Kimmi

You do have a valid point with the strength of opposition. There are definitely fewer runs scored per game in the postseason than there are during the regular season. It's interesting to note that the HR rate is virtually the same in postseason as it is during the regular season, but that the % of runs scored via the HR is higher in the postseason. Makes sense because the postseason pitchers are less likely to allow a multi-hit rally. I don't know what all of that means as it pertains to whether Papi is clutch in the postseason or not, but maybe someone else has some thoughts on it. As far as looking at strength of opposition versus Papi, I'm afraid you might run into the small sample dilemma again. I don't think you can compare how strong the postseason pitching was as opposed to the regular season pitching, but rather you would have to compare how Papi performed against the specific post season pitchers versus how he performed against the same pitchers in the regular season.

Early reports on him out of ST give reason to be optimistic. He's letting the ball get deep and showing more patience, something he didn't show a lot of last year.

We agree on Craig. He was really, really good 2 years ago. It's too early to know if he'll have a place on this team, but I would hate to see the Sox trade him and have him rake somewhere else.

Thank you, and I enjoy the back and forth too. My goal, after becoming the stat geek that I aspire to be, is to convert every traditional baseball fan into an analytics believer. LOL Just kidding. As I have said many times, the scouting aspect of the game has as much merit as the analytics side. Part of the problem with the whole clutch debate is the exact definition of the word clutch. Clutch can mean many different things to different people. As far as the 100% effort on every play, I agree. I love players like Pedroia as well.

Ortiz has played in 82 postseason games, about a half a season's worth. He has had 357 PAs and 295 ABs. Still not large enough for the numbers to be completely stabilized, but a fair-sized sample. His numbers are as follows: Career - .285/.379/.547/.926 Postseason - .295/.409/.553/.962 There's really not that significant a difference, with the largest difference coming in OBP. That difference in OBP would work out to be about 1 extra time on base each week. Most of those extra times on base come from an increase in being intentionally walked in the postseason. In the postseason, Ortiz has been intentionally walked once every 32.5 PAs. For his career, he has been intentionally walked once every 49.7 PAs. Being intentionally walked makes up a little more than half the difference between postseason and career OBP. Also, in the postseason, he has hit a HR once every 17.4 at bats. For his career, he hits a HR once every 16.3 at bats. His HR rate is lower in the postseason. There is also a stat at Fangraphs called, oddly enough, "Clutch". For the postseason, his Clutch rating is 1.12 and for his career, it is 1.13. Both are very good. However, if you look at the individual seasons, he had more seasons below average in terms of clutch than he had above average. In other words, back to the original point, clutch is not a repeatable skill.

I understand your frustration with the SSS argument. However, they can't make an argument that is not going to be statistically valid, just because it fits or doesn't fit their opinions. It's not that they're not using it because they would have to concede something. They're not using it because it would not be valid. FTR, it takes 910 ABs for BA to stabilize. It takes 460 PAs for OBP to stablilize. It takes 320 ABs for SLG to stabilize. So while it's nice to look at Papi's World Series slash of .455/.576/.795 and say that he is otherworldly clutch, his 44 ABs and 62 PAs are not even close to a large enough sample to be meaningful. That would be like assessing a player based on 2 weeks worth of play. Spread that out over 3 seasons that are 10 years apart, and there's even more noise in those numbers. The analysts have done research on postseason clutch. They get around the small sample argument by looking at data for all players over several years, which gives validity to their findings. I know that that is not going to satisfy you as far as the Ortiz argument goes, but I have some other numbers to throw out at you, so hold on....

Honestly, I can't either. I can definitely understand why everyone thinks of him as clutch.

I read that this morning, and I am not happy about this. Not that I want Hamels at Amaro's asking price, but I sure don't want the Yankees having him.

I have never said that players don't feel pressure at the highest level. Of course they feel pressure. They wouldn't be human if they didn't feel the pressure. I laughed when Koji said he was so nervous he thought he was going to throw up, because I can relate to that, and I'm only a fan. LOL Pressure affects performance, and the pros have learned how to deal with it. So, while pressure might affect performance, there is no discernible difference in the overall stats between high and low pressure situations. What I'm hearing is a lot of anecdotal evidence. Obviously, the anecdotal evidence is going to support your opinion. Show me some concrete evidence that suggests that clutch exists. I can show you tons of it that suggest that it doesn't. That said, I am willing to concede that clutch may exist. But as of now, there is no evidence to support that it does.

I am not trying to twist your words cp, nor am I saying that you are calling anyone lazy. I am saying that this is an implication in general. The idea that a player can raise his play to a higher level at will just implies that he is unwilling to do that all the time. It's like the idea of a player having a career year during his contract year. If he can perform that great during a contract year, why not do it all the time? That said, Bellhorn has a valid point about the adrenaline kicking in. I have no doubt that you know baseball and that you have experienced what you have. The majority of the people would agree with you, as you can see by the responses on this board. I know I'm not going to convince you otherwise, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to challenge your statements. I will spare you the numbers. I will only say once again that our eyes will lie to us. We're human. It's one of those human elements of being a fan. ;-)

And this is why you are so dang annoying. ;-) I don't disagree with the effects of adrenaline and all that. It actually makes sense. Except the numbers don't support that players actually perform any better when that killer animal instinct kicks in.

That's a fair enough point about strength of opposition. However, all hitters face the same thing. Even a hitter who is not as good as Papi is likely going to face the opposing team's best relievers in late and close situations. Their numbers in those situations do not necessarily drop significantly. The point is, there has been no correlation found that suggests that 'clutch' is a repeatable skill. A lot of the perception that Papi (or any player) is clutch comes from selective memory. When Papi hits a huge walk off HR, we are likely going to remember that. When he pops up with bases loaded, down by 1 run, to end the game, we tend to forget.

I do not want to see Craig traded. He has said that the way he felt coming into camp this year and the way he felt coming into camp last year are like day and night. That doesn't necessarily mean anything, but there is reason to be cautiously optimistic about him. At this point, unless a trade comes along that just blows them out of the water, I think it would be wise for the FO to hold on to what we have and reassess a couple of months into the season.

I don't agree with the bolded statement. As I've said before, by the time the players reach the majors, they have all shown that they can handle the pressure. The players are performing in the clutch by and large the same way they perform in the non-clutch. I agree completely that mental aspects play a big part in the game and that they affect performance. This is often what separates those that make it to the show versus those that don't.

Saying that a player can ratchet it up when the game is on the line is indirectly implying that he is not trying that hard or is lazy in other situations. It's almost an insult to a great hitter like Papi. He is not just good in clutch situations, he is good in all situations. If a player can raise his level at will, why wouldn't he do it in every situation?

I know exactly what you mean. I have been known to leave the room during some unbearingly tense moments. I will come back 5 minutes later and if the outcome was favorably, I'll rewind and watch it. It doesn't seem like anyone should or could be so invested in a sports team, but I'm guessing most of the people who are rabid enough to post on forums live and die with the Sox.

Interesting Bellhorn. If you look at those numbers year by year, they kind of jump all over the place, except that his OPS in games where the margin is greater than 4 runs if consistently lower than in the other situations. Admittedly, I didn't look at ever year, but I looked at about the last 7. You may have a point about him not being as focused in blowout games. That said, Ortiz' career OPS in 'late and close' situations is .874. Is he not focusing in these situations? Also, his OPS when the team is ahead in games is .951 versus an OPS of .872 when they are behind in games. Doesn't that mean he can only perform in situations when the team is already winning? You know I don't actually believe either of the last two statements that I wrote, but I think they are fair questions.

Clay's line today: 3IP, 41 pitches, 26 for strikes. 0 hits, 0 runs, 4Ks, 1 BB And there folks, is our ace.

I agree Spud, I hope this is not sign of things to come. Victorino only knows one way to play, and that is to go 100% all out. You can't really fault him for that, but that is likely going to keep him banged up a good bit. Victorino did take BP today, so it seems that holding him out of the game is more precautionary than anything else.

LOL Bell. There is no other explanation.

The Sox are winless in the Grapefruit league. We're doomed!

I am truly surprised that I don't have an ulcer from watching baseball games.

I just love talking about stuff like this. I will talk to whoever will listen. The hard part is finding people who want to listen. It doesn't take long for their eyes to start glazing over. LOL

I hear ya sk. Losses ruin my night too. And the following day. My mood goes how the Red Sox go. I know I shouldn't let it affect me so much, but I can't help it. The great thing about baseball is that after a heartbreaking loss, you usually only have to wait one day until they play again. I don't think I could be a die hard football fan and have to wait an entire week after a tough loss to see the team play again.

Are you not enjoying the debate Ogden?