Clutch Rating?
 

Probably a wish for '08, but the game needs this. Even arcade games ten years ago had a rating for better performance close and late. Or are there already ratings that influence this? Like maybe Work Ethic? I dunno, what do you guys think?

TBH, I hadn't looked yet (nor did I play 2006 long enough to check this) but I know 5 & 6 had a clutch performance rating; you were either "Normal", "Suffers" or "Good"

Clutch ... lol.

What's sad is... I almost typed this exact same thing. :p

Probably not the best board to start a discussion on clutch...

clutch THIS!

lol. I'm surprised you didn't beat me to it; it took me a while to get the wording just right. :D

However, in all seriousness, this is just a game. I'm not sure if there are any "clutch" factors in OOTP2007. Perhaps hidden, perhaps not.

Clutch?

How about a true Yankee rating? or a grittiness rating? How about a rating for pitchers with a slide piece.

There should be a rating for "plucky" too, IMO.

Just so the original poster isn't totally baffled . . . there have been huge, raging debates here in the past, usually very argumentative in nature, over whether "clutch" should be in the game.

Most of the anti-clutch group points to the fact that there is no hard evidence that such a phenomena exists. The other half says that just because it can't be measured doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Etc etc.

How about a Winner rating? I believe David Eckstein would receive a 100 for that!!!!!1 :D

EDIT: [As well as Darin Erstad and Derek Jeter]

You are very wrong about Erstad, he should not get a winner rating. He should get a lunch pail rating or blue collar rating.

Yea, it is his football mentality rating that should be off the charts.

This may be a little OT; But can we conclude that if the White Sox had a replacement-level RF, rather than Jermaine Dye, then they would have one of the worst outfields in baseball history? :D

I don't want to get to silly about this and you bring up a point that as mentioned before is very much debated. Clutch implies that certain players have some mearsurable ability to perform at a statistically higher level in a given late inning critical situation.

I don't but it and my view is that what you are seeing is good/great players doing good/great baseball things such as hitting when it is their turn in the line up or with fielding when the baseball is hit in their general direction in the late innings of a baseball game. This also applies to poor/average players but since their average baseball performance is statistically at a lower level overall average/poor players will be "clutch" less often.

In my view, clutch does not exist and is somewhat silly as it is essentially saying this player "tries harder" in this situation. Players who are considered clutch are generally considered good to great ball players.

It depends....Is Erstad allowed to punt the baseball back to the infield?

There's a reason they're arcade games. They have silly stuff like exploding baseballs, and hitting harder by pressing the button faster, and supersliders that break eight feet... and clutch ratings.

:confused: Not Sure what you mean by this... but Erstad is and will be missed for a long time here in California:rant:

What I mean is that he is not a very good baseball player, statistically speaking. To get around this he is often described with meaningless terms such as "bringing his lunch pail to the ball park" to work his "blue collar job" of playing baseball. Credit FJM for that last sentence.