02-08-2009, 09:55 PM
Well, Brock nailed it.
Here's the problem with those numbers, rok and Clappie: in almost every situation, the numbers <b>reverse</b> the next year. In other words, there's never been a case, to my knowledge, of a hitter who constantly kicks ass in high-pressure situations. Never.
So that means that sometimes A-Rod sucks ass in the playoffs, and sometimes he hits like freaking Paul Bunyan. Barry Bonds was stupendous in the 2002 post-season...yet in his 3 playoff series with the Pirates, he was terrible. What, did he "learn" clutchiness, later?
Name a player...anyone in history...and if you look at his stats, you'll see how in one year, he's the king of clutch, and another year he goes 0-for-15 or something in the World Series.
Reggie "Mr. October" Jackson? You want clutch? How about five homers in the 1977 World Series,
3 in the deciding game!
Take that, Mr. stat-head!
Oh, except that...the week earlier, he nearly cost his team the playoffs by going 2-for-16 (2 singles) in the A.L. playoffs, for a kick-ass .125/.222/.125 line. In fact, as Reggie himself relates in his autobiography, the nickname "Mr. October" itself was actually given to him <i>sarcastically</i> in that 2-for-16 series, when his Yankee teammates laid the blame on their near-loss of the series to Reggie's complete suckiness.
Manny? He seems pretty darn clutch, even to me. However, don't bring that up to a Tribe fan...the Indians would have almost certainly won the 1997 World Series if their best player hadn't crapped the bed with a 4-for-26 Series, for a lusty .154 average. (Game 7? 0-for-3, 2 strike-outs).
It's all small sample size. Jim is smart to try to build the team for the 162 games, and not the 3 or 11 or so games in October.
Here's the problem with those numbers, rok and Clappie: in almost every situation, the numbers <b>reverse</b> the next year. In other words, there's never been a case, to my knowledge, of a hitter who constantly kicks ass in high-pressure situations. Never.
So that means that sometimes A-Rod sucks ass in the playoffs, and sometimes he hits like freaking Paul Bunyan. Barry Bonds was stupendous in the 2002 post-season...yet in his 3 playoff series with the Pirates, he was terrible. What, did he "learn" clutchiness, later?
Name a player...anyone in history...and if you look at his stats, you'll see how in one year, he's the king of clutch, and another year he goes 0-for-15 or something in the World Series.
Reggie "Mr. October" Jackson? You want clutch? How about five homers in the 1977 World Series,
3 in the deciding game!
Take that, Mr. stat-head!
Oh, except that...the week earlier, he nearly cost his team the playoffs by going 2-for-16 (2 singles) in the A.L. playoffs, for a kick-ass .125/.222/.125 line. In fact, as Reggie himself relates in his autobiography, the nickname "Mr. October" itself was actually given to him <i>sarcastically</i> in that 2-for-16 series, when his Yankee teammates laid the blame on their near-loss of the series to Reggie's complete suckiness.
Manny? He seems pretty darn clutch, even to me. However, don't bring that up to a Tribe fan...the Indians would have almost certainly won the 1997 World Series if their best player hadn't crapped the bed with a 4-for-26 Series, for a lusty .154 average. (Game 7? 0-for-3, 2 strike-outs).
It's all small sample size. Jim is smart to try to build the team for the 162 games, and not the 3 or 11 or so games in October.
There's nothing better than to realize that the good things about youth don't end with youth itself. It's a matter of realizing that life can be renewed every day you get out of bed without baggage. It's tough to get there, but it's better than the dark thoughts. -Lance