Clutch rule option?

[Page2]

The clutch rule for SOM has nothing to do with how a player hit with RISP its just a way to control RBI's. Look at the cards for most of the lead off hitters they have a bad clutch because they didn't get many RBI during the year, it is a product of where they hit in the lineup not how they hit with RISP. I can't remember the exact example here but a lead off hitter had great numbers with men on but didn't have a good clutch because he didn't have that many chances to knock guys in. I am glad its an option that can be shut off.

Page2

[bleacher_creature]

[quote:ecb8f3496d="Page2"]The clutch rule for SOM has nothing to do with how a player hit with RISP its just a way to control RBI's. Look at the cards for most of the lead off hitters they have a bad clutch because they didn't get many RBI during the year, it is a product of where they hit in the lineup not how they hit with RISP. I can't remember the exact example here but a lead off hitter had great numbers with men on but didn't have a good clutch because he didn't have that many chances to knock guys in. I am glad its an option that can be shut off.

Page2[/quote:ecb8f3496d]

page,

Is this forum opinion, or does this come from SOM itself? I can actually see controlling the RBIs, but I have a real tough time believing it has zero to do with the hitters average with RISP, or RISP with two out.

[1crazycanuk]

[quote:4774f30549="bleacher_creature"][quote:4774f30549="Page2"]The clutch rule for SOM has nothing to do with how a player hit with RISP its just a way to control RBI's. Look at the cards for most of the lead off hitters they have a bad clutch because they didn't get many RBI during the year, it is a product of where they hit in the lineup not how they hit with RISP. I can't remember the exact example here but a lead off hitter had great numbers with men on but didn't have a good clutch because he didn't have that many chances to knock guys in. I am glad its an option that can be shut off.

Page2[/quote:4774f30549]

page,

Is this forum opinion, or does this come from SOM itself? I can actually see controlling the RBIs, but I have a real tough time believing it has zero to do with the hitters average with RISP, or RISP with two out.[/quote:4774f30549]

Maybe the two both play a part in it. If it's controlling RBIs, then it would have to do with hitters' average with RISP and w/2 outs. Most RBIs come with RISP so I guess the two are related.

[Page2]

Hi Bleacher Creature,

Take a look at Ichiro Suzuki's 2004 card that year he hit .372 overall .364 with men on, .372 RISP, .472 RISP and 2 out, .583 with the bases loaded. Yet on his card he had a negative clutch. .472 RISP and 2 out and he is having hits taken away on his card. The only reason a low RBI count because he hit lead off and didn't get that many chances to drive runs in. When the runners were on base and 2 men were out he did an outstanding job. So this is just something that SOM does to keep a total number of RBI's down.

Page2

[1crazycanuk]

Why would they want to keep RBIs down though?

[teepack]

I believe in another thread that Bernie has said he was going to have to rethink this decision, which led me to believe that the clutch hitting rule will be in effect, as it should be. It is built into the cards, so it shouldn't be taken away.

[bleacher_creature]

Great example above page2 (Suzuki's card).

What would happen to his RBI's without the clutch adjustment. Also, here in Seattle people have wondered how he would do batting 2nd or even 3rd. Apparently he won't have it. He only wants to lead-off.

Anyway, there must be info "out there" on this, at one of the SOM off shoot sites, Lammana's or whatever. If we e-mail SOM themselves, you'd be lucky to get a two sentence terse answer.

[b:c626f46282]"The clutch factor is for this reason and that reason, and it is too complicated to explain to you in a short terse e-mail." [/b:c626f46282]-SOM :lol:

[bleacher_creature]

I just e-mailed Glenn Guzzo on this. He knows everything.

[1crazycanuk]

[quote:b4ba8c8c83="bleacher_creature"] If we e-mail SOM themselves, you'd be lucky to get a two sentence terse answer.

[b:b4ba8c8c83]"The clutch factor is for this reason and that reason, and it is too complicated to explain to you in a short terse e-mail." [/b:b4ba8c8c83]-SOM :lol:[/quote:b4ba8c8c83]

:lol: I take it you've been the recipient of some of those terse emails in the past?

[stlouisnathan]

From observation it appears to have more to do with RBI/PA than anything else more complicated.