05-24-2010, 05:58 PM
That's sort of twisting the idea of what "clutch" means to most thinking people IMO. I've always believed, more than anything, that it implies that a player doesn't crumble under pressure. Nothing more nothing less. To apply these ridiculous standards to "clutchness" is putting words in people's mouths. No one is saying that a clutch ballplayer rises above and beyond their normal averages, but to imply that certain players DON'T underachieve in certain situations is short-sighted as well, isn't it? To treat every situation as equal to another is statistically dishonest. That is true in sports and in life.
Why even bother with situational stats then? Should we throw them all away?
Why even bother with situational stats then? Should we throw them all away?