Clutch vs non-clutch

[moonslav59]

Right, so now you're saying players DON'T try their hardest in every at-bat?* That players go up to the plate thinking "Gee, this isn't the post season or anything, so I can just go through the motions this time."

 

Newdflash - these are the best players in the world.* Most of them are better at baseball than most of us are at ANYTHING.* They didn't get where they are by not trying their hardest at EVERY opportunity.* Even players we think of as bad - even guys like Josh Rutledge, who some feel shouldn't even be on the team - are better at baseball than most of us can fathom.* Most people will go through their whole lives and never meet a baseball player as good as Josh Rutledge, and most people will never be as good at their jobs as Rutledge is at baseball, where he is arguably among the 750 best in the world.

 

So we look for clutch in players like David Ortiz.* Certainly, Ortiz has come up big in a lot of big situations.* He has also come up big in a lot of less important ones. Know why?* Because David Ortiz is a TERRIFIC HITTER OVERALL and comes up big a lot!! The man possesses a superhuman ability to hit a baseball traveling in excess of 90mph and drive it a long way, one possessed by very few living human beings.* Very few.* He has also failed in a lot of clutch siituations, but when it comes to hitting, one success can erase a lot of failures.* That's the nature of glorifying a 30% success rate.***But no one talks about his 1 for 12 in the 2009 ALCS loss to the Angels.* Know why?* Because 2004 and 2013 were far more memorable. Or, if you're right, he simply wasn't trying in 2009.

 

So I guess clutch does exist, but in reputation only.* We as fans love to remember the big moments, and we only remember the bad ones for players we didn't like much.* At one point in one of these threads, I asked about the biggest clutch hit JD Drew had.* The answer, as expected, was the grand slam off Fausto Carmona, which was a big hit.* But really, his 2008 ALCS against Tampa was turning into a stream of clutch JD Drew hits in the comeback that fell short.* But what is he remembered for in that series?* Striking out in the biggest at bat of the series against David Price (remember him?* The guy you insisted was the very definition of a choker?* Are we full circle yet?)* So when you don't have Ortiz' history, I guess you can't afford to make big outs and still be "clutch", huh?* Ask Yaz about that.* I remember seeing posters criticizing him for ending Game 163 in 1978 with a weak pop up, and how "unclutch" he was.* All of this was done by people who didn't see 1967, I guess.* (I didn't either, not being born yet, but I did know about it and didn't think his reputation as a player should be defined by one at bat at age 39.* Ah, but the reputation of "clutch."* How it pervades.)

 

To go non-baseball, there was some Tom Brady mention at one point, and how he was just amazingly "clutch" in the Super Bowl.* When I asked would he still be clutch if Edelman didn't catch that ball, the answer was "It wasn't fourth down, so he would have made the next play."* THAT is reputation, not clutch play.* And we know this because you gave him success on a PLAY THAT NEVER HAPPENED.* Brady has absolutely had failures in the same situation - twice the year before in the AFC Chmpaionship game in Denver, and even in the first Super Bowl against the Giants, but when you have a clutch reputation, success is expected and apparently assumed.

 

Really, we could go on about this, but great players have their great moments.* But they have them because they are great players, and are talented enough to take advantage of the opportunities.* The players make the moments, not the other way around as you want it to be.* But we remember - and sometimes misremember - them for it.* And sometimes, they do get lucky.* Take Luis Gonzalez, who had inarguably the biggest hit in Diamondbacks history.* Was he "focused" then more so than in his other at bats?* Or was there some randomness involved?* He did hit a routine shallow pop up to shortstop that would have been an easy out under any defensive alignemt. Except one.* But what alignment were the Yankees in on that very pitch?

 

Or maybe Jeter wasn't trying...

 

Great post, notin.

[moonslav59]

Who are you to doubt John Henry?

 

Who are you to not doubt everything?

[notin]

Or maybe Gibson was just a very good pitcher, period?

 

His 1968 season he had an ERA of 1.12 and a WHIP of 0.85.

 

In comparison to those numbers, we could say that he choked in the postseason.

 

Gibson did have a better ERA in the regular season than the world series in two of those seasons. ...

[notin]

Whether the guy does great in the clutch or lousy in the clutch, you always have a readily available explanation other than mental factors.

 

And have to randomness. Remember Tom Bruanansky's pennant clinching catch in 1991? Was that near game-winning hit by Ozzie Guillen an out because Ozzie didn't come through in a key at bat? Or is it simply because sometimes a hitter can do everything right and things still don't work out?

[notin]

Yes he was. David Price is a very good pitcher, too. You know the rest...

 

Possible with Price it's a stamina issue. He was solid against the Sox in 2009 when he didn't have 200+ IP under his belt.

 

Or - crazy thought - maybe looking at half a dozen games spread out over 7 years really isn't representative. Remember when Cole Hamels was rumored to the Sox? Several fans did research and concluded, based on a handful of gamed spread out over six seasons, that Hamels couldn't pitch in the American League. How accurate was that conclusion?

[moonslav59]

Possible with Price it's a stamina issue. He was solid against the Sox in 2009 when he didn't have 200+ IP under his belt.

 

Or - crazy thought - maybe looking at half a dozen games spread out over 7 years really isn't representative. Remember when Cole Hamels was rumored to the Sox? Several fans did research and concluded, based on a handful of gamed spread out over six seasons, that Hamels couldn't pitch in the American League. How accurate was that conclusion?

 

Maybe missing a month will help Price do better in October.

[notin]

I would argue that Brady has proven himself to be a clutch performer, even though he has had his failures. His ability to execute those late touchdown drives in the last 2 Super Bowl wins was phenomenal.

 

Some people may have unrealistic definitions of clutch. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

He's a great player whose successes will outnumber and outlive his failures. I would argue that makes him great. Isn't that enough?

[notin]

Maybe missing a month will help Price do better in October.

 

I'm hoping...

[Bellhorn04]

Gibson did have a better ERA in the regular season than the world series in two of those seasons. ...

 

And ERA is hardly the best measuring stick, as you well know.

[Bellhorn04]

Possible with Price it's a stamina issue. He was solid against the Sox in 2009 when he didn't have 200+ IP under his belt.

 

Or - crazy thought - maybe looking at half a dozen games spread out over 7 years really isn't representative.

 

Well, you're allowing for the possibility that Price's postseason issues could be attributable to something other than randomness, now, aren't you?

[Bellhorn04]

He's a great player whose successes will outnumber and outlive his failures. I would argue that makes him great. Isn't that enough?

 

'His successes will outnumber and outlive his failures?'

 

To me that's a pretty weak description of a guy with Brady's incredible regular season record, 7 AFC championships and 5 Super Bowls. I imagine they'll find something a little better than that to put on his plaque in Canton.

[cp176]

Right, so now you're saying players DON'T try their hardest in every at-bat?* That players go up to the plate thinking "Gee, this isn't the post season or anything, so I can just go through the motions this time."

 

Newdflash - these are the best players in the world.* Most of them are better at baseball than most of us are at ANYTHING.* They didn't get where they are by not trying their hardest at EVERY opportunity.* Even players we think of as bad - even guys like Josh Rutledge, who some feel shouldn't even be on the team - are better at baseball than most of us can fathom.* Most people will go through their whole lives and never meet a baseball player as good as Josh Rutledge, and most people will never be as good at their jobs as Rutledge is at baseball, where he is arguably among the 750 best in the world.

 

So we look for clutch in players like David Ortiz.* Certainly, Ortiz has come up big in a lot of big situations.* He has also come up big in a lot of less important ones. Know why?* Because David Ortiz is a TERRIFIC HITTER OVERALL and comes up big a lot!! The man possesses a superhuman ability to hit a baseball traveling in excess of 90mph and drive it a long way, one possessed by very few living human beings.* Very few.* He has also failed in a lot of clutch siituations, but when it comes to hitting, one success can erase a lot of failures.* That's the nature of glorifying a 30% success rate.***But no one talks about his 1 for 12 in the 2009 ALCS loss to the Angels.* Know why?* Because 2004 and 2013 were far more memorable. Or, if you're right, he simply wasn't trying in 2009.

 

So I guess clutch does exist, but in reputation only.* We as fans love to remember the big moments, and we only remember the bad ones for players we didn't like much.* At one point in one of these threads, I asked about the biggest clutch hit JD Drew had.* The answer, as expected, was the grand slam off Fausto Carmona, which was a big hit.* But really, his 2008 ALCS against Tampa was turning into a stream of clutch JD Drew hits in the comeback that fell short.* But what is he remembered for in that series?* Striking out in the biggest at bat of the series against David Price (remember him?* The guy you insisted was the very definition of a choker?* Are we full circle yet?)* So when you don't have Ortiz' history, I guess you can't afford to make big outs and still be "clutch", huh?* Ask Yaz about that.* I remember seeing posters criticizing him for ending Game 163 in 1978 with a weak pop up, and how "unclutch" he was.* All of this was done by people who didn't see 1967, I guess.* (I didn't either, not being born yet, but I did know about it and didn't think his reputation as a player should be defined by one at bat at age 39.* Ah, but the reputation of "clutch."* How it pervades.)

 

To go non-baseball, there was some Tom Brady mention at one point, and how he was just amazingly "clutch" in the Super Bowl.* When I asked would he still be clutch if Edelman didn't catch that ball, the answer was "It wasn't fourth down, so he would have made the next play."* THAT is reputation, not clutch play.* And we know this because you gave him success on a PLAY THAT NEVER HAPPENED.* Brady has absolutely had failures in the same situation - twice the year before in the AFC Chmpaionship game in Denver, and even in the first Super Bowl against the Giants, but when you have a clutch reputation, success is expected and apparently assumed.

 

Really, we could go on about this, but great players have their great moments.* But they have them because they are great players, and are talented enough to take advantage of the opportunities.* The players make the moments, not the other way around as you want it to be.* But we remember - and sometimes misremember - them for it.* And sometimes, they do get lucky.* Take Luis Gonzalez, who had inarguably the biggest hit in Diamondbacks history.* Was he "focused" then more so than in his other at bats?* Or was there some randomness involved?* He did hit a routine shallow pop up to shortstop that would have been an easy out under any defensive alignemt. Except one.* But what alignment were the Yankees in on that very pitch?

 

Or maybe Jeter wasn't trying...

 

Newsflash - If you think that because "these guys" are better at their trade than we are at anything because they are professional athletes, I feel very sorry for you. They are certainly better at their professions than I would be at theirs but that is a ridiculous and demeaning statement to make. I'm certainly not denying the fact that Rutledge is a talented baseball player. I just don't think that he is good enough to be on this team.

 

I do appreciate your passion here Notin but I still think that there is room enough for everyone to play. I don't need nor want to have a definition or a statistical breakdown for everything that happens in the world today. it really doesn't have to be nor should it ever be one or the other. if everything was definable and explainable, I would think that watching the games would be a waste of time. the outcomes would all be pre-determined. What fun. What actually is the clutch and what actually is a clutch moment? We probably would never agree on an answer there.

[mvp 78]

Who are you to not doubt everything?

 

I the only thing I don't doubt is that The Greatest Clutch Hitter in the History of the Boston Red Sox, David Ortiz, #34.

[S5Dewey]

Right, so now you're saying players DON'T try their hardest in every at-bat?* That players go up to the plate thinking "Gee, this isn't the post season or anything, so I can just go through the motions this time."

 

Newdflash - these are the best players in the world.* Most of them are better at baseball than most of us are at ANYTHING.* They didn't get where they are by not trying their hardest at EVERY opportunity.* Even players we think of as bad - even guys like Josh Rutledge, who some feel shouldn't even be on the team - are better at baseball than most of us can fathom.* Most people will go through their whole lives and never meet a baseball player as good as Josh Rutledge, and most people will never be as good at their jobs as Rutledge is at baseball, where he is arguably among the 750 best in the world.

 

So we look for clutch in players like David Ortiz.* Certainly, Ortiz has come up big in a lot of big situations.* He has also come up big in a lot of less important ones. Know why?* Because David Ortiz is a TERRIFIC HITTER OVERALL and comes up big a lot!! The man possesses a superhuman ability to hit a baseball traveling in excess of 90mph and drive it a long way, one possessed by very few living human beings.* Very few.* He has also failed in a lot of clutch siituations, but when it comes to hitting, one success can erase a lot of failures.* That's the nature of glorifying a 30% success rate.***But no one talks about his 1 for 12 in the 2009 ALCS loss to the Angels.* Know why?* Because 2004 and 2013 were far more memorable. Or, if you're right, he simply wasn't trying in 2009.

 

So I guess clutch does exist, but in reputation only.* We as fans love to remember the big moments, and we only remember the bad ones for players we didn't like much.* At one point in one of these threads, I asked about the biggest clutch hit JD Drew had.* The answer, as expected, was the grand slam off Fausto Carmona, which was a big hit.* But really, his 2008 ALCS against Tampa was turning into a stream of clutch JD Drew hits in the comeback that fell short.* But what is he remembered for in that series?* Striking out in the biggest at bat of the series against David Price (remember him?* The guy you insisted was the very definition of a choker?* Are we full circle yet?)* So when you don't have Ortiz' history, I guess you can't afford to make big outs and still be "clutch", huh?* Ask Yaz about that.* I remember seeing posters criticizing him for ending Game 163 in 1978 with a weak pop up, and how "unclutch" he was.* All of this was done by people who didn't see 1967, I guess.* (I didn't either, not being born yet, but I did know about it and didn't think his reputation as a player should be defined by one at bat at age 39.* Ah, but the reputation of "clutch."* How it pervades.)

 

To go non-baseball, there was some Tom Brady mention at one point, and how he was just amazingly "clutch" in the Super Bowl.* When I asked would he still be clutch if Edelman didn't catch that ball, the answer was "It wasn't fourth down, so he would have made the next play."* THAT is reputation, not clutch play.* And we know this because you gave him success on a PLAY THAT NEVER HAPPENED.* Brady has absolutely had failures in the same situation - twice the year before in the AFC Chmpaionship game in Denver, and even in the first Super Bowl against the Giants, but when you have a clutch reputation, success is expected and apparently assumed.

 

Really, we could go on about this, but great players have their great moments.* But they have them because they are great players, and are talented enough to take advantage of the opportunities.* The players make the moments, not the other way around as you want it to be.* But we remember - and sometimes misremember - them for it.* And sometimes, they do get lucky.* Take Luis Gonzalez, who had inarguably the biggest hit in Diamondbacks history.* Was he "focused" then more so than in his other at bats?* Or was there some randomness involved?* He did hit a routine shallow pop up to shortstop that would have been an easy out under any defensive alignemt. Except one.* But what alignment were the Yankees in on that very pitch?

 

Or maybe Jeter wasn't trying...

 

Why is it that when those of us who believe in clutch use anecdotal evidence to make our case it's dismissed as so much hooey, but when someone is trying to prove that clutch doesn't exist anecdotal evidence has merit to them?

 

The fact is, the players do not try their hardest in every opportunity. Although they may be the best in the world ***at their jobs*** they're also human and sometimes "mail it in" just like most people do at their jobs. It's all about motivation. To believe otherwise is extremely naive. Do you really think that when a team is down 13-2 with two outs in the bottom of the 9th that the last hitter has the same intensity as if the score were tied?

 

Most of us wouldn't deny the existence of adrenaline and yet that may be the biggest factor in being clutch. I wrote some pages ago about having the hair stand up on the back of the neck, a calmness settling in, and an increased ability to focus. That's the result of adrenaline kicking in.

 

When one takes a person who is already better than 99.9...% of his peers at something and introduce adrenaline into his system he's going to perform at an elevated state. When you take a player who's better than 99.9% of his peers - that is, professional baseball players - he's suddenly going to be a lot better than his peers. That doesn't mean he's going to be successful every time - baseball isn't like that - but when adrenaline and motivation meet a player has a better chance to be successful. Statistically when a person has a better chance to be successful he WILL be successful and when a person/player is repeatedly more successful than the norm he rightfully becomes known as being clutch.

 

Talent + motivation + adrenaline = increased success in clutch situations.

Increased success in clutch situations = a deserved reputation for being clutch.

[notin]

Newsflash - If you think that because "these guys" are better at their trade than we are at anything because they are professional athletes, I feel very sorry for you. They are certainly better at their professions than I would be at theirs but that is a ridiculous and demeaning statement to make. I'm certainly not denying the fact that Rutledge is a talented baseball player. I just don't think that he is good enough to be on this team.

 

I do appreciate your passion here Notin but I still think that there is room enough for everyone to play. I don't need nor want to have a definition or a statistical breakdown for everything that happens in the world today. it really doesn't have to be nor should it ever be one or the other. if everything was definable and explainable, I would think that watching the games would be a waste of time. the outcomes would all be pre-determined. What fun. What actually is the clutch and what actually is a clutch moment? We probably would never agree on an answer there.

 

Well, demeaning or not, it's true. In order to be a player in MLB you need to be one of or close to the best 750 players in the world. This is not meant to insult anyone as much as it is to get some perspective.

 

I have no idea what your job is, But let's say you're an accountant. Are you one of the best 750 accountaNts in the world? If there were only 750 accounting jobs in the U.S., would you have one? Would you even be considered? Like Rutledge of not, he has had one of the available 750 jobs as an mlb player. He's in the running for one again. That alone takes an amazing level of talent, which is the point in t trying to make here. So yes, Rutledge is better at baseball than you our I are at our jobs and that's not an insult regardless of your opinion of Rutledge.

Edited March 30, 2017 by notin

[mvp 78]

Be careful what you say about accountants on here. We are legion.

[a700hitter]

Talent + motivation + adrenaline = increased success in clutch situations.

Increased success in clutch situations = a deserved reputation for being clutch.

SOunds like a good definition to me.

[User Name]

Clutch doesn't exist.

 

The hairs on the back of my neck stand up all the time. Does that mean I'm about to do something "clutch"? (I am being facetious here, but you get the point).

 

It's made up stuff that owes its very existence to confirmation bias.

[a700hitter]

Clutch doesn't exist.

 

The hairs on the back of my neck stand up all the time. Does that mean I'm about to do something "clutch"? (I am being facetious here, but you get the point).

 

It's made up stuff that owes its very existence to confirmation bias.

That's because you have no hair on your head. The hair on the back of your neck is standing out of fear that it is endangered like the former hairs on your head.

[User Name]

I have all of the hair. Clutch still doesn't exist.

[a700hitter]

I have all of the hair. Clutch still doesn't exist.

But choking does...right?

[User Name]

But choking does...right?

 

Ask Byung Hyun Kim.

[a700hitter]

Ask Byung Hyun Kim.

To me, clutch = choking less than your competitors.

[cp176]

Well, demeaning or not, it's true. In order to be a player in MLB you need to be one of or close to the best 750 players in the world. This is not meant to insult anyone as much as it is to get some perspective.

 

I have no idea what your job is, But let's say you're an accountant. Are you one of the best 750 accountaNts in the world? If there were only 750 accounting jobs in the U.S., would you have one? Would you even be considered? Like Rutledge of not, he has had one of the available 750 jobs as an mlb player. He's in the running for one again. That alone takes an amazing level of talent, which is the point in t trying to make here. So yes, Rutledge is better at baseball than you our I are at our jobs and that's not an insult regardless of your opinion of Rutledge.

 

First of all it is absolutely not true. As much as I respect what he has accomplished, and truly do appreciate what he has done, you have a very bizarre way here of tooting his flute. I was fairly successful at what I did and yes I guess that I would have to say that there is a very good chance that he could not have done my job even if he had wanted to. If you had left out all of the ******** which is in fact what it is and simply said that you admired and respected what he has done, that would make a lot of sense. I'm not insulted by what you have said primarily because it is nonsensical but I will tell you this that on the importance scale of life - a professional athlete doesn't rank very high for me. He is a talented entertainer but that is about the size of it. No one I hope would ever question how hard he has worked to get where he has gotten but comparing what he does for a job and how much sacrifice he has had to made to get there, you should spend some time talking to a good doctor or yea maybe even a teacher for awhile.

[Slasher9]

Right, so now you're saying players DON'T try their hardest in every at-bat?* T

 

yes, i am saying exactly that. do you really believe they do?

[User Name]

To me, clutch = choking less than your competitors.

 

I can see that. It's not made-up mumbo jumbo about love and bigfoot.

[a700hitter]

yes, i am saying exactly that. do you really believe they do?

I have seen hitters give away ABs without any doubt. Do people remember the night that Manny was called in to PH against Mo on a Sunday night that was supposed to be his night off and took 3 pitches right down the pipe for a 3 pitch strikeout. Over a full season, lots of ABs are given up. If it is getaway day and the game is out of hand, players are not bearing down as hard.

[Kimmi]

Whether the guy does great in the clutch or lousy in the clutch, you always have a readily available explanation other than mental factors.

 

That's not really true. I'm a huge believer in the effect mental and emotional factors have on players. None of which are statistically provable, BTW. I just don't believe in clutch because of all the data against the concept.

[Kimmi]

Who are you to doubt John Henry?

 

Is that the same John Henry who said that Pablo was at 17% body fat last season?

[Kimmi]

Well, you're allowing for the possibility that Price's postseason issues could be attributable to something other than randomness, now, aren't you?

 

Sure. I would feel very comfortable attributing his issues to fatigue, not that we know whether that's the case. I just don't feel comfortable attributing his issues to being a choker.