Mythbusters: Trevor Hoffman

[HollywoodLeo]

Myth: Trevor Hoffman sucks in non-save situations, always has.

Does Trevor Hoffman struggle in non-save situations? -- The Hardball Times

Often a team will bring its closer into a tie game in the ninth inning at home on the theory that if he can hold the opposition in the top half of the inning, his team has a chance to win in the bottom half. When the Padres try this (as they did recently against the Dodgers) and it doesn't work, fans and analysts alike are quick to note that Trevor Hoffman isn't effective in non-save situations. Frequently this observation is accompanied by calls to hold him out of such situations in the future.

But here's a question to consider: Is it true? Does Hoffman really struggle in non-save situations, or is the power of perception at work?

To answer this question, I ran through Hoffman's game logs at Baseball-Reference. Using B-R's Play Index, it's possible to choose only those games that represent save opportunities. I did that for 1994-2007 (no 1993 because Hoffman wasn't a closer yet) and dumped everything into a spreadsheet. And then I added everything together and came up with the following:

<stats shown here comparing Trevor's stats in save situations compared to non save situations from 1994-2007, but I couldn't format them correctly and don't have time to do so, so click on the link to view them>

Three things jump out at me here. First, Hoffman's ERA is indeed higher in non-save situations. Second, Hoffman appears to be less concerned with putting runners on base in non-save situations—his strikeouts are down 4%, his hits allowed are up 10%, and his walks are up a staggering 52%.
So, yeah, it looks like the naysayers are right. End of story.
Wait, I forgot to mention the third thing that jumped out at me: the difference in innings pitched. Hoffman has worked only half as many innings in non-save situations as in save situations.

Conclusion:

Myth Busted

[NYgiantsfan5689]

what does the innings matter? ERA is an inning-resistant statistic and if his hits are UP in LESS INNINGS i think that's telling. especially if they're percentage-wise. i would say this "myth" is confirmed

[HollywoodLeo]

what does the innings matter? ERA is an inning-resistant statistic and if his hits are UP in LESS INNINGS i think that's telling. especially if they're percentage-wise. i would say this "myth" is confirmed

His ERA in non save situations is "up" to an astonishing 2.81....I wouldn't say that constitues suckage

MYTH remains busted.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

The myth isn't that he sucks in non-save situations. It's that he's worse in non-save situations. The mere fact that his ERA is up is a sign that he's worse. Not bad. Just worse.

"Myth" Confirmed

[Dry1313]

Myth confirmed, giantsfan is a silly enough goose to think Trevor Hoffman is bad.

Psh. Poser

[NYgiantsfan5689]

Myth confirmed, Dry doesn't read my whole post. I DIDN'T SAY HE'S BAD. I said he's WORSE in non-save situations. Hell, a 0.00 ERA in save situations and a 0.40 ERA in non-save situations still constitutes as worse in non-save situations. I don't think Trevor Hoffman is bad. I actually really like him. He's just WORSE in non-save situations.

[HollywoodLeo]

The myth isn't that he sucks in non-save situations. It's that he's worse in non-save situations. The mere fact that his ERA is up is a sign that he's worse. Not bad. Just worse.

"Myth" Confirmed

You haven't talked to many Padres fans in your life, have you?

As someone who does talk to many Padres fans over the internet on a daily basis I can tell you that the myth IS that Trevor Hoffman sucks in non-save situations.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

1) No, I don't talk to many Padres fans, considering i live on the other side of the country
2) That wasn't the situation here. If the myth is that trevor hoffman sucks in non-save situations, then it's busted. but if it's that he's worse in non-save situations, it's confirmed.

[HollywoodLeo]

1) No, I don't talk to many Padres fans, considering i live on the other side of the country
2) That wasn't the situation here. If the myth is that trevor hoffman sucks in non-save situations, then it's busted. but if it's that he's worse in non-save situations, it's confirmed.

1) I kinda figured you didn't, but the rhetorical question was asked anyways to make a point.

2) I started the thread and therefore dictated what the "myth" is.

If you want to say he's "not as good" in non-save situations, then sure, you're correct. Granted that has more to do with how great he is in save situations (or was, perhaps...) than how he did in non-save situations, because the stats in the NS situations are good in and of themselves.....but that's not the myth.

[NYgiantsfan5689]

alright. then i agree, the myth is busted

[Dry1313]

If you argue the semantics.

Worse vs. Bad.

Seriously buddy, arguing semantics is the biggest waste of time

[HollywoodLeo]

If you argue the semantics.

Worse vs. Bad.

Seriously buddy, arguing semantics is the biggest waste of time

Because the myth is he "sucks" there are no semantics to argue.

[Dry1313]

Right.

I'm on your side Leo

[Dry1313]

Was this ever resolved?

[HollywoodLeo]

It was resolved in the first post.

And I argue that any data compiled this year is irrelevant because Trevor sucks thus far this year, save and non save situations alike.