Who was clutch?
Apparently not who you think.
almost 3 years ago
R.J. Anderson
5 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
This whole thing is basedd on the fact that fans know who is and isn't clutch
and that’s a real problem. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial to take one year’s clutchiest players and compare that to the next season, while taking into account aging curves, etc.? Hasn’t this been done before?
by lookatthosetwins on Feb 20, 2009 2:11 PM EST reply actions
That's how the clutch research projects have been done in the past.
Basically, there’s so much noise that you need a TON of data to find anyone that’s clutch to a significant degree. And it’s usually not the guys we think of as clutch.
This is the best quote in Tom’s recent article:
Let’s let this clutch debate end today (please?), and simply agree that: a) yes, clutch exists, b) yes, fans can perceive clutch players, but c) the impact of clutch players is limited to less than the platoon advantage.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow us on Twitter!
BTB: @BtBScore
Justin: @justinbopp
Satchel: @SatchelPrice
J-Doug: @RationalPastime
Daniel: @CamdenCrazies
Peter: @CapitolAvenue
Josh: @garik16
Julian: @splashinpumpkin
Matt: @devil_fingers
Bill: @BillPetti
JD: @JDSussman
Lucas: @DBITLefty
Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Lewis: @LewsOnFirst
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
