Is it the opinion of those on this board that athletes can be more clutch players than others? Can we say "That Moochie Norris guy sure is clutch." Can we say that Jeff Bagwell isn't clutch, and that Mariano Rivera is? (With the exception of last year's World Series game) Or that MJ is clutch? Opinions, comments, preferably from those who haven't sounded off on this topic recently.
I tend to think that there are guys who respond differently under pressure. Some guys tighten up. Some guys get looser. Others remain basically the same. The key is to be able to maintain your concentration when the pressure is on but not push too hard. I think some guys are just wired for that and others aren't.
Sam Cassell is clutch, MJ is clutch. Reggie Jackson was clutch. Many athletes are clutch.....some may rise to that level, for instance Cuttino has the balls to take the shot, as does Moochie....they could be considered up and coming clutchers. DaDakota
Keep in mind that being "Clutch" means they perform below their abilities the other 98% of the time...
I think being 'clutch' is simply the willingness to act in a situation that is unfamiliar to us. 'Clutch' players have failed as often as they have succeeded. That being said, how many of us are willing to act in new situations. Very few of us. Most of us just stand back and watch. If you are only talking about a game winning shot or defensive stop as being CLutch. ... The first element is luck. You have to be in a 'clutch' situation to get the chance to act. In a given season how many chances are there for a starting player. Maybe 1 out of every 15 games The second element is the willingness to act in that situation. Only one person out of the 10 on the court can act. Multiply that by the odds that you will act if someone hasn't already. For someone like Mobley it might be 1 of 2. The third element would be your chance of success. For most players that would be 1 of 2 or 50% So these very rough odds have Mobley being Clutch 1 out of 600 games. Now consider that in order for you to be considered Clutch by your fans you might want them to be watching. What are the odds that anybody is even watching you.
I don't think being clutch exists in baseball. There have been numerous statistical analyses of it... ... and players do not deviate significantly from expected norms in supposedly clutch situations over the course of a career.. They can in a single year. But not over a career. This means that being "clutch" is a temporary phenomena... or that it doesn't exist. Or that it's so minute that it's not quantifiable. In any event, it doesn't seem important. I wouldn't rule it out in bball or football.
I wouldn't rule it out in bball or football. Why the difference between football/basketball vs. baseball?
haven -- ok..what's the definition of "clutch" in that statement in your post??? i don't mean with runners on in early innings when i say clutch...i mean late innings, game is on the line situations. i have a hard time believing that there is no statistical deviations among hitters in that scenario.
Major: Harder to quantify. While in baseball, every pitch, etc, is statistically recorded... it's much harder to record what goes on in basketball or football, because it's less of a duel between individual players. Yes, there are fielders... but the pitcher and the batter matter much, much more than anyone else... and differences in fielding aptitudes are generally compensated for across the course of a player's career. There have not been, as far as I know, many statistical inquiries into the existence of clutchness in basketball or football... and in any event, it would seem more difficult to prove.
MadMax -- Haven is right over the course of a career. For example, I believe Biggio was great in those late&close situations last year, but a year or two before that was absolutely horrible. Now, what that says about clutchness, I don't know. The reason I asked haven that question is that I do believe it exists in basketball and football. Certain players just make plays late in games. However, they always seem to be great players -- Jordan, Favre, etc -- so it's possible that they just make great plays all the time but you notice them so much more when so much is riding on a particular play. That said, it still seems that they are "clutch", and if that's the case, then why wouldn't it exist in baseball even though it might not show in the stats? What makes baseball different?
I think that being clutch is the ability to continue to play at your own skill level when it's crunch time. Larry Bird made a number of clutch plays at the end of games, yet they were the same plays he made during the course of the game. To be "clutch" you have to be willing to accept the responsibility to fail.
hitting is about habit and concentration....if you are thrown off by pressure...if your concentration is screwy or you're "trying too hard", that can affect your ability to hit in clutch situations. i've seen it and i've felt it, myself!!! it's hard for me to imagine someone whose played baseball arguing something else. i certainly was no pro baseball player..but played long enough to play in pressure situations...and those at bats felt MUCH different.
Shanna: Football's the sport that really troubles me. If I had to guess, however... I'd say this. Clutch situations in baseball happen all the time. One could say, "well, the world series is different from anything else..." but at the same time, that's true the first time you have a major league at bat. And players bat thousands of time, pitch to thousands of batters. It becomes more and more routine. Then, once you reach the playoffs, even if you get eliminated in 3 games, you're still going to have quite a few at bats. Now, perhaps the first time... you are a little psychological jittery. Maybe you don't do as well in your first series. But after a while, I think baseball players have the opportunity to get used to it. Moreover, the game is more leisurely. You can step out of the box, take your time... etc. You know your team will have 9 innings to win, just like the othe team. That's not true in football or basketball. "real time plays" in baseball, are the minority. The rest of the game is psychological. You're getting ready, you're guessing, you're trying to understand what the other team is doing. Maybe all of thst psychological work prepares one more mentally for "clutch" situations? Maybe players are more easily to isolate each at bat. At least, to me... that's what it felt like when I played. I was good at two sports: soccer, and baseball. When I was in soccer, I really played differently in "clutch" situations. Oddly enough. I tended to do either much better or much more poorly. In baseball, it didn't matter to me. I got an adrenaline rush, but I sent it on its merry way. That might be it, too? Perhaps baseball players do better without adrenaline rushes? I mean, after all... it seems more of a "cool-headed" game... Bottom-line, I'm rambling... and am not really sure. But I don't believe clutchness exists in baseball... because quite frankly, there's not much room for it to exist statistically. If it matters, it has to manifest itself somewhere. So if it does exist, it's unimportant. But when I watch football, especially... I agree, it does seem like certain players "are" clutch. Maybe it's an illusion... I don't know.
Lol... one of the arguments that tries to explain this, actually... is that people who can't take the pressure never make the pros . The thing is... if you believe clutchness exists, then it's going to show up in a stat sheet. Because everything else does. Everything is recorded. So, if some players perform better in "clutch" situations, it'll show up. But it doesn't. Why?
haven, what was your gpa when you were accepted into UT Law? Just curious, I'm thinking of grad school.
