Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo_The_Lip
There are late innings and RISP statistics on the players' screens, so if you'd like to make your own CLUTCH evaluations based on prior performance, the stats are there.
Good luck with that.
|
Not sure if you're being sarcastic here but what would those statistics be there for if not to consult them in specific situations?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RchW
As we said earlier how many PA would you consider enough to rely on any given performance? If a marginal player gets hot for a month and gets several "clutch" hits would his clutch rating be legitimately higher than an 8-10 year veteran with 5000 PA? Would you not have to consider how that performance came about. Who was the opposition, when in the season, the specific pitcher etc. I'd be more inclined to trust a less spectacular but consistent veteran than the flavor of the week.
|
Obviously there's a difference between a proven hitter and a guy on a hot streak. I'm not saying I'd pinch hit for Mike Trout just because some 5th outfielder with 25 career ABs has a higher avg with RISP. I'm just saying that some statistics regarding pressure situations are recorded and they are recorded for a reason. Perhaps we don't need a CLUTCH rating in OOTP but maybe we could have access to each player's career numbers for situational hitting.
That said, I'm not sure why this thread turned into a "lesson" on "clutch" and whether or not it exists "irl." There are plenty of psychological case studies that prove that people respond to pressure differently. It's been scientifically proven. I'm not saying that this proves that a CLUTCH rating can be quantified and then implemented into OOTP but to suggest that everyone reacts to pressure equally is insane. Just because there's no article on FanGraphs doesn't mean it isn't worth considering.
I mean no disrespect and I'm glad to read other people's opinions on the matter, but it's my understanding that this board is for making suggestions to the game's developers for the next installment. I imagine that if a suggestion sounds good to the community, they'll show their support by "bumping" the topic or "thanking" it. Maybe the developers will see this and then think about ways to implement the idea.
What I don't understand is why so many people, when they see a suggestion that they dislike, feel the need to prove to the suggester that their ideas are stupid or inane or impossible to do or etc.
If you think an idea is stupid, why not just ignore it? Odds are the post will drop off the main page in a day or so. Why must some of us defend and explain ourselves?