Farrell

[devildavid]

So by the same token you can't rule out the possibility that it's real.

 

Until you present a preponderance of evidence that it's real, calling it possible is just wishful thinking.

[devildavid]

No. It's vague because we use the words 'small' and 'large' when referring to sample sizes and they're both words of comparison. Statisticians like to have solid, firm numbers they can rely on so 'small' and 'large' don't work for them.

 

I would guess that no player has ever been clutch throughout his entire career, unless that career was very short - in which case it probably wouldn't have been recognized. David Ortiz probably was not as 'clutch' at age 20 as he was at age 37. People's abilities change as they get older, usually for the better, then for the worse.

 

The whole clutch thing is nebulous to begin with. Until we can define a clutch situation we can't know with certainty who's clutch and who isn't and defining a clutch situation is close to impossible because 'clutch' is in the mind of the player or the fan. Until we can find out what's in the mind of the player this discussion will go on and on and on and on.

 

What I still don't understand about this entire discussion is why we can't accept the fact that we have different opinions on the topic and quit trying to convert the other. I frankly don't care if you or anyone else believes in 'clutch'. This whole thing restarted when I suggested that those people who have said they don't believe in clutch stop saying that the players 'turned it up'. Back some time ago I defined 'clutch' as being able to 'turn it up a bit' and I was promptly 'schooled' on the topic of clutch. Now I'm hearing from that same poster who 'educated' me that players 'turned it up' but it's somehow now not the same as clutch. Be consistent.

 

I have been consistent. Debating about the concept of clutch is not merely expressing opinions. Baseball debates often use statistics to back up claims. Otherwise, Marv Throneberry could be called greater than Babe Ruth because it's somebody's opinion. Debates, like it or not, are about trying to sway people to your view. Otherwise we just express opinions which don't end up in any discussion at all. Opinions are made to be challenged and defended.

[Bellhorn04]

Until you present a preponderance of evidence that it's real, calling it possible is just wishful thinking.

 

But I can't present a preponderance of evidence because of the small sample sizes - Catch-22.

[devildavid]

But I can't present a preponderance of evidence because of the small sample sizes - Catch-22.

 

You can look at an entire career depending on how you define clutch situations. Clutch can also be compared year to year for consistency. It might be similar to calling a hitter a good RBI man. Is there such a thing?

[Bellhorn04]

You can look at an entire career depending on how you define clutch situations.

 

Well, that's the problem. There are high leverage situations in a lot of regular season games but there aren't that many high leverage games. In the postseason almost every game is high leverage.

[devildavid]

Well, that's the problem. There are high leverage situations in a lot of regular season games but there aren't that many high leverage games. In the postseason almost every game is high leverage.

 

Using an entire career can at least show if there is at least a basis for calling a hitter clutch.

[devildavid]

Was Marty Barrett one of Boston's greatest clutch hitters?

[Kimmi]

Does that mean you expect a return to "normalcy", whatever that is, next year?

 

Will signing JD Martinez take away some of that excessive drive to do better and better?

 

Would signing EE have done the trick this year (with or without Moreland)?

 

 

I do expect some positive regression next year from some of our guys.

 

If the guys were indeed trying to do too much, then signing Martinez would likely take some of that pressure off of them. And EE probably would have helped with that this year.

[Kimmi]

Stepped it up is meaningless figure of speech after the fact subjective description of something that exceeded expectations. Saying it doesn't prove a player willed himself to a better performance or that clutch exists. There is no ability to step it up. There is fluctuation on how well a player can utilize their talents in each individual, discrete performance.

 

It isn't a skill at all.

 

Well said.

[notin]

But I can't present a preponderance of evidence because of the small sample sizes - Catch-22.

 

That's not a catch-22; that's just an unsupported belief.

 

It doesn't make you're wrong. But it does mean actually trying to use data to justify your opinion is difficult and potentially impossible...

Edited October 3, 2017 by notin

[notin]

I agree, it is vague because it's baseball and everything is relative. Is a .300 hitter a good hitter? Is a .299 hitter not a good hitter? Where is that line then? We're even unable to define with any certainty exactly how large a sample has to be in order to not be "small".

 

What I believe is that some players are better at getting hits in clutch situations than other players are and those are the players I refer to as being "clutch".

 

BTW, I also believe in the soul, the small of a woman's back, the cock, the pussy, the hanging curve ball, high fives, good scotch...

 

I don't think anyone doubts that, But from my observations and every bit of data I have gone over, those players are equally better in "non-clutch" situations as well, and their performance is typically about the same.

 

With the game on the line, I would prefer to have David Ortiz up over, say, Brock Holt. But to be honest, I'd rather see Ortiz hit than Holt even if the game wasn't on the line...

[notin]

Was Marty Barrett one of Boston's greatest clutch hitters?

 

He certainly had one of the best post-seasons back in 1986, along with Spike Owen. Barrett also had one of the worst for the Sox in 1988.

 

Of course, this all operates on the theory that every at-bat and IP in the post-season is a clutch situation.

 

Barrett had a career OPS of .684. His OPS in Late and Close situations was .681. His OPS in High Leverage was .694. Shouldn't high leverage and late and close be clutch opportunities as well? He hit almost exactly the same, and the same size is significantly greater than looking at one two week stretch from a 10 year career...

[Kimmi]

Until you present a preponderance of evidence that it's real, calling it possible is just wishful thinking.

 

OTOH, there is some very strong evidence that clutch does not exist.

 

I approve of your posts on the topic.

[notin]

Well, that's the problem. There are high leverage situations in a lot of regular season games but there aren't that many high leverage games. In the postseason almost every game is high leverage.

 

But is every at-bat?

 

Fans loved Jacoby Ellsbury for the 2007 WS MVP due to his team leading batting average.

 

But the reality is, he as a non-factor for the first two games. And with the Sox up 2-0, he put up a 4-hit game that carried his series stats in a game the Sox won 10-5. Was he really a clutch performer?

[devildavid]

He certainly had one of the best post-seasons back in 1986, along with Spike Owen. Barrett also had one of the worst for the Sox in 1988.

 

Of course, this all operates on the theory that every at-bat and IP in the post-season is a clutch situation.

 

Barrett had a career OPS of .684. His OPS in Late and Close situations was .681. His OPS in High Leverage was .694. Shouldn't high leverage and late and close be clutch opportunities as well? He hit almost exactly the same, and the same size is significantly greater than looking at one two week stretch from a 10 year career...

 

I agree with your analysis.

[cp176]

Not moon, but I'll say this: Ortiz had his share of clutch hits. He also had his share of failures in those situations. We remember the former.

 

The biggest "clutch" hit in franchise history was not delivered by Ortiz or Yaz or Williams, but by Bill Mueller.

 

Clutch hitters are defined by clutch moments which are defined by us individually. I would argue that Yaz's base hit in the last game of the season in 67 was as big as any hit in Red Sox history - maybe even Lonborg's bunt. People might disagree for sure but to me it might have been. It is the beauty of something that literally cannot be statistically proven. Thank God for that. Maybe your clutch hit has to lead to victory or it isn't clutch. Maybe it leads to a franchise becoming better than anyone ever thought that it would or could. I'll define it might way - you define it yours. To understand these types of things yes - you have to have actually played the game or at least have been a decent athlete who actually had the opportunity to fail or succeed in high pressure moments.

[notin]

Clutch hitters are defined by clutch moments which are defined by us individually. I would argue that Yaz's base hit in the last game of the season in 67 was as big as any hit in Red Sox history - maybe even Lonborg's bunt. People might disagree for sure but to me it might have been. It is the beauty of something that literally cannot be statistically proven. Thank God for that. Maybe your clutch hit has to lead to victory or it isn't clutch. Maybe it leads to a franchise becoming better than anyone ever thought that it would or could. I'll define it might way - you define it yours. To understand these types of things yes - you have to have actually played the game or at least have been a decent athlete who actually had the opportunity to fail or succeed in high pressure moments.

 

 

 

First of all, I don't think anyone needs to have played the game (or been a decent athlete) to understand the concept of high pressure moments. In fact, I could argue those who play the game have their opinion swayed by their own experiences. "Pressure" itself becomes a subjective concept.

 

No one ever denied certain hit and moments are "clutch." But what we frequently forget is, especially in baseball, there is always more than one person involved. Back to Mueller, was his hit really "clutch" or was that a choke moment for Mariano Rivera? And while no one likes to think of Rivera as anything but a post-season fountain of ice water (despite his being the only pitcher in MLB history to lose the lead and game in the ninth inning of game 7 of the World Series), so he couldn't have choked? Right?

 

But what about Dave Henderson? Again, a massive clutch moment. But was Henderson clutch or did Donnie Moore choke? How do you draw that line? If you believe Moore choked, it certainly has to somewhat refute the argument that Henderson was able to "step up his game" in a high pressure moment...

[cp176]

First of all, I don't think anyone needs to have played the game (or been a decent athlete) to understand the concept of high pressure moments. In fact, I could argue those who play the game have their opinion swayed by their own experiences. "Pressure" itself becomes a subjective concept.

 

No one ever denied certain hit and moments are "clutch." But what we frequently forget is, especially in baseball, there is always more than one person involved. Back to Mueller, was his hit really "clutch" or was that a choke moment for Mariano Rivera? And while no one likes to think of Rivera as anything but a post-season fountain of ice water (despite his being the only pitcher in MLB history to lose the lead and game in the ninth inning of game 7 of the World Series), so he couldn't have choked? Right?

 

But what about Dave Henderson? Again, a massive clutch moment. But was Henderson clutch or did Donnie Moore choke? How do you draw that line? If you believe Moore choked, it certainly has to somewhat refute the argument that Henderson was able to "step up his game" in a high pressure moment...

 

I knew that I would get a response here Notin if I said what I said. I respect all opinions of others and I'll stick with mine. To truly understand it yes you have to have lived it to some extent. I'm not trying to be offensive either here but I think that you have to have at least been in the arena to some extent. To those of you who have never really played - I'm glad that you care deeply about this topic. Doesn't matter what the sport is though, if you have never been in a situation that is defined by what you do then you really don't know what it means to make or not make the play.

[Bellhorn04]

That's not a catch-22; that's just an unsupported belief.

 

It doesn't make you're wrong. But it does mean actually trying to use data to justify your opinion is difficult and potentially impossible...

 

Understood. But if in fact these samples are too small it means that no one has any good data to justify the opinion that clutch doesn't exist...because both sides are in the same boat...

[notin]

Understood. But if in fact these samples are too small it means that no one has any good data to justify the opinion that clutch doesn't exist...because both sides are in the same boat...

 

Which is why I've never liked post-season stats as evidence of clutch or choke. They're too small and often spread out over too many years.

 

I prefer in- season stuff like high leverage and late and close...

[a700hitter]

I only did what you did when you said I was wrong. Everything in this discussion is not just opinion.

I said you win. Can't you take yes for an answer. But it is all just opinion. On that, you are DFW.

[S5Dewey]

i knew that i would get a response here notin if i said what i said. I respect all opinions of others and i'll stick with mine. To truly understand it yes you have to have lived it to some extent. I'm not trying to be offensive either here but i think that you have to have at least been in the arena to some extent. To those of you who have never really played - i'm glad that you care deeply about this topic. Doesn't matter what the sport is though, if you have never been in a situation that is defined by what you do then you really don't know what it means to make or not make the play.

 

boom!!

[Bellhorn04]

Which is why I've never liked post-season stats as evidence of clutch or choke. They're too small and often spread out over too many years.

 

I prefer in- season stuff like high leverage and late and close...

 

Somebody on a game thread mentioned about Abad being really terrible in high-leverage situations. I looked it up and the splits are actually pretty incredible.

 

Low Lvg PA 834 OPS .646

 

Med Lvg PA 238 OPS .712

 

Hgh Lvg PA 275 OPS .948

 

So can we safely conclude that Abad has serious problems with being put in high-leverage situations?

[a700hitter]

Until you present a preponderance of evidence that it's real, calling it possible is just wishful thinking.

And you set the rules? Your argument and logic is fatuous BS. Clutch is not a label like a clothing size. And no one is making a list of clutch players or a list of chokers. Where would the cutoff be? Your insistence on a definitive measure is really in the realm of dopey. Your insistence that you are right is downright obnoxious. Edited October 4, 2017 by a700hitter

[moonslav59]

Understood. But if in fact these samples are too small it means that no one has any good data to justify the opinion that clutch doesn't exist...because both sides are in the same boat...

 

You're assuming that's the only reason we claim clutch hitters do not exist.

[notin]

I knew that I would get a response here Notin if I said what I said. I respect all opinions of others and I'll stick with mine. To truly understand it yes you have to have lived it to some extent. I'm not trying to be offensive either here but I think that you have to have at least been in the arena to some extent. To those of you who have never really played - I'm glad that you care deeply about this topic. Doesn't matter what the sport is though, if you have never been in a situation that is defined by what you do then you really don't know what it means to make or not make the play.

 

Well, first of all, it's narrow-minded to assume sports and athletes are the only people who deal with high pressure situations.

 

But even then, success in high pressure once doesn't prove the ability to excel in high pressure repeatedly...

[notin]

Somebody on a game thread mentioned about Abad being really terrible in high-leverage situations. I looked it up and the splits are actually pretty incredible.

 

Low Lvg PA 834 OPS .646

 

Med Lvg PA 238 OPS .712

 

Hgh Lvg PA 275 OPS .948

 

So can we safely conclude that Abad has serious problems with being put in high-leverage situations?

 

See. That type of split is typically he evidence I want to see, but in reverse. Abad looks like a good argument for choke...

[SoxHop]

Somebody on a game thread mentioned about Abad being really terrible in high-leverage situations. I looked it up and the splits are actually pretty incredible.

 

Low Lvg PA 834 OPS .646

 

Med Lvg PA 238 OPS .712

 

Hgh Lvg PA 275 OPS .948

 

So can we safely conclude that Abad has serious problems with being put in high-leverage situations?

 

How and where did you get the leverage stats?

[notin]

How and where did you get the leverage stats?

 

baseball-reference.com

 

Under "Splits"

[SoxHop]

baseball-reference.com

 

Under "Splits"

 

Uggg....... I was just going to ask how it knows high leverage spots. And then figured it calculates outs and if a person is on base and how many are on base and what base to detirmine that. Is that how high leveraged is calculated on that site?

 

I wonder what the breakdown is between high, medium and low leverage....