.3%	114.0%	104.3%	109.1%
Reds	11.9%	106.3%	111.0%	108.5%
Padres	10.2%	105.2%	109.9%	107.4%
Tigers	8.6%	106.2%	106.9%	106.5%
Marlins	12.3%	103.3%	110.0%	106.1%
Twins	11.5%	102.9%	105.6%	104.1%
Athletics	12.3%	105.2%	101.5%	103.5%
Phillies	12.7%	101.0%	104.8%	102.8%
Pirates	13.7%	104.9%	100.3%	102.6%
Brewers	10.7%	102.6%	98.8%	100.8%
Blue Jays	6.4%	99.4%	100.3%	99.8%
Diamondbacks	10.1%	94.2%	104.8%	98.5%
Rangers	9.3%	97.8%	99.4%	98.5%
Yankees	9.7%	100.0%	95.0%	97.8%
Braves	11.3%	101.4%	93.9%	97.5%
Rays	12.1%	90.5%	107.3%	97.3%
Rockies	10.1%	100.9%	89.2%	95.2%
Red Sox	14.7%	90.3%	99.3%	94.6%
Cardinals	11.9%	94.2%	86.3%	90.4%
Mets	13.6%	90.8%	85.8%	88.2%
Astros	8.9%	87.7%	85.5%	86.7%
Cubs	12.1%	83.4%	80.4%	82.0%
Nationals	12.5%	85.3%	77.1%	81.5%
Dodgers	10.1%	77.1%	79.8%	78.3%
Angels	9.8%	72.0%	70.9%	71.5%

The Giants are performing 11.7 percent better when the leverage is turned up, the biggest gain of any National League team. What’s more, they’ve saved their worst performances for when the leverage is the lowest, ranking only behind Cleveland in the gap between high and low leverage performance at 22 percent.

There are a few ways someone could classify that as “luck,” especially considering the largest “high versus low” gain over a full season in 2013 was just 16.4 percent (Kansas City), and they were the only team to top a 7.1 percent high leverage gain. Again in 2012, an 11.5 percent mark (Cincinnati) topped the list, and in 2011, two teams managed a double-digit percentage gain but none topped 13.9 percent (Milwaukee). In short, recent history suggests a team can’t sustain being 20 percent better in high leverage situations than low leverage ones, so the Giants are surely due to regress some.

How much has this benefited San Francisco on the offensive end? Well, that wOBA in high leverage situations has been worth 5.6 weighted runs above average, and their offense in other situations has been 9.7 runs below average. Inputting their wOBA in medium and low leverage situations in place of their .344 mark in high leverage spots, they would lose 6.7 weighted runs, enough to drop their Pythagorean win-loss record another half-win. That’s some rough back of the envelope math, but needless to say this unexpected performance in the clutch has probably added a win or so to their total based on math alone, but may have manifested itself in specific situations to help lead to more real wins. The fact that their projected winning percentage moving forward is just .524 rather than the .644 they’ve amassed so far gives reason to be skeptical they can keep this up.

To this point, the Giants haven’t been all that fortunate in terms of every player outperforming expectations in high leverage spots, but rather that their best bats have tended to come up in high leverage situations. Hunter Pence has been incredibly “clutch” with a .458 high leverage wOBA, and he leads the team with 32 such plate appearances. Pablo Sandoval has struggled and Brandon Belt hasn’t had nearly as many important appearances as you’d expect, but otherwise the distribution of these appearances has been favorable.

Name	HighLev PA	HighLev wOBA	Overall wOBA
Hunter Pence	32	0.458	0.367
Pablo Sandoval	30	0.178	0.305
Brandon Crawford	28	0.279	0.313
Angel Pagan	24	0.307	0.349
Buster Posey	23	0.403	0.319
Michael Morse	23	0.399	0.393
Hector Sanchez	19	0.356	0.266
Brandon Belt	19	0.262	0.356
Brandon Hicks	18	0.541	0.297
Gregor Blanco	14	0.521	0.297
Joaquin Arias	9	0.111	0.163
Tyler Colvin	7	0.415	0.359
Juan Perez	7	0.145	0.193
Ehire Adrianza	6	0.178	0.169
Madison Bumgarner	4	0.529	0.299
Tim Lincecum	2	0.000	0.077
Matt Cain	1	0.892	0.275
Tim Hudson	1	0.000	0.096
Ryan Vogelsong	1	0.000	0.181
Jean Machi	1	0.000	0.000

In part as a result of this, Pence and Morse both rank in the top-10 in win probability added this season despite ranking 32nd and 18th, respectively, in wOBA.

It’s been more of the same on the pitching side, too, with the Giants locking things down when the leverage is cranked up:

Team	HighLev ERA	HighLev TBF	HighLev BABIP	HighLev FIP	MedLev FIP	LowLev FIP	High/Low FIP
Red Sox	6.71	241	0.272	3.01	3.62	3.62	83.1%
Tigers	8.38	229	0.277	3.37	3.55	3.80	88.7%
Dodgers	6.97	287	0.280	3.53	3.61	3.87	91.2%
White Sox	9.41	247	0.293	3.92	4.17	4.24	92.5%
Phillies	7.53	303	0.263	3.93	3.91	4.23	92.9%
Giants	4.92	251	0.231	3.26	3.58	3.43	95.0%
Reds	8.11	234	0.208	3.64	4.28	3.77	96.6%
Braves	6.48	273	0.297	2.58	3.76	2.64	97.7%
Rockies	9.78	236	0.280	4.65	4.42	4.68	99.4%
Orioles	8.43	281	0.285	4.22	4.35	4.18	101.0%
Royals	8.28	225	0.307	4.06	4.03	3.95	102.8%
Athletics	7.52	250	0.264	3.62	3.50	3.51	103.1%
Yankees	7.01	250	0.253	4.13	3.35	3.98	103.8%
Astros	9.62	219	0.347	4.32	3.59	4.07	106.1%
Twins	10.83	228	0.320	3.99	3.91	3.75	106.4%
Nationals	8.41	186	0.365	3.39	3.29	3.17	106.9%
Rangers	10.67	212	0.286	4.36	4.09	3.90	111.8%
Rays	8.76	281	0.317	3.75	4.36	3.32	113.0%
Padres	5.84	229	0.211	3.40	4.16	2.99	113.7%
Pirates	7.71	326	0.273	4.90	3.81	4.26	115.0%
Angels	12.50	203	0.321	4.53	3.68	3.87	117.1%
Cardinals	8.55	319	0.305	3.63	3.33	3.08	117.9%
Blue Jays	10.05	255	0.263	4.88	3.62	4.11	118.7%
Mets	7.00	323	0.263	4.46	3.88	3.75	118.9%
Marlins	7.73	254	0.309	4.03	3.85	3.36	119.9%
Cubs	8.82	218	0.292	4.10	3.35	3.22	127.3%
Mariners	8.02	221	0.231	4.57	3.96	3.54	129.1%
Brewers	9.21	224	0.245	5.02	3.77	3.86	130.1%
Diamondbacks	9.89	226	0.282	5.11	4.37	3.61	141.6%
Indians	9.44	283	0.267	4.71	3.71	3.31	142.3%

Here, the Giants have the lowest high leverage ERA by nearly a full run, trimming their FIP by five percent from low leverage spots. This is a case where “luck” is harder to use as an explanation, because a manager’s bullpen usage plays a key role. Consider how starters and relievers differ, first:

Pitcher	FIP	pLI
Starter	3.86	0.98
Reliever	3.66	1.13

Relievers have lower FIPs than starters and tend to pitch in higher leverage situations, on average, which both make perfect sense, but the previous table clearly shows that pitchers struggle when the leverage is high. What we see with the Giants in particular is that Bruce Bochy has done well to get his best arms into the game when the situation calls for it:

Pitcher	FIP	gmLI	HighLev TBF	HighLev FIP
Sergio Romo	4.65	1.99	40	3.23
Santiago Casilla	3.29	1.74	44	3.81
Javier Lopez	4.56	1.41	7	0.66
Jeremy Affeldt	2.46	1.37	13	1.40
Jean Machi	2.05	1.33	26	2.10
Jake Dunning	7.56	0.82		n/a
Yusmeiro Petit	2.42	0.81	12	8.31
Juan Gutierrez	3.45	0.79	6	0.06
David Huff	4.31	0.62	6	3.66
George Kontos	1.51	0.52		n/a

You can quibble with Romo’s usage some but he also has a multi-year track record to suggest he’s beter than he’s performed so far this season. And despite Casilla’s struggles with FIP in the clutch, he’s posted a 2.25 ERA in those spots. Like on the hitting side, the result is several Giants among the leaders in win probability added, with Machi, Casilla and Romo ranking 10th, 17th and 20th, respectively despite none of them ranking in the top-30 for FIP overall.

For the season so far, the Giants have been involved in the single game with the highest average leverage index, three of the top-50, eight of the top-100 and 17 of the 276 games that have had an average leveraged index of 1.5 or greater, not a disproportionate share at any cutoff.

Source: FanGraphs
In those games, however, they’re respectively 1-0, 2-1, 4-4 and 9-8, and they’re 13-14 in games with an above-average leverage index over the course of the game. That is to say, while their aggregate numbers in high-leverage spots are extreme, they haven’t made a difference in the highest-leverage games (they’re also 12-9 in one-run games, only 10th in the league). Instead, you get early-inning dominance when the leverage remains high (they have four first-inning home runs when the leverage is above 1.5 and are 17-2 when leading after one) and a bullpen that locks things down if the leverage ratchets up later (they’re 31-0 when leading entering the ninth).

None of this is to say they won’t be regressing over the last two-thirds of the season, because they almost surely will. Players and teams can’t just turn things up when their adrenaline rises, otherwise Brett Lawrie would be batting 1.000. Luckily for the Giants, the wins they’ve already achieved are in the bank, and regression can’t change their record to date. Even with some regression factored in, they remain the NL West favorites by roughly four games. And, of course, should the race come down to a high leverage final week, the Giants would be untouchable.