Kimmi

Pats Superbowl today, Truck Day tomorrow! Does it get any better? A little off topic, but why are they getting rid of Roman numerals for the Superbowl after this year?

LOL This post made me chuckle. Skill is a big part of the performances, but I think you agree that there is a lot of randomness going on in the sport.

Baseball is far more random than any of the other major sports, and I think that most people do not realize how much randomness affects the game. In small samples, in short series, and in close games, randomness is king. I suppose there is no definitive proof that Schilling's postseason performance is all randomness. There is no definitive proof that clutch does not exist. Only very, very strong evidence. The correlation between clutch from one situation to the next, be it from game to game, month to month, season to season, postseason to postseason, etc., is nil.

If only the Sox had home field advantage.....

A prime example would be our 2012 team.

Because you "sighed" me, I am posting this quote from Sheehan to you. "The idea that players' abilities do not change in the clutch is one of those things that gets the anti-stathead crowd riled up, gets them talking about pocket protectors and people who take the fun out of the game. I don't buy it; the fun is the game, in the performances and the competition and the talent that we get to watch. When you have that, who needs a myth?"

IMO, the ability to manage the players and the clubhouse is a lot more important than the in game managing. I don't agree with all of Farrell's calls, but I think he gets a lot more criticism than he deserves. The same was true with Francona. A manager is criticized almost anytime a call does not work. But that does not necessarily mean that it is the wrong call.

Once again, no one is denying the impact that emotions and personal factors can have on players. If a player is unhappy or doesn't feel supported by his coach, I don't think he will perform as well as he would if he's happy and he knows his manager has his back. If a player has a sick child at home or is going through some other personal problem, those things can most definitely affect his performance. That said, that idea is not the same as a player being clutch, and home field advantage is still not nearly as important as many people think it is.

Clutch is a mirage.

I have said it many times but I'll say it again. As far as I know, there is not a single stat person who has dismissed emotions and the human element aspect of the game. The guys who make it to the majors and stick there are the top .1%. They have to be able to handle the pressure and perform well in the toughest of situations. So it can be said all major leaguers are clutch. Of course coaches and players believe in clutch. I will quote Joe Sheehan's explanation on that because he states it so well: "The notion of clutch persists because it allows for a storyline with a hero and a goat, and that's both an easy tale to write and an easy one to read. While it's a facile concept, players buy into it because it's flattering. No one wants to believe that they're successful just because they hit the genetic lottery and that, on a particular day, they performed better than the other, equally-gifted guys. It's much more enjoyable to extrapolate a certain moral superiority from on-field success, to attribute that game-winning double to your heart and desire, rather than to your fast-twitch muscles and hitting the fastball at just the right angle to push it past the diving center fielder. It's this need to turn physics and physicality into a statement about the character of people--to stick labels on them based on their day at work and the bounce of a ball--that is the most damning thing about the myth of clutch."

As you know, we've debated this topic many times before, and it's been a while since I've read some of the articles, but I have read in depth about the existence or non-existence of clutch. I can't remember the specifics of what they did with the postseason performances (I searched briefly but could not find what I was looking for.), but IIRC, they grouped 'clutch players' together and supposed chokers together to get a large enough sample. To S5, they are not 'averaging' the good performances with the bad so that they 'cancel' each other out. Beyond that, this topic has been dissected by the stat geeks in every way imaginable. They come to the same conclusion every time - that clutch does not exist, meaning that it is not a repeatable skill, meaning that there is no predictive value in it. Any differences in the stats that you might see are exactly what you would expect to see due to ..... here's that word again.... randomness.

Well, I'm not sure how much of a compliment that is. LOL I could not do play by play. I'd be too emotional and too much of a homer in terms of cheering for the Sox and against the opponent.

I don't think Dombrowski passed on Encarnacion simply to accommodate Travis. IMO, who he signed or did not sign was all about resetting the luxury tax. If resetting were not an issue, I think Dombrowski would have signed Encarnacion and figured out what to do with Travis later.

I agree that Henderson's offense is underrated. What I was trying to say was that I think the reason he may be underrated is because he was such a prolific base stealer that people tend to overlook where his true value lies, and therefore tend to underrate his true value.

I really respect the guys who show up to camp early. It's a long enough and grueling enough season as it is, and you always have a handful who have made that extra bit of commitment to the team and to themselves as players. I very much admire Price and Porcello for opting out of the WBC and focusing on the team instead. I don't fault ERod for wanting to represent his country, but with his knee injury in question, I think that him playing in the WBC is a mistake.

Welcome Poppy! Hope you stick around!

Postseason performances are considered as a whole. Any one player's postseason performance would be too small a sample, but looking at all postseason performances over various time periods provides sufficient sample sizes.

Three days until Truck Day! Just over a week until pitchers and catchers report! Stupid Phil says we have 6 more weeks of winter..... Come on baseball!

Agreed. Stealing bases is "flashy". Hence, that's what Henderson will be remembered for. Stolen bases are overrated though.

LOL Hugh. The timing/placement of this post cracked me up. I agree with you on the depth though.

One of the problems with determining whether clutch exists is with the definition of what clutch is. That said, the topic has been researched and analyzed in pretty much every way imaginable, and the results have been pretty much the same.

I pretty much agree with this. I have no doubt that some people choke under pressure. That said, as with clutch, there is no evidence of 'choke' at the major league level. The most likely reason for the lack of choke is that players who are able to make it to the majors are people who can handle the pressure. Those who fold under pressure either don't make it to the majors or, if they do, they don't last very long. I am fine with definining clutch to be the ability to control one's emotions in pressure situations, but in that case, I would say that pretty much every major league player that sticks is clutch.

They should give me the job. Either Steve's or Gary's. People would love me.

While it hasn't been proven or disproven, there is rather strong evidence against the existence of clutch.

There are clutch or timely hits, but that is not the same as saying there are clutch players.