[A.G._Crockett]

Cabrera generally is a very poor putter. I looked up his putts per GIR the last several years.  Every year but one he has averaged over 1.8.  That generally leaves him in around 150th or 180th place on the PGA tour.  2006 was the exception to this: he was 28th on tour.  This year, 2007, he's averaging 1.829, which puts him in 158th place.

The putts per round figures at the U.S. Open suggest, strongly I think, that Cabrera was right: not many putts were being made.  The sample size should be big enough for the entire field.  The median figure at Oakmont was nearly 2 putts more per round than the median on tour this year.  Only one person averaged under 29 at Oakmont; on tour this year 68 pro's are averaging under 29.  These putts per round figures are higher at Oakmont, despite the fact that the golfers missed lots more greens.  

Bottom line, sounds like Cabrera is right on both counts.  

Think we can add another point, too: Oakmont neutralized the great scramblers' abilities.  Cabrera generally is awful at scrambling.  He is averaging just 46.9% this year.  I don't have the exact figures at Oakmont, but remember seeing terrible numbers there, too, from guys like Tiger.  Probably the combination of tough greens and heavy rough around them.    

Jim,
To you first point, Cabrera is NOT "a very poor putter" in the context of the neverending discussion here.  He DOES rank in the middle 100's ON THE PGA TOUR, but that is a far, far cry from being a poor putter.  My guess is that if you or I were to play a round with the Duck, we would finish feeling like we would die to have his putting stroke.

To your second point, I agree that the stats show that not many putts were being made.  However, that may speak more to the difficulty/impossibility of hitting it close on that golf course.

To your third point, you are spot on.  Scrambling was very, very tough, and again, fewer putts were made.

All of this combines to mean that the putting situation at Oakmont might have had more to do (maybe MUCH more to do!) with getting the ball close to the hole initially than with putting skill among a select group of golfers who live in a very small range of putting skill.

[John Kirk]

Cabrera does not possess a fluid putting stroke.  I saw quite a few jerky moves on putts, including a few recoils, where he would pull the putter back after contact.

I think it's pretty clear that the greens at Oakmont are a big problem, and a complete renovation is necessary to bring them up to modern playing standards.

 

[A.G._Crockett]

Cabrera does not possess a fluid putting stroke.  I saw quite a few jerky moves on putts, including a few recoils, where he would pull the putter back after contact.

John, with all due respect, there is no way that Cabrera has a bad putting stroke, except in the most relative sense.  The putts that you are talking about were on the most difficult greens in captivity during the heat and pressure U.S. Open.  Which he won...  

That he ranks in the middle 100's on Tour does NOT make him a "bad" putter.  That's like saying that a guy hitting .250 in the major leagues is a "bad" hitter.  If Cabrera was a bad putter, he would have three jacked a bunch and somebody else would have won the Open.

What Cabrera did was hit it close enough often enough.  What Tiger did was make a bunch of par putts.  Cabrera did what he did one shot better, but if he was really a bad putter in an absolute sense, he ain't IN the U.S. Open, much less winning.

[John Kirk]

A.G.,

I agree, and it should be noted that Tiger made a number of tough 6-10 foot par putts just trying to stay close at the end, although it seemed to take Tiger forever to actually putt them.  Gosh the end of the tournament was slow, and NBC refused to show us other players, instead choosing to show us the beautifully sculpted Tiger frozen behind the ball, staring at an 8 footer for par.

Angel Cabrera is the Jeremy Burnitz of golf.  Hits it a mile, but only averages about .250.

Also, Cabrera made a long bomb for a 2 on the 300 yard 8th hole, and I think made a couple other long ones during the tourney.  

[Tom Huckaby]

I'm just taking Cabrera's words as evidence, that's all.

Tom -

I was just trying to say that the claims that

A. The US Open was won by a poor putter

B. who is determined to be so by the fact that he said "aw shucks, I'm such a lousy putter".

are without merit.

Fair enough.  But if it helps my argument - which it so clearly does - than it works for me.

I don't take any of this very seriously.

TH

[George Pazin]

Everyone playing at the tour level is at least a good putter, and my guess is that the difference between a great putter, like a Faxon, and a "poor" putter, like Singh, Garcia, Cabrera, etc., is simply consistency. The latter will have weeks where they putt as well as anyone, within really minor statistical variations - Cabrera had one of those weeks - but the former does it week in and week out.

Saying he made more 12 footers at Oakmont is no small feat, indeed. Did anyone happen to note the breaks on those shortish putts? When you do it for 72 holes, it's not a fluke or luck, as his modest remarks imply. I'd have to check the stats and whatever, but I remember him making at least a few putts that were substantially longer than anything I saw Tiger make, and he only needed to make one of 'em to provide the difference.

Jim -

I don't think the slope numbers are computed under Open conditions. As I related earlier, I have a friend who's a single digit golfer and who worked the grounds crew at Oakmont in 94; he told me he played the course a day or two after the 94 Open and didn't break 100.

I'd love to talk to any members who played the course this past week.

[Phil Benedict]

I'd love to talk to any members who played the course this past week.

They'd probably say the course played easier for the Open than the typical member set up!

[Jesse Jones]

I couldn't find the proximity to the hole stats for the US Open.
I think that is another piece of the putting puzzle that was Oakmont.
Does anyone in the treehouse know where those numbers can be found?

Jesse

[Jim Nugent]

When I called Cabrera a poor putter, I meant for on tour.  Compared to most golfers, he must be a fantastic putter.  

Jesse -- I can't find any proximity stats.  The U.S. Open, the Masters and the British Open keep real meager stats, compared to the PGA.  It is telling to me, though, that even with the low GIR numbers at Oakmont, the field averaged about 2 putts more per round than the average on tour.  Normally, if pro's miss lots of greens I would expect their putts per round to fall: they should one-putt a lot as they successfully scramble.  Not the case at Oakmont.  

[Kalen Braley]

When I called Cabrera a poor putter, I meant for on tour.  Compared to most golfers, he must be a fantastic putter.  

Jesse -- I can't find any proximity stats.  The U.S. Open, the Masters and the British Open keep real meager stats, compared to the PGA.  It is telling to me, though, that even with the low GIR numbers at Oakmont, the field averaged about 2 putts more per round than the average on tour.  Normally, if pro's miss lots of greens I would expect their putts per round to fall: they should one-putt a lot as they successfully scramble.  Not the case at Oakmont.  

Well said Jim,

I caught on from the start that "poor putter" was a relative term.  I'm just surprised so many people tried to claim otherwise.  If Angel truly was a poor putter he wouldn't even be a pro much less on tour...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()