Clutch or Composure?

by Rob Deer For President on Jan 8, 2011 8:08 AM CST

In yesterday's comment section, one of the many threads discussed the myth or reality of performing in the clutch. As in most clutch or no clutch conversations, the dialogue became heated. The subject seems to bring out the best in everyone. There were calls for everyone's right to have an opinion followed by "Spanish Inquisition."

If I understand correctly, it seems that clutch and composure are often mixed up. To reach the major leagues, can we assume that a player has cultivated enough mental toughness to perform at the highest level? And if he has, then can't we assume he will eventually match his career numbers if given enough opportunities in these "pressurized situations"?

Bob Costas said an interesting thing one time. He distinguished baseball from other sports in that batting orders control who comes to the plate in "clutch" situations. Other than inserting pinch hitters, these so called critical moments produce opportunities for anyone in the line-up. Even a career .230 hitter may come up with a big hit in game 7 while Barry Bonds may strikeout, but over the course of 400 at bats or whatever, all numbers will return to their respective norm. I think that's the argument anyway.

Players who can't perform under pressure are not long for major league baseball. And playing a regular season "meaningless" game involves pressure. It makes me think of Turnbow who after imploding on his very own Bobble Head Night, watched his short career go down the tubes. It didn't seem like failure in the clutch at the time and it doesn't now. It seemed more like lack of mental toughness or composure.

Ultimately, the clutch or no clutch debate boils down to who would you rather have up with the game 7 on the line; Craig Counsell or Barry Bonds? Let's assume for this discussion that Counsell had better post season numbers than Bonds. I think the answer is sort of obvious.

Tweet Comment 26 comments | 2 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Someone needs to start a blog.

Twitterize me: @mykenk

by Mykenk on Jan 8, 2011 10:24 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

This one's actually a pretty accurate summary of my position in the debate.

Maybe not necessary, because I feel like it was stated many times in that thread, but accurate.

E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).

by Jordan M on Jan 8, 2011 2:19 PM CST up reply actions

Despite what it may have appeared like

I loved the discussion, but I am fearful of Conquistadors (not the tag team wrestlers!) showing up at my door. Anyway, I don’t think there is a right answer to this question. That’s what makes this such a good discussion. In my opinion, it all depends on your perspective and your interaction with the game itself.

Some commented that if there is not a way to attach data to it, it doesn’t exists and others said that if they can’t see it, it isn’t there. I can appreciate that viewpoint because this is a website that delves DEEP into the numbers and there isn’t a number to assign to it. Most people here at BCB would fall into this category. Someone with my perspective would say it is a tangible part of the game based on many, many instances of seeing it with my own 2 eyes. Not sure anyone will be proven right in the end. I guess this is what makes baseball so great to discuss with people that are clearly wrong (haha).

by Brew Town Boozer on Jan 8, 2011 10:43 AM CST reply actions

What's the difference?

Whether you call it composure or clutch it’s still the same thing.
Not every ML player can perform well in pressure situations, that’s just a fact.

Look how long it took A-Rod to finally perform in the post season.
Was that just bad luck? Every time he was at the plate?

No, he lacked the mental focus (clutch) to perform in those situations.

I don’t see how there is even an argument. Some players are just better in clutch situations than others.

For your health!

by menchkins on Jan 8, 2011 10:59 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

But that's just a myth/perception bias.

A-Rod’s career line in Sept/Oct is .288/.379/.550/.929 (1721 PA) and in the postseason is .290/.396/.528/.925 (276 PA). A player will have one bad series and it will be all over the media how he is unclutch or can’t handle the pressure, or one good series and he’s a clutch hero, but when you approach a sample size that’s actually meaningful most players good enough to play in the majors will approach their career numbers.

There may be a mental component to baseball, but the major leagues are a concentration of all the best and “most clutch” players from high school and college teams across the country. If you’re good enough to make it in the majors, you have to be able to handle pressure and playing in front of huge crowds. And it seems to me that either you can handle the pressure or you can’t; I don’t understand how one guy can be “more clutch” than another. If you can handle the pressure, it’s just another at-bat, and over a large enough sample the numbers will approach your career line. If you can’t handle the pressure, you probably aren’t going to make it to the majors in the first place (like Rob Deer For President said in his original post).

Ryan Braun: He loves it. -- Four pitchers in history with 8.5+ WAR and <250 IP seasons: Greg Maddux (age 29), Pedro Martinez (age 28), Roger Clemens (age 27), Zack Greinke (age 25).

by SRB on Jan 8, 2011 11:32 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

A-Rod is a good or bad example of clutch depending on your viewpoint.

If I remember correctly he was pretty good in the post season with Seattle. Then he had a couple bad years with the Yankees then a few good years.

Give him an offspeed pitch down and in. He will swing and miss.

by cooper82 on Jan 10, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions

Ed Whitson example

When you look at a small sample, it seems obvious that some players choke under pressure, but the argument about no clutch is not dealing in small samples. And when you consider the larger sample, the Pujols struggle looks alot more like a slump and nothing to do with his skill or inability to hit in the clutch. And every player including Pujols fall into slumps, mini as they may be. The fact that these slumps happen during the playoffs adds hype to the clutch argument. But Barry Bonds also struggled in the post season initially, but with more at bats, his numbers began to even out, especially his power.
Another thought…If Yankee Sadium is the center of presure in baseball, then Ed Whitson’s performance suffered as a result of this pressure or lack of focus. But this seems like something all together different from “clutch.” More in the realm of mental breakdown.
Take Whitson away from Yankee Stadium which is exactly what happened (He was traded back to San Diego) and his numbers eventually (2 years later) returned to the norm for his career. The Whitson situation like the Sax and Knoblauch throwing issues seem to be menatl breakdowns rather than “clutch.” Agaiin, I think the difference is whether or not you are considering a player’s performance in a small sample or carrying them out towards infinity where a player’s career numbers will return..

by Rob Deer For President on Jan 9, 2011 8:30 AM CST up reply actions

If you define clutch as hitting just as well under high pressure as a player would be expected to normally

Then even a clutch .300 hitter, given 5 “clutch” at-bats in the playoffs, could reasonably not get a hit in any of those at-bats. Does that make him unclutch? No, it’s random variation. If you show me a guy wih 250 or more postseason at-bats that are significantly lower than their career numbers, you might have some argument here. SRB’s post was right on the money.

E: George 4 (5, throw, throw, throw, throw).

by Jordan M on Jan 9, 2011 12:05 PM CST up reply actions

This FanPost deserves a rec...

1. For not being titled “One Night Stand”

2. For the author staying on topic and focused in the post

Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.

by sjlee on Jan 10, 2011 1:48 PM CST reply actions

Soooo....rec it?

by Noah Jarosh on Jan 11, 2011 1:07 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

If you're so inclined.

I say it “deserves” a rec… it’s up to you if you want to oblige.

Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.

by sjlee on Jan 11, 2011 9:30 AM CST up reply actions

deserves one

not just from him. maybe from BUCKS?

by PagsBrewCrew on Jan 11, 2011 10:13 AM CST up reply actions

do we need to rec something that he's supposed to do anyway?

I mean, seriously, my fanposts may be a bit off-topic (like my one about Heroes and the dissappointments w go through in life), but at least I stick to the topic I put on the title.

"That's not a weird stat. Rickie is a run-scorer," Yost said. "It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter," Yost told reporters. "See, you guys have no concept. He's a run-scorer. So there's nothing weird about it. That's what he does."
BCB Fantasy Football League 1 Champ

by Hyatt on Jan 11, 2011 8:54 AM CST up reply actions

Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.

by sjlee on Jan 11, 2011 9:34 AM CST up reply actions 5 recs

indeed

by nullacct on Jan 11, 2011 1:30 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs

Was the specific placement of Roenicke intentional?

Because it looks like Macha is not happy with him. :)

Pujols is the Barack Obama of baseball.

by sjlee on Jan 11, 2011 1:57 PM CST up reply actions

by molitorfan on Jan 11, 2011 9:27 PM CST up reply actions

We all figured that out

http://www.mlbsoup.com

by tcyoung on Jan 11, 2011 10:00 PM CST up reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

NL Central Standings

	W	L	PCT	GB	STRK
Cincinnati Red Reporter	25	20	.555	0	Lost 1
St. Louis Viva El Birdos	25	21	.543	0.5	Lost 2
Houston The Crawfish Boxes	22	23	.488	3	Won 4
Pittsburgh Bucs Dugout	21	24	.466	4	Won 1
Milwaukee Brew Crew Ball	19	26	.422	6	Won 2
Chicago Bleed Cubbie Blue	15	30	.333	10	Lost 10