- MLB Draft, International Signings, Amateur Baseball

Magnetic Curses · January 4, 2006

True.....and isn't the Boston left field with the green monster far easier for Manny than say the O's left field ? I wonder if anyone ever calculated how many extra runs he's costed.

All those rbi's don't have to mean a thing, when you score 3 or 4 at a time, and dont'score any when your teams needs them the most. For that matter I guess Ortiz has outperformed Manny in a big way with effective scoring.

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?

KingCubsFan · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?

If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

vance_the_cubs_fan · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

brfahey · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

It's all in how you define clutch. Bases loaded in a 8-0 blowout is not the same as bases loaded with your team down by a run or two in the late innings. You can't lump the two at-bats into the same category. I think on this one, actual viewing of the game is required.

UK1679666180 · January 4, 2006

Clutch is something that is there, players have had the ability to play better in those situations than regular situations. I don't why it exists, I know it does, though.

I wouldn't base much off of it, though. If I was looking at a player and clutch was mentioned in a positive or negative manner, I'd file it under part of his mental make-up (baseball maturity).

Ding Dong Johnson · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

"Clutch" is rather subjective. Using the ManRam vs Big Papi example previously mentioned (last yr splits), it all depends on what your definition of clutch is. Close and late? Runner on 3rd < 2 outs? Bases loaded? Leading off an inning (rally starter)? If someone was truly "clutch", they really should be equally outstanding in all of these situations.

Close and Late:

Ramirez - 810 OPS (222 ABs)

Ortiz - 1293 OPS (only 78 ABs)

Runner on 3rd < 2 outs:

Ramirez - 1124 (100 AB)

Ortiz - 746 (32 AB)

Bases loaded:

Ramirez - 1019 (52 AB)

Ortiz - 1200 (15 AB)

Leading off:

Ramirez - 1003 (402 AB)

Ortiz - 944 (116 AB)

Considering Ortiz's sample size is so small in close and late, I would hesitate to give either an advantage when asked who I thought was more "clutch". It is pure perception in this case.

BleedCubbieBlue81 · January 4, 2006

Clutch is how you react in pressure situations. I believe that some guys react better in high pressure situations than others. And some guys fall flat on their face when faced with pressure. It's been a part of every team I've ever been on. There is no metric to figure out how clutch someone is.

Transmogrified Tiger · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

It's all in how you define clutch. Bases loaded in a 8-0 blowout is not the same as bases loaded with your team down by a run or two in the late innings. You can't lump the two at-bats into the same category. I think on this one, actual viewing of the game is required.

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

badger1679666666 · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.

treebird · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

It's all in how you define clutch. Bases loaded in a 8-0 blowout is not the same as bases loaded with your team down by a run or two in the late innings. You can't lump the two at-bats into the same category. I think on this one, actual viewing of the game is required.

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

he WATCHES the games

brfahey · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

It's all in how you define clutch. Bases loaded in a 8-0 blowout is not the same as bases loaded with your team down by a run or two in the late innings. You can't lump the two at-bats into the same category. I think on this one, actual viewing of the game is required.

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

he WATCHES the games

That's right, you ought to try it sometime.

goonys evil twin · January 4, 2006

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.

I don't think it makes sense to compare across sports.

Just look at Jeter. Everybody claims he's clutch. Yet, his postseason and regular season numbers are nearly identical. They remember the big plays he made when the Yankees one, but forget the bad results he creates when they lose. He's just a good player whose numbers translate to production in the clutch or out of the clutch.

fromthestretch · January 4, 2006

are you implying that manny doesn't produce in "clutch" or, as i like to say "unicorn" situations?
If you don't believe there's such a thing as a clutch player, you must not watch much sports, and you clearly didn't play many either.

I watch a lot of sports and have played plenty in my time and I don't believe there is a "clutch player."

The numbers don't bear that out. If being "clutch" is an ability, then "clutch players" would have good numbers in "clutch" situations from year to year or at least numbers that are consistent with their career numbers. They do not.

It's all in how you define clutch. Bases loaded in a 8-0 blowout is not the same as bases loaded with your team down by a run or two in the late innings. You can't lump the two at-bats into the same category. I think on this one, actual viewing of the game is required.

Any runs a player drives in during non-pressure situations count just as much as runs driven in during "clutch" situations. If a player puts his team up 3-0 in the first with a three-run homer, but fails to drive home the tying run from second with two outs in the ninth, I think more blame falls on his team, most likely the pitcher, for squandering the nice three-run cushion he gave them early in the game. I certainly wouldn't say that player isn't clutch.

Transmogrified Tiger · January 4, 2006

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

he WATCHES the games

That's right, you ought to try it sometime.

Of course he watches the games. Do you think that stat oriented people hate watching baseball? That everyone who doesn't subscribe to clutch is a mathmetician that's never seen baseball before?

brfahey · January 4, 2006

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

he WATCHES the games

That's right, you ought to try it sometime.

Of course he watches the games. Do you think that stat oriented people hate watching baseball? That everyone who doesn't subscribe to clutch is a mathmetician that's never seen baseball before?

No. I think people who mock those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player are narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own.

KingCubsFan · January 4, 2006

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.

MJ is the perfect example of this. I don't know how anyone could watch MJ and say there's no such thing as as a clutch performer.

As far as baseball:

Bases empty:

Manny .236 avg/.332 OBP

David Ortiz: .275 avg/.353 OBP

Aramis: .279 avg/.313 OBP

Runners On:

Manny .346 avg/.439 obp

Ortiz .290 avg/ .381 obp

Aramis: .327 avg/.397 obp

These are three people I would consider clutch, and the numbers show they are different batters when runners are on. Aramis said as much a few years ago in an interview.

goonys evil twin · January 4, 2006

No. I think people who mock those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player are narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own.

Who is mocking whom? I see you and plenty of others ridiculing people who put a lot of emphasis on objective analysis.

brfahey · January 4, 2006

No. I think people who mock those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player are narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own.

Who is mocking whom? I see you and plenty of others ridiculing people who put a lot of emphasis on objective analysis.

Please point it out. I have said on here more than once that stats are important and useful but are not everything. If we can all agree on that there is no dispute.

goonys evil twin · January 4, 2006

These are three people I would consider clutch, and the numbers show they are different batters when runners are on. Aramis said as much a few years ago in an interview.

So they can't perform without their teammates performing first? What time period do those numbers illustrate? 1 year, 2 years, career? Those types of splits generally do not carry over year to year, and often completely flip flop from time to time. For instance, while he was good, Sammy alternated between years when he performed better in close/late situations than his overall numbers, and years when he performed worse in close/late than his overall numbers. ARod has had amazing postseason runs, and bad postseasons. Jeter has been good in the "clutch" or came up short in the "clutch" but in the end, he's been consistent no matter the situation.

fromthestretch · January 4, 2006

It doesn't matter what situations you narrow it down to, situational performance varies wildly from year to year.

he WATCHES the games

That's right, you ought to try it sometime.

Of course he watches the games. Do you think that stat oriented people hate watching baseball? That everyone who doesn't subscribe to clutch is a mathmetician that's never seen baseball before?

No. I think people who mock those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player are narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own.

You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who mocks "those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player." Most people who value stats realize that you can't scout a player on just stats alone.

However, I think people who ignore stats and continually mock people that value stats are "narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own."

rawaction · January 4, 2006

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.
MJ is the perfect example of this. I don't know how anyone could watch MJ and say there's no such thing as as a clutch performer.
As far as baseball:
Bases empty:
Manny .236 avg/.332 OBP
David Ortiz: .275 avg/.353 OBP
Aramis: .279 avg/.313 OBP

Runners On:
Manny .346 avg/.439 obp
Ortiz .290 avg/ .381 obp
Aramis: .327 avg/.397 obp

These are three people I would consider clutch, and the numbers show they are different batters when runners are on. Aramis said as much a few years ago in an interview.

Are those 05 numbers? Check 04, 03, and 02? I bet the numbers are different.

goonys evil twin · January 4, 2006

No. I think people who mock those who watch baseball to get a feeling for a player are narrow-minded and have little respect for viewpoints other than their own.

Who is mocking whom? I see you and plenty of others ridiculing people who put a lot of emphasis on objective analysis.

Please point it out. I have said on here more than once that stats are important and useful but are not everything. If we can all agree on that there is no dispute.

There is a dispute. In this very thread the anti-moneyball types have been mocking those who choose to focus on objective analysis over subjective opinion.

Transmogrified Tiger · January 4, 2006

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.
MJ is the perfect example of this. I don't know how anyone could watch MJ and say there's no such thing as as a clutch performer.
As far as baseball:
Bases empty:
Manny .236 avg/.332 OBP
David Ortiz: .275 avg/.353 OBP
Aramis: .279 avg/.313 OBP

Runners On:
Manny .346 avg/.439 obp
Ortiz .290 avg/ .381 obp
Aramis: .327 avg/.397 obp

These are three people I would consider clutch, and the numbers show they are different batters when runners are on. Aramis said as much a few years ago in an interview.

Aramis in '05

Runners on: .327/.397/.628/1.025

Scoring position: .285/.367/.492/.859

Scoring position, 2 outs: .186/.314/.322/.636

Does the clutch go away?

Mizzou · January 4, 2006

Just so I understand what you guys are saying... you're saying that players don't perform differently in certain situations? Or at least don't do it consistently enough to classify them as being more successful in certain situations than others?

badger1679666666 · January 4, 2006

I think there are certain players that rise up to the occassion who obviously are always good players but seem to be even better in pressure situations - intangibles if you will.

MJ is a shining example of one of them.

I don't think it makes sense to compare across sports.

Why not. People were debating whether clutch was real, and I gave an example of an athlete that was by far the most clutch player in sports history.

I'm generally for objective analysis but I don't think statistics tell you all there is to know about every ball player. You could have two equal players based on basic metrics, but one might just respond better to pressure situations.

I don't think that concept is so foreign that it should be mocked (not saying you are mocking it goony - but treebeard sort of did). I wouldn't make 90% of my decisions based on it, but as former assistant coach/private coach I had an idea of who I would want under pressure, and I certainly didn't study numbers.

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blogs