Very interesting, Rickjay. Based on that, I assume that you don’t believe there is any such thing as a “clutch hitter”, as well? I am resistant to your way of thinking, but that might be only because it’s more fun for me (as a fan) to think of it my way.
Here’s the test: Name five batters or pitchers that are consistiently “clutch.” That is, they do significantly better than can otherwise be explained in key situations (define however you like) year in, year out, throughout their careers.
You won’t find any, because there aren’t any. It’s an empirical fact that the “clutch” guy who hits .375 with men on base one year will just as likely hit .250 with men on the next year (and back up the year after).
Hence, either the thing’s a myth, or else the guys with nerves of steel turn into cowards from one year to the next for no explicable reason …
Here’s the test: Name five batters or pitchers that are consistiently “clutch.” That is, they do significantly better than can otherwise be explained in key situations (define however you like) year in, year out, throughout their careers.
You won’t find any, because there aren’t any. It’s an empirical fact that the “clutch” guy who hits .375 with men on base one year will just as likely hit .250 with men on the next year (and maybe back up the year after).
Hence, either the thing’s a myth, or else the guys with nerves of steel turn into cowards from one year to the next for no explicable reason …
Better yet, Furt, do what I do: offer to bet large sums on these five “clutch” players repeating their clutchness in an upcoming season. Yields both satisfying results and profitable ones.
Why would it be more fun that way? Honest question.
Anyway, no, there’s no such thing as a clutch hitter. Every study ever done on the issue demostrates that a hitter’s performance in “clutch” situations, no matter how you define them, will track his performance in non-clutch situations. The variances are within a normal random distribution pattern.
Of course, players have had huge clutch performances. Paul Molitor hit .500 in the 1993 World Series. David Ortiz really did hit unusually well in key situations in 2005. Bob Gibson started in nine World Series games, completed eight of them, went 7-2 with a 1.89 ERA, and hit two home runs. They deserve credit for those performances, even if one would not expect them to do it again. It’s just that over time those aren’t repeatable skills.
Also, the illusion of clutch-ness and choke-ness stems from the relatively small sample sizes that relievers and batters face. You will tend to know more about how, say, Roy Halladay, will pitch in a situation than you will know about JC Romero, because Halladay will throw 200-230 innings a year, while Romero may only throw 50.
Likewise, a hitter may have only 50-70 ABs in a year where it’s 7th inning or later, and the game’s within 1 or 2 runs either way. This is why you’ll see wild swings in year-to-year stats, especially for relievers.