Clutchness

[kbwsb]

<!--quoteo(post=97816:date=May 22 2010, 04:10 PM:name=Ace)-->QUOTE (Ace @ May 22 2010, 04:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->And the thing is, like it or lump it, I bet if you came up with such a stat, you'd see nothing meaningful. The "good" hitters would have a "good" clutch stat over a large enough sample. Some guys would be uber "clutch" one year, and then back down to earth the next year.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's <i>exactly</i> the case. That's why the mathletes you mention don't believe that it's a tangible thing. It just seems that way, from visual observance.
Comparing A-Rod and Jeter's post-season stats is instructive. One's supposed to be Mr. Clutch, the other's supposed to be the ultimate choker, but last time I looked, A-Rod's stats were actually <i>better</i>. Not just as good. Better. Not just in their career post-season stats, but in late-game, clutch situations, too.

For the Cubs, a good example is our 3rd baseman. Aramis has always seemed "clutch." That' because he's always been the best hitter on the team (or one of them). Now he's hitting under .200, and he seems less clutch.