cp176

I am obviously not a stat geek (whatever that really is) but where scares me is that I could be!

Now I am ok. I'm thinking right about now that I might go clutch a bud and choke it down. I'm also thinking how much thought I have given this topic and how little it amounts to . I'v been shoveling s*** on here for quite a while and now I have to go shovel some snow!lol

By the way, does the fact that you have degrees in engineering and math supposed to have relevance to me in this discussion? Are you suggesting that "stat geeks" have to have degrees in math, engineering, or both? I was a fairly successful football coach and never played a down of football. Is that possible?

I didn't say it nor imply it. Kind of sounds like you wish that I had. None of us want to be painted with one brush do we? Not that it matters, but do you think that it is possible that there are some "stat geeks" who have never played? For the record, I never said that all "stat geeks" have never played or coached. I will stand behind what I said though - If anyone - be they a stat geek or not - truly believes that statistics can tell them that choking and playing up in the clutch don't exist - there is a pretty good chance that they really haven't done much competing. Actually I find it pretty condescending as well for you to suggest that what I have seen, felt, and experienced can be disproven through a statistical study. But in all honesty I don't care what you think. It really isn't a very important argument to have. It is fun to talk about these things when the discourse remains civil but when it starts to get nasty my personal choice is to do something worthwhile - have to go blow the snow out of my dooryard. You want to make it sound like I am anti stats or maybe even anti modern thinking. Kind of looks like the next direction. Have at it. You would be wrong.

I am sure that there are lots of "stat geeks" who have who have done their fair share of playing. I am sure that their are some who haven't. I'm not painting labels on anyone. If you want to interpret what I write in a way that really does sound kind of negative, that is your perogative. It isn't who I am.

When you see one other than the football thread that isn't a yawner right now, give me a nudge.

If my comments caused am uptick, I apologize. It is a very important topic to me I guess.

ty - it is starting now to get to the core as to why I spent my life involved in athletics. All these things that we are currently debating that seem so goddam mystical and unproveable, are so very real. Anyone who has really played knows this to be true.

thanks for posting this - my guess would be that you played a game or two.

Well actually i am not looking for any validation what so ever. I like it of course when other posters say they like what I have posted - makes me feel appreciated but my whole point in this discussion isn't to get a hearty hooza pat on the back from anyone. I truly believe that there are times when the least likely athletes based on their stats are able to step up their games and play to a level that no one thinks that they can play to. I have been that athlete - I have seen that athlete- and I have coached that athlete. It isn't an opinion anymore - it is a fact - those players exist whether there are people who want to debate their existence or not. My guess would be yes - if people truly think that we don't have these types of players among us and the stats tell them so, there really is a pretty good chance that they really never have been involved in the competition to any degree.

thanks - now I think that I am ready to move on - hopefully

couldn't do it - terms like clutch and choke - team player ... have been used for years by everyone involved with athletics at all levels. I would hate to think that I was spending any time at all trying to prove whether they are accurate labels or not. They are opinions. They are personal and just speaking for myself don't need to be proven.

Sorry - I'm just not to keen on a labels in general. If someone on here wants to call me an ******* when I act like one (in print) I'm ok with that but to slap a label on me without having any clue who or what I am - my point is that there is too much of that crap going join in general in the world today. Now I am ready to move on as well.

Is calling someone clutch derogatory? What did I miss? I have been called anti-stat, traditionalist, old fashioned, old school, and just old. Sorry - left one out - conservative (the only one I like). I don't think any of the other labels really apply but oh well. If someone watched me play today and called me clutch, in all honesty that would thrill me - the others even though I can live with them, not so much. All things I don't think need to be proven in my world.

I had to blame Moon's rant on someone -lol. He baffled me with the ******** on the last one. I got through half of it but that is all I could deal with. Plus I wanted to find out if you had crawled out of the snow. We are coming home for a week or so and I bet I know what it is going to be like traveling through Boston to get to Maine!

Who is responsible for this? Spud?

Do they really Moon? Who are the stat deniers? It does kind of look to me like if you question anything that has been even suggested by someone who fashions themselves to be a "stat geek", then you obviously must disagree with everything related to stat compilation in general. That is not true . I really don't know anyone who questions the importance of the work done by the people who are immersed in stat analytics. Not accepting everything that gets thrown at you does not necessarily mean that you belong in a group labelled - the opposition. What actually is a "stat geek"?

for me too but I have o leave you with this. I made a birdie putt today on 17 that saved me a great deal of $. I should not necessarily have made the putt but I willed it in!

It does kind of sound like you think it is a mirage. Not to me. It is very real.

Kimmi - this is a legit question for you. You might know the answer and if you don't you probably know someone who does. What if anything to do the people that you call "stat geeks" think of the study of pscho cybernetics? do they respect it as having value? It is a practice that is and has been used for a quite some time.

Hey don't get me going about the tooth fairy. My grandchildren are currently making small fortunes as a result of that old bat. lol

I surely do think that you would see more tendencies toward these types of things at the lower levels but I don't think that a player's skill level necessarily tells me whether they will come up big or not at any level all the time. I just believe that we can't provide data to determine everything. You might not agree with me and that is ok. It also doesn't mean that I don't appreciate and understand the value of using every piece of information that we can get our hands on to help us. I do. I also think that it is very true that many of the greatest games are won and lost because of what someone has between their ears and I think that it is pretty tough to measure that.

That is a good point and it might turn out to be his year. I just want the best one that we can have back there doing the job.

I really think that it will boil down to which of these two is the better hitter with respect to the immediate future. They are both pretty good catchers. I can see that there is a lot of love here for Vazquez, but I really don't see him as a better catcher at this time than Leon. It may really boil right down to whether the Red Sox hang on to Swihart and how he progresses as a backstop.

No one I hope would disagree with what you have said here. Any professional athlete has to have learned to deal with pressure very well or they wouldn't be where they are. None of them are immune to what it can do though and some deal with it a lot better than others.