05-24-2010, 09:42 PM
<!--quoteo(post=98147:date=May 24 2010, 08:37 PM:name=Butcher)-->QUOTE (Butcher @ May 24 2010, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=98131:date=May 24 2010, 06:49 PM:name=Ace)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ace @ May 24 2010, 06:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=98130:date=May 24 2010, 07:43 PM:name=ruby23)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ruby23 @ May 24 2010, 07:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->If you don't believe in clutchness or hot-handedness, I don't really want to hear anything else you have to say involving sports.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think it's not a yes or no question. It - like many things - is a spectrum.
I think some players are naturally better at handling pressure, and thus have an incrementally better "clutch" ability, if you want to call it that.
But those guys tend to be the better players overall.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you define "clutch" as "not pissing down your leg in a big situation and being able to play at the same level as if it weren't a big situation," then I believe in "clutchness." If you define "clutch" as "being able to raise the level of your game *above* your regular level of play at will during a big situation," then I don't believe in "clutchness."
I do believe, however, that there are some players who piss down their legs in big situations -- including some pretty good players. So if "clutch" helps define those players who aren't "clutch," then that's fine.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is pretty much what I was saying earlier. Sports stats can't be analyzed in a vacuum. There is no controlled environment. Randomness happens, and players tend to revert to their averages, but it doesn't mean that everyone deals with varying degrees of pressure in the exact same manner every single time. Seems to me that some are arguing a point that no one is really making.
I think it's not a yes or no question. It - like many things - is a spectrum.
I think some players are naturally better at handling pressure, and thus have an incrementally better "clutch" ability, if you want to call it that.
But those guys tend to be the better players overall.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If you define "clutch" as "not pissing down your leg in a big situation and being able to play at the same level as if it weren't a big situation," then I believe in "clutchness." If you define "clutch" as "being able to raise the level of your game *above* your regular level of play at will during a big situation," then I don't believe in "clutchness."
I do believe, however, that there are some players who piss down their legs in big situations -- including some pretty good players. So if "clutch" helps define those players who aren't "clutch," then that's fine.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is pretty much what I was saying earlier. Sports stats can't be analyzed in a vacuum. There is no controlled environment. Randomness happens, and players tend to revert to their averages, but it doesn't mean that everyone deals with varying degrees of pressure in the exact same manner every single time. Seems to me that some are arguing a point that no one is really making.