notin
-
Posts
53,867 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
47
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by notin
-
Mike Willis was the one I remembered. I think the other two were Mike Flanagan (Orioles) and Mike Caldwell (Brewers). But I could be wrong...
-
Right. Not every at bat in a high leverage game is a clutch moment. That is one reason I don't like using post-season stats to define clutch...
-
And in doing so , 39yo Carl Yastrzemski became only the second left-handed hitter to homer off Ron Guidry that year. The other I believ was an oft-injured Detroit first baseman named Justin Thompson. Another fun fact. Guidry lost only 3 games that year. In all three, the opposing starting pitcher was named Mike. The Sox starter that day? Mike Torrez. Fourth time was not a charm...
-
By that logic, Jose Canseco is not on steroids. Several years ago, my wife (who is legally blind) and I went to see the Red Sox play the While Sox at the Cell. We sat out in right field. She couldn't see much but the one player she could recognize due to his sheer massive size was Jose Csnseco (who was on the White Sox at the time). And I had to agree. His massive volume clearly seperate him from everyone else on the field. THAT might be the best steroid test. If you can be recognized from 300 feet away by a legally blind person, you're definitely juicing...
-
You didn't love Don Baylor? (RIP) Also Tony Armas Jr helped us get Pedro (and keep him off the Yankees)...
-
Every time some player shows a power surge mid-career, the steroid chatter begins. Judge, obviously, is a bit early for that. But Jose Bautista certainly was a hot topic. Like there was no other way. And it's so unprecedented. Right? By that logic, Roger Maris was clearly on steroids. And Babe Ruth...
-
Clutch moments happen. Sometimes from the unlikeliest players, like (ugh) Bucky Dent or Aaron Boone or Francisco Cabrera. And certainly Papi. But I just think of Papi as a great hitter who excelled in and out of the clutch. To me, "clutch hitter" seems more like a reputation based on individual successes and ignoring the failures. Earlier, you mentioned Yaz in 1967. I wasn't born when that happened, but if you ask people my age about how clutch Yaz was, everyone remembers him popping out to Graig Nettles with the tying run on third. And for that, he is remembered as "unclutch." For the record, that is a laughably bad view of Yaz. The guy was like 39 years old when that happened and had already had a great career of successes and failures in every situation imaginable. But he was remembered for that by my generation (outside of me) for a long time...
-
Maddox has like what, 20IP for his career? I don't mind if he doesn't go. I bet they do bring a LOOGY (Scott?) , but the toughest outs in the Houston lineup aren't the lefties. McCann and Reddick are their tough lefties, and not the guys the Sox are likely to be strategizing against...
-
Maybe in the 7 game series? If they make it?
-
I never assume any individual player is on steroids without sufficient evidence. And that evidence cannot come in the form of statistical improvement or elite performance alone. However, I do strongly suspect multiple players throughout the league continue to use and manage tobeat the system
-
Regardless of how you feel about it, nothing you have said provides any evidence that "clutch" is a repeatable skill...
-
Of course September pennant races also involve facing minor league call ups, who do pitch in high leverage games, especially if the manager is Bruce Bochy. And let's not discount high leverage April games, where pitchers are fresher and wins can negate tight September pennant races. You know the saying. And I'm willing to bet no onr here ever watched a three run walk off home run snd thought "Big deal. Its only April. " But if you try to whittle clutch opportunities down to important September games, you find sample sizes get so small, one or two big hits might be all it takes to get the reputation. Is that what it takes?
-
When you start insisting only players/athletes can understand clutch, you're devolving this whole argument back into a completely untrue but oft-repeated "the people on here who played the game believe in clutch but the people who didn't say it doesn't exist " counterargument. You don't need to havr played baseball to appreciate it. Just like you don't have to have appeared in s movie to appreciate it. No one ever denied players do have clutch moments and come through in the clutch. The question on the table is about clutch hitters ' hitters who can ELEVATE their performance in key situations. Ortiz is the most obvious example, but did he ever perform BETTER in clutch situations than he did in non-clutch ones? He was a flat out great hitter in any circumstance, and found homself in many key situations over his career. While we all remember many big moments he came through, we also forget about (or dismiss or excuse) the ones he didn't. And his success rate in big "clutch" situations appears to have been the same as other ones. True or false?
-
baseball-reference.com Under "Splits"
-
See. That type of split is typically he evidence I want to see, but in reverse. Abad looks like a good argument for choke...
-
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...
-
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...
-
Curses! There was still another way!
-
Homerism much? The Guardians are equally capable of sweeping the Yankees as they are the Twins.
-
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...
-
Every time someone has one of those "there's only one way to win," reality frequently proves there was another. The only axiom that holds true all the time would be - the only way the Sox win is if they score more runs than the Astros three times...
-
I get it, but slumps, unlike injuries, can also end without reason. I like his chances better if it's just a slump. Everyone has them..
-
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?
-
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 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...
