What will be the 2017 greatest weakness for the Sox?

[notin]

And I think it is subjective.

 

So clutch is an opinion?

 

If so, then there is no debate. It's not real...

[a700hitter]

So clutch is an opinion?

 

If so, then there is no debate. It's not real...

And depression is a emotion, but it too is real, and you depress me.

[notin]

And depression is a emotion, but it too is real, and you depress me.

 

An emotion isn't an opinion. That's why we have two different words...

[moonslav59]

I can't wait until we have some real life baseball events to discuss.

[a700hitter]

An emotion isn't an opinion. That's why we have two different words...

Just because I can't prove something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. But I guess that you don't get that.

[sk7326]

Clutch definitions always seem to be applied post-hoc which is problematic. Every systematic definition of a clutch situation has largely revealed no statistically significant evidence. Again - that doesn't mean that such situations don't exist - but the evidence is scant.

 

Are some players better than others in those spots? Sure. Is it a significantly different list of players than simply players who are good? I am skeptical. Pitchers with men on base of course is meaningful - pitching out of the stretch is a different skill after all.

 

After all - every favorite example comes with a pretty good counter.

 

Papi is an all time clutch player. He had a miserable 2008-2009 and 2016 postseason.

ARod choked a lot. He was the Yankees best player in their 2009 title run.

David Price can't get it done in big games. He pitched his best down the stretch for teams chasing division titles the last two seasons.

[Spudboy]

I can't wait until we have some real life baseball events to discuss.

 

You ain't just a rooster poopin'.

 

The Pats are done. I watch the Celts but the NBA is an abomination Old School basketball junkies like me. I don't do NHL much anymore since the second expansion.

 

I need a fix to quell my baseball jones soon.

[User Name]

Ok Bellhorn, let's look at it this way.

 

"Clutch" is up for debate, as many are currently engaged in. But "choke" seems to be widely accepted. So is it possible that "clutch hitting" is really being on the receiving end of "choke pitching"? Did David Price choke or was Lonnie Chisenhall clutch? Or both?

 

(Or wad Lonnie a little lucky?)

 

You can analyze pitch quality to come to that conclusion though.

[Bellhorn04]

Clutch definitions always seem to be applied post-hoc which is problematic. Every systematic definition of a clutch situation has largely revealed no statistically significant evidence. Again - that doesn't mean that such situations don't exist - but the evidence is scant.

 

Are some players better than others in those spots? Sure. Is it a significantly different list of players than simply players who are good? I am skeptical. Pitchers with men on base of course is meaningful - pitching out of the stretch is a different skill after all.

 

After all - every favorite example comes with a pretty good counter.

 

Papi is an all time clutch player. He had a miserable 2008-2009 and 2016 postseason.

ARod choked a lot. He was the Yankees best player in their 2009 title run.

David Price can't get it done in big games. He pitched his best down the stretch for teams chasing division titles the last two seasons.

 

Where's the counter for Schilling's postseason numbers?

[Bellhorn04]

There is no counter to Schilling's postseason gamelogs except the old favorites, SSS and randomness.

 

In 19 starts he had 3 bad ones. One of those with a severed tendon in his ankle.

 

In the other 16 he gave up:

 

0 runs - 4

1 run - 8

2 runs - 4

[moonslav59]

You ain't just a rooster poopin'.

 

The Pats are done. I watch the Celts but the NBA is an abomination Old School basketball junkies like me. I don't do NHL much anymore since the second expansion.

 

I need a fix to quell my baseball jones soon.

 

I always thought they should plan the NFL schedule to have the Super Bowl the day before President's Day, so we have the day after off. I realize outdoor winter playoff games are not preferable, but at least it would shorten up this lull.

[moonslav59]

There is no counter to Schilling's postseason gamelogs except the old favorites, SSS and randomness.

 

In 19 starts he had 3 bad ones. One of those with a severed tendon in his ankle.

 

In the other 16 he gave up:

 

0 runs - 4

1 run - 8

2 runs - 4

 

He was amazing when it counted- no doubt.

 

Speaking of injuries, he had some good games pitching hurt as well. Not like this guy...

 

First 10 playoff games:

75.2 IP 37H 14BB 82K

6-2 1.73 (0.674 WHIP)

(2 losses: 7IP 1 ER and 7.1IP 2 ER)

 

Last 4 games:

21 IP 27H 7BB 17K 18ER (+1 HBP)

1-1 7.71 (1.619 WHIP)

 

So, this guy was "clutch" then (maybe due to injury) morphed into a "choke".

 

Too many variables to know anything for certain with sample sizes these small.

 

[cp176]

You ain't just a rooster poopin'.

 

The Pats are done. I watch the Celts but the NBA is an abomination Old School basketball junkies like me. I don't do NHL much anymore since the second expansion.

 

I need a fix to quell my baseball jones soon.

 

I'm with you

[Bellhorn04]

He was amazing when it counted- no doubt.

 

Speaking of injuries, he had some good games pitching hurt as well. Not like this guy...

 

First 10 playoff games:

75.2 IP 37H 14BB 82K

6-2 1.73 (0.674 WHIP)

(2 losses: 7IP 1 ER and 7.1IP 2 ER)

 

Last 4 games:

21 IP 27H 7BB 17K 18ER (+1 HBP)

1-1 7.71 (1.619 WHIP)

 

So, this guy was "clutch" then (maybe due to injury) morphed into a "choke".

 

Too many variables to know anything for certain with sample sizes these small.

 

 

Beckett still gets the clutch tag for me. He carried 2 teams to 2 championships.

 

(It's possible that doing this might have made him too cocky, if anything, thinking that he'd didn't have to work as hard any more. I freely admit this to being only personal speculation.)

[moonslav59]

Beckett still gets the clutch tag for me. He carried 2 teams to 2 championships.

 

(It's possible that doing this might have made him too cocky, if anything, thinking that he'd didn't have to work as hard any more. I freely admit this to being only personal speculation.)

 

I used him as an example, because he shows how assigning that label in any definitive way based on small sample sizes involves so many variables.

 

Was Josh hurt those last 3-4 games?

 

Was it his attitude that changed?

 

Did he just face tougher hitters?

 

If "clutch" is a repeatable skill, what happened?

 

If batting .300 is a repeatable skill (and I think it is for some players), why do .300 hitters sometimes have seasons where they hit .260 and .330? Could the answer to this question also be the answer why some players happened to do great or poorly in several playoff games scattered over several seasons?

 

I'm fine with using the word "clutch" to describe an event. "That was a clutch hit!"

 

But, when we start assigning definitive labels to a player based on small sample sizes or sketchy data, I draw the line personally.

[jacksonianmarch]

Clutch is a very human thing. You're talking about a psyche, a mindset. There are guys who are the balls when the sacks are packed in the fifth and suck when the team is down two in the same situation in the 9th. Most players are able to keep things within their career norms. Some players are outliers for a brief time, some are outliers for their whole careers yet still have one postseason where their talent shines through (ARoid). You take a look at a guy like Ortiz. His career numbers in the postseason are slightly better than his career averages in general (.947OPS v .932). But in 3 post seasons, he went nuclear (1.278 in 2004, 1.204 in 2007, 1.206 in 2013) and it carried his team to the title.

[moonslav59]

...Most players are able to keep things within their career norms. Some players are outliers for a brief time, some are outliers for their whole careers yet still have one postseason where their talent shines through ...

 

But, isn't that what you'd expect by randomly taking specific sample size from here and there in any baseball player's history?

 

Baseball is such a fickle sport with so many variables, it's hard to comprehend them all. It's a game of millimeters when bat meets ball.

 

One would expect most players would fall within their norm and some having outlier numbers based on any number of reasons or no particular reason at all other than that stretch just happened to be a hot or cold streak at the "wrong time".

 

There's a chance no mental factors were involved at all, or at least not the ones we think cause "clutch" or "choke" to happen.

 

For instance, a player could be right on his game and have the perfect mental attitude for a particular AB. Normally, (for argument's sake) when he's "zoned in like that", he does better than normal, which might be hitting .400 vs vs hitting .250. However, this particular series, he went 4 for 20. Maybe he hit the ball hard for outs. maybe he faced a tough pitcher. maybe he faced too many lefties. Maybe, maybe, maybe...

 

It's just impossible or nearly impossible to ever know for sure if that .200 (4 for 20) event was a "choke" or not.

[Bellhorn04]

I used him as an example, because he shows how assigning that label in any definitive way based on small sample sizes involves so many variables.

 

Was Josh hurt those last 3-4 games?

 

Was it his attitude that changed?

 

Did he just face tougher hitters?

 

If "clutch" is a repeatable skill, what happened?

 

 

The repeatability of clutch is certainly a big question.

 

Schilling seems to be one of the few you could argue was consistently clutch.

 

Even if you're better than average in the clutch you're not Superman.

 

Beckett was clearly better than average.

[mvp 78]

It's just impossible or nearly impossible to ever know for sure if that .200 (4 for 20) event was a "choke" or not.[/b]

 

Maybe nearly impossible for you. Others can just sit back, say someone choked and not worry about whether it has "definitively" tagged someone or not.

[a700hitter]

Maybe nearly impossible for you. Others can just sit back, say someone choked and not worry about whether it has "definitively" tagged someone or not.

It's not like it is memorialized on an official plaque, except in the case of Big Papi, who was given a plaque by the Red Sox.

[mvp 78]

It's not like it is memorialized on an official plaque, except in the case of Big Papi, who was given a plaque by the Red Sox.

 

That plaque is ********! He went 1 for 9 in the ALDS last year! Should never make definitive plaques like that! Should be made out of Woody Willy metal filings that can be changed at the drop of a hat! Sad!

[a700hitter]

That plaque is ********! He went 1 for 9 in the ALDS last year! Should never make definitive plaques like that! Should be made out of Woody Willy metal filings that can be changed at the drop of a hat! Sad!

How about calling him "The Greatest Random Hitter of All Time"?

[sk7326]

There is no counter to Schilling's postseason gamelogs except the old favorites, SSS and randomness.

 

In 19 starts he had 3 bad ones. One of those with a severed tendon in his ankle.

 

In the other 16 he gave up:

 

0 runs - 4

1 run - 8

2 runs - 4

 

He was a remarkable postseason pitcher - he was also a remarkable, very underrated all the time pitcher.

 

He also pitched quite poorly in the 2007 ALCS. So even there there was a blip.

[sk7326]

Clutch is a very human thing. You're talking about a psyche, a mindset. There are guys who are the balls when the sacks are packed in the fifth and suck when the team is down two in the same situation in the 9th. Most players are able to keep things within their career norms. Some players are outliers for a brief time, some are outliers for their whole careers yet still have one postseason where their talent shines through (ARoid). You take a look at a guy like Ortiz. His career numbers in the postseason are slightly better than his career averages in general (.947OPS v .932). But in 3 post seasons, he went nuclear (1.278 in 2004, 1.204 in 2007, 1.206 in 2013) and it carried his team to the title.

 

All of this is true - and great players embody all of it (and therein lies the problem).

 

You have the odd David Price - but his splits are so rare that it does not seem to prove anything.

[mvp 78]

How about calling him "The Greatest Random Hitter of All Time"?

 

King of Small Sample Sizes!

[Bellhorn04]

This whole 'repeatability' issue with clutch thing gets overplayed a bit, in my opinion. Hitting home runs is a 'repeatable skill', but even the best can only do it once every 15 times up or something like that.

[Maxbialystock]

Anyone who says DH is the issue has got a point because Ortiz is irreplaceable. You can't count H.Ramirez as the replacement because his bat was in the lineup last year. Me, I count Moreland as Ortiz's replacement, clearly a step down. However, I think Benintendi's left bat will mitigate the loss of Ortiz.

 

So I went with the bullpen as the biggest concern. Last year it wasn't much good until September. Our returning closer is somewhat erratic. We lost some others who were pretty good last September/October.

[Bellhorn04]

He was a remarkable postseason pitcher - he was also a remarkable, very underrated all the time pitcher.

 

He also pitched quite poorly in the 2007 ALCS. So even there there was a blip.

 

Not exactly. One bad game and one good game.

[mvp 78]

This whole 'repeatability' issue with clutch thing gets overplayed a bit, in my opinion. Hitting home runs is a 'repeatable skill', but even the best can only do it once every 15 times up or something like that.

 

Unless you can retrofit every player with the Barry Bonds cheat elbow armor! Then it would get down to about once every 12 times!

[sk7326]

This whole 'repeatability' issue with clutch thing gets overplayed a bit, in my opinion. Hitting home runs is a 'repeatable skill', but even the best can only do it once every 15 times up or something like that.

 

Consistency and repeatibility is the proof that it exists. Now - at least for me - the issue is not whether big moments exist. Of course they do. (this seems to be a popular strawman) It is whether the ability to deliver then is really differentiating.

 

Clutch would be a little easier to get behind as a thing if there were, say players the caliber of Sandy Leon - who delivered Papi-esque production in higher leverage spots.

 

At best, clutch performers are a subset of a group of players who were already far more likely to deliver than their counterparts.