May 21, 2013

Updated Runs Produced and RBI% Metrics

May 21, 2013 by Leave a Comment
John McGibbon

Not a lot changed in the runs produced category over the weekend. Garrett Boulware leads the team in both runs produced per game and runs produced per plate appearance.

I’ve documented Tyler Slaton’s numbers in this metric before, but it’s worth pointing out that Slaton came to bat with 15 runners on base in the Florida State series and ended up with 1 RBI.

At .17 runs produced per plate appearance it would take roughly 6 plate appearances for Slaton to produce 1 run.


Slaton was not the only Tiger to struggle with runners on in Tallahassee. Garrett Boulware had 0 RBI with 10 runners on base and Steven Duggar had 1 RBI with 8 runners on.

Duggar has come to bat with more runners on than any other Tiger, which makes sense for a guy who has played every game and typically bats third.

Unfortunately for Clemson Duggar’s 12.7% conversion of runners into RBI is approaching the lower end of the team average and 1 for 8 (12.5%) is close to Duggar’s season average and the only regular players below this average are Tyler Slaton and Jay Baum.

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , , ,

Stats Through 56-The Goose Is Loose and Slaton’s Tough Day

May 20, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Daniel Gossett

Breaking News! Daniel Gossett can pitch.  Coming into Thursday’s game Gossett had 80 strikeouts in 80 innings.  Even I can do that math.  But something curious happened in Tallahassee – Gossett pitched 6 shutout innings and had only 3 strikeouts while giving up only 3 hits in an 8-2 Clemson win. 

“Goose” proved that he is about more than the strikeout.

That said, Gossett is averaging 8.7 strikeouts, 3.2 walks and  7.0 hits per 9 innings.  I’ll take that any day.

 

 

Tyler Slaton had a tough Saturday. Three times he came up with two men in scoring position, two of them with the bases loaded an less than two outs. A groundout, pop out and strike out later Slaton had left 8 men on base, 6 in scoring position, in his three at bats.

I don’t question Jack Leggett pinch hitting for Maleeke Gibson in the 6th inning with the bases loaded and one out. I do find the choice of Jay Baum (.217 vs. left handers) interesting. Baum doesn’t strike out much and had hit into only 2 double plays in 68 previous at bats against left handers, so you understand the move from that perspective and hindsight is 20/20.

That said, Mike Triller and his .500 average vs. left handers remained seated. Triller hasn’t faced the competition displayed in Tallahassee, but at the same time Baum has 4 RBI of the 58 runners on base when facing a lefty (6.9%).

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , ,

Updated Stats Through 53 Games

May 16, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Kevin Bradley

Patrick Andrews continues his stellar year with a perfect inning on Tuesday against USC-Upstate. Andrews lowered his ERA to 2.25, WHIP to 0.93 and opponents’ batting average to .196. Left handed batters are 4 for 31 (.129) against Andrews with 7 strikeouts and 0 walks.

Matt Campbell isn’t too far behind. Campbell gave up 2 hits in an inning on Tuesday, but opponents are batting only .195 against him, Campbell’s WHIP is 1.07 and he has 30 strikeouts in 23 1/3 innings to date.

Campbell has gotten 43 right handed batters out with 21 of those being by strikeout and Campbell strikes out over 38% of the right handed batters he faces.

Jonathan Meyer had 3 2/3 scoreless innings on Tuesday and Meyer has struck out 28 right handed batters while walking only 3. That works out to a 9.3 to 1 strikeout to walk ratio.

The starting trio of Daniel Gossett, Matthew Crownover and Zack Erwin – a sophomore and two freshmen – have WHIPs of 1.15, 1.14 and 1.10 respectively.

Speaking of freshmen, the Clemson freshmen have accounted for 41% of the innings pitched (198) and 42% of Clemson’s wins (16).



On the offensive side, freshmen have accounted for 30% of the Tigers’ plate appearances, including two starters that have played every game (Dugger and Krieger), the current lead-off batter (Gibson) and Tuesday’s hero (Kevin Bradley).

The aforementioned Bradley began Tuesday batting .132 and was 0 for 14 against left handed pitchers on the season. While Bradley’s game-winning home run didn’t come against the USC-Upstate left handed starter, Bradley did get his first hit against a LHP earlier in the game.

Steve Wilkerson and Shane Kennedy don’t care which arm you are throwing with. Wilkerson is batting .309 vs. RHPs and .310 vs. LHPs, while Kennedy is actually hitting LHPs better than RHPs – .329 to .323.



Maleeke Gibson has added something to the leadoff spot and some of these numbers bear that out. Gibson has 1 less run scored and 2 more RBI than Tyler Slaton in 82 less plate appearnces and with 37 less runners on base during those plate appearnces. While not all of either players plate appearances have come at the leadoff spot a significant number of them have and that portends well for the future.

On the flip side, Gibson walks rarely (4.55% of the time) which should be a staple for someone at the top of the order. Both Slaton (11.18%) and Brittle (10.91%) take base on balls far more often than Gibson.



One thing Gibson has done extremely well for the leadoff batter is knock in runs. In fact, of anyone on the team with significant playing time, Gibson has the fourth highest percentage of runners on base knocked in.

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Updated RBI% and Runs Produced

May 14, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Garrett Boulware

After briefly falling to second place in RBI% after the Furman games last week, Garrett Boulware is back with a vengence at the top of the list.

Boulware leads the team in RBI% despite the fact that he is fourth on the team in number of runners on base while at bat.


Boulware also put some distance between himself and McGibbon in Runs Produced over the weekend while Maleeke Gibson had a huge series and seemed to add something to the leadoff spot that has been missing for a good portion of the season.

Maleeke GibsonWhether that is related to Gibson’s development as he nears the end of his freshman season or more to the caliber of competition remains to be seen.

Tyler Slaton has cooled a little bit since peaking in mid-April after replacing Thomas Brittle at the leadoff spot.

Gibson still has work to do to be a long-term solution at the top of the order – batting .240 with only 4 walks in 83 plate appearances overall and only 1 walk in 40 plate appearances against left handers.

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , ,

Updated Stats Through 52 Games – Tyler Krieger, Before and After

May 13, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Tyler Krieger

Tyler Krieger
Through the first 27 games of his college baseball career Tyler Krieger was batting .220 (20 for 91) with 9 RBI and the Clemson Tigers were scuffling along at 16-11 and headed nowhere fast.

Not only that, but the Tigers had lost the first two games of a 3 game series in Chapel Hill and faced the #1 ranked Tar Heels on Monday, April 1st. And oh yeah, Freshman Matthew Crownover was starting for the Tigers.

The Tigers went on to win that game in 11 innings, Crownover pitched well and Krieger went 2 for 5 with an RBI.

It was the beggining of a good thing for Clemson and Krieger. Clemson has gone 21-4 and Kreiger has hit .348 (32 for 92) with 16 RBI in that span.

While Krieger still has some work to do against left handed pitchers (.247, only 5 walks in 89 plate appearances), he’s batting .314 against righties with a .415 OBP.

Krieger’s bat is not the only hot one during this streak, but Krieger’s penchant for coming through in the clutch, coupled with the fact that he has come to bat with the second most men on base of any Tiger (172) means his bat has been more important than your average 7 hole hitter and a big reason for the Tigers recent success.


Patrick AndrewsPatrick Andrews continues to baffle batters of all shapes, sizes and batting stances. A 1-2-3 inning on Saturday lowered Andrews’ ERA to 2.33 and WHIP to 0.96.

Left handed batters are 4 for 31 against Andrews with 7 strikeouts and 0 walks. Perhaps at some point Jack Leggett will defy convential wisdom and bring Andrews in to face a lefty.

Speaking of which, sure was nice to see Joseph Moorefield have a successful complete inning on Sunday. It’s been a crazy statistical year for Moorefield and despite only throwing 4.1 innings this season I get the feeling Moorefield is going to be needed in the postseason.

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , ,

Updated Runs Produced and RBI % Through 49 Games

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment
John McGibbon

For the first time someone other than Garrett Boulware leads in RBI% – John McGibbon.  McGibbon has also come to bat with more runners on base than any other Tiger.

 
Garrett Boulware still leads in Runs Produced, but the gap is closing quickly.
 

 

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: ,

Batting Stats Through 49

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Shane Kennedy

Thanks for hanging with me while I work out these formatting issues. In the long run I think it will offer a better experience for everyone.

Shane Kennedy takes the lead in average, with Steve Wilkerson closing in on slugging percentage and John McGibbon in RBI.

It will be interesting to see how Garrett Boulware handles this weekends series and more interesting to see if he’s given any rest.

Just a hunch, but it seems to me that Boulware knows no other way than play all out every day and the only way to stop that from happening resides with Coach Leggett.

On the other hand, with Clemson fighting (supposedly) for a regional host spot, every game is important and who else would you rather have in the lineup and behind the plate than #30?

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , ,

Pitching Stats Through 49 Games

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Firth

Pitching Stats Through 49 Games

Table 1 – Against All Batters

vs. All OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% ERA
Andrews .267 .208 1.00 .313 105 26.000 13 6 12.38 5.71 2.42
Bates .452 .258 1.56 .290 44 9.000 4 6 9.09 13.64 4.00
Campana .448 .238 1.89 .333 29 6.333 3 7 10.34 24.14 2.84
Campbell .271 .187 1.06 .333 85 21.667 27 9 31.76 10.59 4.15
Crownover .307 .252 1.17 .366 220 54.667 31 13 14.09 5.91 2.14
Erwin .293 .209 1.02 .294 180 45.000 25 14 13.89 7.78 2.60
Firth .324 .256 1.26 .345 233 53.333 36 15 15.45 6.44 2.53
Gossett .298 .224 1.21 .336 313 72.667 68 26 21.73 8.31 2.48
Kent .328 .310 1.40 .414 63 14.333 10 2 15.87 3.17 3.77
Koerner .364 .214 1.56 .357 125 27.000 27 21 21.60 16.80 2.67
Meyer .353 .329 1.49 .456 157 35.667 27 4 17.20 2.55 3.79
Moorefield .474 .438 2.70 .750 19 3.333 2 2 10.53 10.53 2.70
Schmidt .422 .353 1.99 .463 248 49.667 24 22 9.68 8.87 5.26
Schnell .322 .250 1.25 .279 116 26.333 19 7 16.38 6.03 2.05
Totals .333 .260 1.34 .366 1,937 445.000 316 154 16.31 7.95 2.93

 
Table 2 – Against Right Handed Batters

vs. RH OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% % Right
Andrews .324 .246 1.32 .369 74 16.667 6 6 8.11 8.11 70.48
Bates .417 .250 1.38 .286 36 8.000 3 4 8.33 11.11 81.82
Campana .391 .176 1.50 .294 23 5.333 3 5 13.04 21.74 79.31
Campbell .229 .163 0.87 .349 48 12.667 18 4 37.50 8.33 56.47
Crownover .275 .239 1.03 .359 151 38.667 20 6 13.25 3.97 68.64
Erwin .292 .227 0.99 .352 100 25.333 11 5 11.00 5.00 55.56
Firth .323 .262 1.19 .344 138 32.000 19 6 13.77 4.35 59.23
Gossett .320 .236 1.35 .366 182 40.000 43 16 23.63 8.79 58.15
Kent .241 .222 0.91 .296 31 7.667 6 1 19.35 3.23 49.21
Koerner .366 .224 1.47 .373 86 19.000 14 13 16.28 15.12 68.80
Meyer .306 .280 1.20 .355 111 26.667 24 2 21.62 2.50 70.70
Moorefield 1.000 1.000 #DIV/0! 1.667 3 .000 0 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 15.79
Schmidt .431 .371 1.92 .427 141 28.667 15 9 10.64 6.38 56.85
Schnell .310 .210 1.06 .210 72 17.000 12 5 16.67 6.94 62.07
Totals .327 .256 1.27 .357 1196 277.667 194 82 16.22 6.86 61.74

 
Table 3 – Against Left Handed Batters

 

vs. LH OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% % Left
Andrews .129 .129 0.43 .194 31 9.333 7 0 22.58 0.00 29.52
Bates .667 .333 3.00 .333 8 1.000 1 2 12.50 66.67 18.18
Campana .667 .500 4.00 .500 6 1.000 0 2 0.00 66.67 20.69
Campbell .324 .219 1.33 .313 37 9.000 9 5 24.32 18.52 43.53
Crownover .377 .283 1.50 .383 69 16.000 11 7 15.94 14.58 31.36
Erwin .295 .185 1.07 .215 80 19.667 14 9 17.50 15.25 44.44
Firth .326 .247 1.36 .346 95 21.333 17 9 17.89 14.06 40.77
Gossett .266 .207 1.04 .293 131 32.667 25 10 19.08 10.20 41.85
Kent .406 .387 1.95 .516 32 6.667 4 1 12.50 5.00 50.79
Koerner .359 .194 1.75 .323 39 8.000 13 8 33.33 33.33 31.20
Meyer .467 .452 2.33 .714 46 9.000 3 2 6.52 4.35 29.30
Moorefield .375 .308 1.80 .538 16 3.333 2 2 12.50 20.00 84.21
Schmidt .411 .330 2.10 .511 107 21.000 9 13 8.41 20.63 43.15
Schnell .341 .310 1.61 .381 44 9.333 7 2 15.91 7.14 37.93
Totals .342 .267 1.46 .380 741 167.333 122 72 16.46 9.72 38.26
Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , , ,

ACC Baseball Defensive Efficiency

May 9, 2013 by Leave a Comment
SW Error

As I watched the Tigers kick the ball around in the second game against Maryland on Monday and heard that (surprisingly) the Terps lead the ACC in fielding percentage I got to thinking about defensive efficiency – neither of those teams on the field looked very good defensively, I don’t care what their fielding percentage is.

And sure enough, Clemson, currently 3rd in fielding percentage in the ACC, is 7th in defensive efficiency – turning balls in play into outs – while Maryland is 6th.

Neither is particularly good at turning batted balls into outs.

Team DE AB H HR SO SF SH
North Carolina .746 1543 313 12 385 12 25
North Carolina St .731 1636 353 27 432 11 23
Florida State .709 1585 370 11 379 15 23
Virginia .704 1565 373 15 392 17 35
Miami .702 1675 415 15 359 18 22
Maryland .700 1698 435 15 328 13 34
Clemson .699 1635 429 20 301 11 34
Wake Forest .698 1710 464 32 304 20 35
Georgia Tech .692 1605 424 28 347 19 35
Virginia Tech .691 1842 474 24 422 17 43
Duke .691 1517 390 14 326 15 24
Boston College .670 1631 479 17 282 22 44
Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: ,

Stats Through 47 – Freshmen Pitchers Come Through

May 7, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Matthew Crownover

Stats through 47 games.

This week we move to a new format that I hope in the long run will be easier to navigate and interpret for my readers. Until then, please bear with the formatting issues.

Pitching – Vs. All, Vs. Right, Vs. Left

vs. All OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% ERA
Andrews .263 .200 0.96 .278 99 25.000 13 6 13.13 6.06 2.52
Bates .486 .280 1.86 .320 37 7.000 3 6 8.11 16.22 5.14
Campana .524 .333 2.31 .467 21 4.333 1 5 4.76 23.81 4.15
Campbell .271 .187 1.06 .333 85 21.667 27 9 31.76 10.59 4.15
Crownover .307 .252 1.17 .366 220 54.667 31 13 14.09 5.91 2.14
Erwin .293 .209 1.02 .294 180 45.000 25 14 13.89 7.78 2.60
Firth .324 .256 1.26 .345 233 53.333 36 15 15.45 6.44 2.53
Gossett .298 .224 1.21 .336 313 72.667 68 26 21.73 8.31 2.48
Kent .328 .310 1.40 .414 63 14.333 10 2 15.87 3.17 3.77
Koerner .381 .250 1.67 .400 101 21.000 20 15 19.80 14.85 3.43
Meyer .341 .317 1.39 .444 133 31.000 24 3 18.05 2.26 4.06
Moorefield .474 .438 2.70 .750 19 3.333 2 2 10.53 10.53 2.70
Schmidt .422 .353 1.99 .463 248 49.667 24 22 9.68 8.87 5.26
Schnell .343 .268 1.38 .299 109 24.000 17 7 15.60 6.42 2.25
Totals .334 .262 1.34 .368 1,861 427.000 301 145 16.17 7.79 3.04

 

vs. RH OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% % Right
Andrews .324 .237 1.28 .322 68 15.667 6 6 8.82 8.82 68.69
Bates .448 .273 1.67 .318 29 6.000 2 4 6.90 13.79 78.38
Campana .467 .273 1.80 .455 15 3.333 1 3 6.67 20.00 71.43
Campbell .229 .163 0.87 .349 48 12.667 18 4 37.50 8.33 56.47
Crownover .275 .239 1.03 .359 151 38.667 20 6 13.25 3.97 68.64
Erwin .292 .227 0.99 .352 100 25.333 11 5 11.00 5.00 55.56
Firth .323 .262 1.19 .344 138 32.000 19 6 13.77 4.35 59.23
Gossett .320 .236 1.35 .366 182 40.000 43 16 23.63 8.79 58.15
Kent .241 .222 0.91 .296 31 7.667 6 1 19.35 3.23 49.21
Koerner .403 .273 1.70 .455 71 14.667 10 10 14.08 14.08 70.30
Meyer .290 .267 1.09 .333 93 23.000 22 1 23.66 1.45 69.92
Moorefield 1.000 1.000 #DIV/0! 1.667 3 .000 0 0 0.00 #DIV/0! 15.79
Schmidt .431 .371 1.92 .427 141 28.667 15 9 10.64 6.38 56.85
Schnell .338 .232 1.20 .232 66 15.000 10 5 15.15 7.58 60.55
Totals .331 .260 1.28 .362 1136 262.667 183 76 16.11 6.69 61.04

 

vs. LH OBP AVG WHIP SLG BF IP SO BB SO% BB% % Left
Andrews .129 .129 0.43 .194 31 9.333 7 0 22.58 0.00 31.31
Bates .667 .333 3.00 .333 8 1.000 1 2 12.50 66.67 21.62
Campana .667 .500 4.00 .500 6 1.000 0 2 0.00 66.67 28.57
Campbell .324 .219 1.33 .313 37 9.000 9 5 24.32 18.52 43.53
Crownover .377 .283 1.50 .383 69 16.000 11 7 15.94 14.58 31.36
Erwin .295 .185 1.07 .215 80 19.667 14 9 17.50 15.25 44.44
Firth .326 .247 1.36 .346 95 21.333 17 9 17.89 14.06 40.77
Gossett .266 .207 1.04 .293 131 32.667 25 10 19.08 10.20 41.85
Kent .406 .387 1.95 .516 32 6.667 4 1 12.50 5.00 50.79
Koerner .333 .200 1.58 .280 30 6.333 10 5 33.33 26.32 29.70
Meyer .462 .444 2.25 .722 40 8.000 2 2 5.00 5.00 30.08
Moorefield .375 .308 1.80 .538 16 3.333 2 2 12.50 20.00 84.21
Schmidt .411 .330 2.10 .511 107 21.000 9 13 8.41 20.63 43.15
Schnell .349 .317 1.67 .390 43 9.000 7 2 16.28 7.41 39.45
Totals .340 .266 1.44 .377 725 164.333 118 69 16.28 9.52 38.96

 

Batting – Vs. All, Vs. LHPs and Vs. RHPs
 

vs. ALL OPS OBP SLG AVG PA AB HR RBI SO BB SO% BB%  
Baum .595 .322 .273 .227 157 132 0 7 18 17 11.46 10.83  
Boulware .849 .366 .483 .308 191 172 7 39 21 15 10.99 7.85  
Bradley .433 .262 .171 .143 42 35 0 1 9 5 21.43 11.90  
Brittle .649 .345 .304 .250 197 168 1 18 33 21 16.75 10.66  
Campana 1.500 .500 1.000 .500 2 2 0 1 0 0 0.00 0.00  
Costigan .890 .390 .500 .306 41 36 0 6 10 5 24.39 12.20  
Duggar .725 .364 .361 .283 208 180 2 22 30 23 14.42 11.06  
Dunster .222 .111 .111 .111 9 9 0 1 5 0 55.56 0.00  
Gibson .472 .254 .218 .200 61 55 0 6 8 3 13.11 4.92  
Kennedy .829 .400 .429 .304 197 161 3 25 42 29 21.32 14.72  
Krieger .692 .354 .337 .277 191 166 0 21 24 18 12.57 9.42  
McGibbon .611 .333 .278 .254 192 169 0 31 25 17 13.02 8.85  
Reader .333 .333 .000 .000 3 2 0 0 2 1 66.67 33.33  
Reed 1.250 .500 .750 .500 4 4 0 2 2 0 50.00 0.00  
Slaton .714 .381 .333 .295 158 132 0 10 31 18 19.62 11.39  
Triller 1.053 .417 .636 .455 13 11 0 3 2 0 15.38 0.00  
Wilkerson .761 .359 .402 .293 185 164 1 23 38 17 20.54 9.19  
Totals .708 .354 .354 .273 1,851 1,598 14 216 300 189 16.21 10.21  
 -  -  - -   - -   - -  -   -  - -   -  
vs. RHP OPS OBP SLG AVG PA AB HR RBI SO BB SO% BB% % vs. RHP
Baum .679 .351 .328 .234 79 64 0 3 8 10 10.13 12.66 50.32
Boulware .921 .389 .532 .319 108 94 5 26 9 10 8.33 9.26 56.54
Bradley .580 .308 .273 .227 26 22 0 1 5 3 19.23 11.54 61.90
Brittle .719 .366 .353 .259 101 85 1 12 16 13 15.84 12.87 51.27
Campana 3.000 1.000 2.000 1.000 1 1 0 1 0 0 0.00 0.00 50.00
Costigan .934 .389 .545 .333 36 33 0 6 7 3 19.44 8.33 87.80
Duggar .771 .362 .409 .280 105 93 2 10 10 12 9.52 11.43 50.48
Dunster .400 .200 .200 .200 5 5 0 1 2 0 40.00 0.00 55.56
Gibson .398 .226 .172 .172 31 29 0 2 3 2 9.68 6.45 50.82
Kennedy .819 .417 .402 .310 110 87 1 13 20 18 18.18 16.36 55.84
Krieger .774 .407 .367 .311 108 90 0 17 12 14 11.11 12.96 56.54
McGibbon .587 .300 .287 .255 100 94 0 17 10 6 10.00 6.00 52.08
Reader .333 .333 .000 .000 3 2 0 0 2 1 66.67 33.33 100.00
Reed 1.000 .500 .500 .500 2 2 0 0 1 0 50.00 0.00 50.00
Slaton .700 .385 .315 .260 91 73 0 5 18 15 19.78 16.48 57.59
Triller .476 .143 .333 .167 7 6 0 2 1 0 14.29 0.00 53.85
Wilkerson .759 .347 .412 .282 96 85 1 13 13 8 13.54 8.33 51.89
Totals .742 .364 .378 .277 1,009 865 10 129 137 115 13.58 11.40 54.51
-  -   - -  -  -  -   -  -  -  -  -  - - 
vs. LHP OPS OBP SLG AVG PA AB HR RBI SO BB SO% BB% % vs. LHP
Baum .514 .293 .221 .221 78 68 0 4 10 7 12.82 8.97 49.68
Boulware .760 .337 .423 .295 83 78 2 13 12 5 14.46 6.02 43.46
Bradley .188 .188 .000 .000 16 13 0 0 4 2 25.00 12.50 38.10
Brittle .576 .323 .253 .241 96 83 0 6 17 8 17.71 8.33 48.73
Campana .000 .000 .000 .000 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00 50.00
Costigan .400 .400 .000 .000 5 3 0 0 3 2 60.00 40.00 12.20
Duggar .677 .366 .310 .287 103 87 0 12 20 11 19.42 10.68 49.52
Dunster .000 .000 .000 .000 4 4 0 0 3 0 75.00 0.00 44.44
Gibson .555 .286 .269 .231 30 26 0 4 5 1 16.67 3.33 49.18
Kennedy .839 .379 .459 .297 87 74 2 12 22 11 25.29 12.64 44.16
Krieger .587 .284 .303 .237 83 76 0 4 12 4 14.46 4.82 43.46
McGibbon .636 .370 .267 .253 92 75 0 14 15 11 16.30 11.96 47.92
Reed 1.500 .500 1.000 .500 2 2 0 2 1 0 50.00 0.00 50.00
Slaton .731 .375 .356 .339 67 59 0 5 13 3 19.40 4.48 42.41
Triller 1.800 .800 1.000 .800 6 5 0 1 1 0 16.67 0.00 46.15
Wilkerson .763 .371 .392 .304 89 79 0 10 25 9 28.09 10.11 48.11
Totals .667 .341 .326 .269 842 733 4 87 163 74 19.36 8.79 45.49

 

Runs Produced

Player RP/Game RP/PA GP PA R HR RBI RP
Boulware 1.43 0.35 46 191 34 7 39 66
Kennedy 1.17 0.28 47 197 33 3 25 55
Duggar 1.15 0.26 47 208 34 2 22 54
McGibbon 1.15 0.28 47 192 23 0 31 54
Wilkinson 1.05 0.25 44 185 24 1 23 46
Brittle 1.04 0.24 46 197 31 1 18 48
Krieger 0.87 0.21 47 191 20 0 21 41
Costigan 0.63 0.24 16 41 4 0 6 10
Gibson 0.58 0.25 26 61 9 0 6 15
Slaton 0.57 0.16 44 158 15 0 10 25
Baum 0.50 0.14 44 157 15 0 7 22
Triller 0.42 0.38 12 13 2 0 3 5
Reed 0.33 0.50 6 4 0 0 2 2
Campana 0.33 0.50 3 2 0 0 1 1
Dunster 0.22 0.22 9 9 1 0 1 2
Bradley 0.13 0.07 24 42 2 0 1 3
Reader 0.00 0.00 3 3 0 0 0 0
                 

RBI PERCENT – Percent of Runners on Base That Are Driven In

 

Player HR RBI ROB RBI%
Boulware 7 39 146 21.92
McGibbon 0 31 155 20.00
Costigan 0 6 31 19.35
Kennedy 3 25 132 16.67
Wilkerson 1 23 134 16.42
Krieger 0 21 151 13.91
Duggar 2 22 147 13.61
Brittle 1 18 127 13.39
Gibson 0 6 49 12.24
Slaton 0 10 97 10.31    
Baum 0 7 118 5.93    
Bradley 0 1 28 3.57    

 

Filed Under: Clemson Baseball Tagged With: , , , ,
«Older Posts