Observing Clutch

[cummings2]

I am about to start a season where I intend to follow to some extent the effect -if any- of clutch.

For this particular experiment I'll be batting F. Catalanotto 5th in the L.U. -Not my ideal choice given his lower SLG, but OK given his high + clutch.

What I'm thinking of doing is tracking all the clutch situations throughout the season -men in scoring pos. with 2 outs- and keeping tab of the outcomes. After 162 games it'll be easy to figure out his BA with and w/o clutch coming into play.

If my goofy math skills are right, Catalanottos's +clutch (11) would translate into 50 points higher BA in clutch situations in relation to non-clutch situation.

My questions right now are:

1) Is the 5th spot better for this experiment or the 4th spot? -DH league but current cleanup hitter has healthy ammount of gbAs-

2) Is there any other information worth recording other than just BA in clutch situations? i.e. specific pitcher, runner(s) on which base, whether hit is SI or Xb...

[durantjerry]

There have been posts over the years in ATG as to the value of clutch. I believe the results were that it doesn't really matter much. If I remember correctly, the poster observed a whole lineup of hitters with good clutch. The post is gone by now, but there might be some informed opions on the ATG boards.

[Terry101]

Given the "all things being equal" 5th place is the best position for a high clutch player. I did some calculations awhile back- I'll look them up and get back to you. It does matter, how much is the question. And, will HAL ever IW your 4th batter- probably not.

[cummings2]

Thnx DJ, I'll peruse through the boards, old and new to look for some of that ATG stuff.

Terry, certainly be interested in your calculations if you don't mind sharing. Thnx.

I think in order to make things easier I'll just post here week by week the results of Catalanotto in clutch vs non-clutch sits so that at the end of 162 it'll be easier to look at the data.

Thanks again guys :D

[worrierking]

I think singles would be a better judge than batting average. I would use a % of singles per at bat in clutch situations against singles per at bat in non clutch situations.

Any thoughts?

[Mean Dean]

I don't see how it'd be useful to know how much better he hits in the clutch in a given season. The card, after all, tells you that. If you got a different result, it would be due to small sample size. If the card is made to be 20 points of BA better in the clutch, given enough clutch PA, it will in fact produce 20 points of BA better in the clutch. That's just probability, and the way the game and cards work.

The info about clutch that would be useful to building your team, IMO, would be to know 1) how many runs good/bad clutch adds/subtracts, and 2) how often different lineup spots come up in the clutch. I did a study on the latter [url=http://forums-beta.sportingnews.com/viewtopic.php?t=69393]here[/url], which, although I think the basic methodology makes sense, is not perfect. If you wanna look at clutch, I'd suggest either trying to improve that mousetrap and studying #2, or studying question #1. One easy way to study #1 would be to take a team where eight hitters are the same, but one team has a great clutch hitter, and the other team has an otherwise comparable hitter who stinks in the clutch; sim a bunch of seasons, and record the average difference in the two teams' run totals. That would be a snap to do with the CD-ROM. (As would the study you originally suggested, BTW. It wouldn't take long at all to sim 50 Toronto seasons and record how Cat hit in the clutch in each of them.)

[cummings2]

You're absolutely right on all accounts Dean, I have been observing some stuff in the CD game where it's easier to clock when the clutch came into effect and the impact it has on single games/season, however I have noticed that the numbers I recorded do not match wit the numbers I've been getting through 21 finished seasons here in TSN.

In all accounts this statement is absolutely true:
[i:462f4dd27a]
If the card is made to be 20 points of BA better in the clutch, given enough clutch PA, it will in fact produce 20 points of BA better in the clutch. That's just probability, and the way the game and cards work.[/i:462f4dd27a]

I'm not into starting any blame the OL version or conspiracy theories, I just thought of doing this very small study in order to start having some data to then compare to my other teams.

I'll try running the experiments you mentioned in the CD. No matter what it should be fun and keep me interested for a while.


Thanks a lot Dean, got my wheels turning :D

---
WorrierK, you're right, it should be singles and not anything else recorded to better isolate the clutch effect.

I think I'll try continuing with the Cat. experiment for a while perhaps a bit small sample here and a smnall sample there and in time a better sized sample can be accumulated....if not, no problem I still get an excuse to peruse boxscores 8)

[bleacher_creature]

[quote:a32124397e="durantjerry"]There have been posts over the years in ATG as to the value of clutch. I believe the results were that it doesn't really matter much. If I remember correctly, the poster observed a whole lineup of hitters with good clutch. The post is gone by now, but there might be some informed opions on the ATG boards.[/quote:a32124397e]

After playing roughly 10 billion CD ROM games at one low point of my sad, boring life, I disagree with this. The CD ROM shows you the clutch/non-clutch affected results.

My experience has been that clutch can be the difference between being winers or losers. It is pretty huge IMO.

[MARCPELLETIER]

I think the importance of clutch depends on the type of team/stadiums you have.

If you have a Coors-like, waiting-for-the-3run-hr team, clutch has much less importance than if you have a Petco team loaded of high on-base, low slugging players, in which you have plenty of games decided by one run.

[visick]

IMHO partly true...

A single or double with a man on 2nd. and 2 outs in Petco is the same as a single (or double) with a man on 2nd. and 2 outs in Coors...No?