OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

Number5 · 04-17-2020, 10:02 PM

The point isn't, that a factual difference between players in certain situations doesn't exist. It certainly does, plenty of players perform in situation x better than in y. I believe therefore some players might tend to perform better in some situations that would lead to them being described as "clutch".

The problem is, how to recognize those players, what situations are considered "clutch" and what bonus to give them to them.

Let's go back to Rivera. He performed great in the postseason, this is seen as "clutch". However, he performed below average against his biggest rival, the Red Sox. This is "unclutch". So what is he now - clutch, unclutch, averagely clutch? Lets say another closer converted a lot of one run saves (clutch) but bottled many 4 out saves (unclutch). What now?

Postseason perfomance is associated with clutchness, but postseason baseball has a lot of factors (End of season, cold weather, extra rest days) that make it objectively distinct from regular season baseball as a whole. Being good there doesn't make you better in other situations, and if lets say some guy would be consistently better in april, most people would react "huh, that's interesting" but if somebody has the same quirk in october, its "HE'S A CLUTCH GOD!!!!" - and saying this postseason performance proves he's better in hitting with RISP on a may night in ****ing Tampa Bay.
And this has also the big caveat that the "postseason clutchness" isn't just a statistical fluke with small sample sizes.

If there is data that a bunch of players consistently performs better in certain situations with a reasonable sample size and controlled for other factors (LIKE SACRIFICE FLIES THAT MAKE EVERYONE HAVE BETTER AVERAGES WITH RISP), statminded people would be open to seeing that.

We also want to quantify why Ortiz bats .455 and Bumgarner has a .25 ERA and Rivera a .99 ERA in the WS.

That said, those performances doesn't mean that those players deserve a clutch rating that helps them perform in arbitrary situations some people describe and some not as clutch or unclutch. It may mean that some people MIGHT deserve a "postseason performer" bonus, but even then, you can only quantify this after a long and successful career for a good team and then only if you're a big name guy cause nobody notices utility infielder Jones going 5-12 in the WS when usually he bats .210

And there's a fair chance that there is a parallel universe where people hail clutch postseason hero Kershaw and spit on the names Ortiz, Rivera and Bumgarner as postseason bottlers, just because the coin flipped on heads and not tails in the other universe.

So we say: This is 99% percent speculative bull****, and we'd rather have no clutch ratings than asspulled clutch ratings and if you can quantify what clutch is and when does it provably apply, we will be willing to listen to you. If you say something exists, then it's on YOU to prove us this exists and cherrypicked stats by cherrypicked players prove **** all in the millons of stats the baseball world produces each year.

04-17-2020, 10:02 PM	#83
Number5 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2020 Posts: 41	The point isn't, that a factual difference between players in certain situations doesn't exist. It certainly does, plenty of players perform in situation x better than in y. I believe therefore some players might tend to perform better in some situations that would lead to them being described as "clutch". The problem is, how to recognize those players, what situations are considered "clutch" and what bonus to give them to them. Let's go back to Rivera. He performed great in the postseason, this is seen as "clutch". However, he performed below average against his biggest rival, the Red Sox. This is "unclutch". So what is he now - clutch, unclutch, averagely clutch? Lets say another closer converted a lot of one run saves (clutch) but bottled many 4 out saves (unclutch). What now? Postseason perfomance is associated with clutchness, but postseason baseball has a lot of factors (End of season, cold weather, extra rest days) that make it objectively distinct from regular season baseball as a whole. Being good there doesn't make you better in other situations, and if lets say some guy would be consistently better in april, most people would react "huh, that's interesting" but if somebody has the same quirk in october, its "HE'S A CLUTCH GOD!!!!" - and saying this postseason performance proves he's better in hitting with RISP on a may night in **ing Tampa Bay. And this has also the big caveat that the "postseason clutchness" isn't just a statistical fluke with small sample sizes. If there is data that a bunch of players consistently performs better in certain situations with a reasonable sample size and controlled for other factors (LIKE SACRIFICE FLIES THAT MAKE EVERYONE HAVE BETTER AVERAGES WITH RISP), statminded people would be open to seeing that. We also want to quantify why Ortiz bats .455 and Bumgarner has a .25 ERA and Rivera a .99 ERA in the WS. That said, those performances doesn't mean that those players deserve a clutch rating that helps them perform in arbitrary situations some people describe and some not as clutch or unclutch. It may mean that some people MIGHT deserve a "postseason performer" bonus, but even then, you can only quantify this after a long and successful career for a good team and then only if you're a big name guy cause nobody notices utility infielder Jones going 5-12 in the WS when usually he bats .210 And there's a fair chance that there is a parallel universe where people hail clutch postseason hero Kershaw and spit on the names Ortiz, Rivera and Bumgarner as postseason bottlers, just because the coin flipped on heads and not tails in the other universe. So we say: This is 99% percent speculative bull, and we'd rather have no clutch ratings than asspulled clutch ratings and if you can quantify what clutch is and when does it provably apply, we will be willing to listen to you. If you say something exists, then it's on YOU to prove us this exists and cherrypicked stats by cherrypicked players prove ** all in the millons of stats the baseball world produces each year.