Clutch is defined as the ability to come through in a critical situation where the outcome of the game is at stake. The perception (correct or incorrect) is a player performs beyond his normal skill set in these situations, but that might be more of a fan definition. Especially since many fans treat all postseason AB and IP as critical, when some just blatantly are not.
If you think of a clutch player as just being himself in important at bats, that’s plausible. But then the issue is quite often that player is just a good player in any circumstance. I mean, aren’t bad hitters also “clutch” if they have a .600 OPS in both critical and non-critical situations? After all, they don’t succumb to pressure as much as they simply suck.
But when clutch is thought of as excelling in critical situations, it gets difficult to prove. Most of our allegedly clutch hitters excel all the time, and really they turn into players thrust on a national stage more often to create memorable or epic moments. Would Derek Jeter be less clutch if he was on the Pirates? If you think so, clutch becomes a byproduct of environment as well.
To me, in far too many years of watching MLB, I’ve only seen one player with the ability to excel in critical situations, and that would be former Indian/Royal utility infielder Pat Tabler. Tabler was a .700ish OPS guy throughout his career who somehow posted an OPS over 1.000 with the bases loaded, and he had a reputation regarding this ability to boot. He was often called upon to pinch hit in these situations because of this skill, giving him a disproportionate amount of plate appearances with the sacks full.
No idea what it was about Tabler that made him excel in this one situation, but far bettter hitters have performed far worse where he shined.
I stand by my belief that the only clutch player ever was Pat Tabler…