strat defines clutch as

I wish SOM would just turn the clutch feature off for the online game. It's original intention "to tweak cards to increase RBI chances for certain cards that may not produce the desired Strat result on their own" really doesn't apply in the game we play. We're trying to win, not to replicate the stats on a particular card.

Also, far more cards—and especially good cards-- have negative clutch reading than positive ones. And this includes some really great RBI performances. For example, Lou Gehrig 1927 (175 RBI) has a negative clutch rating. So does Chuck Klein 1930 (170 RBI). And then there's Jimmy Foxx 1932 (169 RBI), who also has a negative clutch rating, along with Joe Dimaggio 1937 (167 RBI). I mean, what do these guys have to do to achieve a positive clutch?

Lousy overall clutch performance is a characteristic of most ATG teams. I have a current team in the playoffs with 92 wins that has a 1-27 clutch outcome (hits/outs). Among the other playoff teams, one is 1-11. Another is 0-21. And the last is 0-25. That's a total of 2 clutch hits in 84 opportunities. Yikes! And I just looked at this league at random, since it's my most recently completed league. I wasn't cherry picking.

Anyway, I've decided to basically just ignore the clutch rating when I choose players for a team. And while I don't think we really need, in general, to take steps to increase offense in the ATG game, turning off the clutch feature would be a plus in my book.

Clutch is also supposed to normalize low, real-life RBI totals, like when Brook Jacoby had 32 HRs but only 69 RBI in ‘87. He had a horrible clutch card, but since those situations are highly specific and rare, and because RBI are as much about the team around you as what you do (ask ‘93 Ruben Sierra, 233/288/390, 101RBI for the A’s [Rickey’s your lead off man]), you can bet he’d still drive in a lot more in a replay than he did with the 61-101 Indians. (To be fair, Sierra’s A’s only won 68G, and Rickey only played in 90, but no one’s that clutch. Some of that is just luck.).

For my part, clutch may as well stay on. It provides a small brake to most hitters, and ATG has plenty of offense as it is.

Clutch is also supposed to normalize low, real-life RBI totals, like when Brook Jacoby had 32 HRs but only 69 RBI in ‘87. He had a horrible clutch card, but since those situations are highly specific and rare, and because RBI are as much about the team around you as what you do (ask ‘93 Ruben Sierra, 233/288/390, 101RBI for the A’s [Rickey’s your lead off man]), you can bet he’d still drive in a lot more in a replay than he did with the 61-101 Indians. (To be fair, Sierra’s A’s only won 68G, and Rickey only played in 90, but no one’s that clutch. Some of that is just luck.).

For my part, clutch may as well stay on. It provides a small brake to most hitters, and ATG has plenty of offense as it is.

This to me is the reason the whole concept in Strat doesn't make sense.

Genuine question--is the metric they use even based on that particular batters performance in that season with runners on base and two outs, or just some general need to control RBI potential?

It was meant as a RBI/RUN adjuster for "AS PLAYED" team replays. It really does not have anything to do with how "clutch" the hitter was during the season. Furthermore, most players will have a negative clutch, or none at all.

Clutch is also supposed to normalize low, real-life RBI totals, like when Brook Jacoby had 32 HRs but only 69 RBI in ‘87. He had a horrible clutch card, but since those situations are highly specific and rare, and because RBI are as much about the team around you as what you do (ask ‘93 Ruben Sierra, 233/288/390, 101RBI for the A’s [Rickey’s your lead off man]), you can bet he’d still drive in a lot more in a replay than he did with the 61-101 Indians. (To be fair, Sierra’s A’s only won 68G, and Rickey only played in 90, but no one’s that clutch. Some of that is just luck.).

For my part, clutch may as well stay on. It provides a small brake to most hitters, and ATG has plenty of offense as it is.

This to me is the reason the whole concept in Strat doesn't make sense.

Genuine question--is the metric they use even based on that particular batters performance in that season with runners on base and two outs, or just some general need to control RBI potential?

I absolutely agree. It is too bad that common sense and tiny adjustments are so rare with the online game.

It was meant as a RBI/RUN adjuster for "AS PLAYED" team replays. It really does not have anything to do with how "clutch" the hitter was during the season. Furthermore, most players will have a negative clutch, or none at all.

This.

I have done many "ALL CLUTCH" teams in the past (at least a dozen) and going from memory, pretty much all but one, did well. But that may also be because they were small ball teams which have good fielders who can bunt and/or H & R with speed, so they are able to manufacture more runs which MAYBE gets magnified a bit by a clutch rating since we are bunting and stealing our way to 2B???

On averages it has translated to somewhere between 20 - 50 extra hits a season.

Unfortunately, the breakdowns of clutch are missing from all the older teams and links in general for most of them ... Thanks strat!!

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/1265923
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/183188
93 wins lost in semis
84 wins won ring
90 wins lost in semis
78 wins missed playoffs
92 wins lost in finals
96 wins lost in finals
78 wins missed playoffs
90 wins won ring
93 wins lost in semis
90 wins lost in semis

... On averages it has translated to somewhere between 20 - 50 extra hits a season...

Remember, every clutch hit also means 1 or 2 extra runs scored per hit. Considered over the course of the season, your clutch-first approach made a tremendous difference.

I would be OK if Strat turned off clutch hitting (as if they would). But a player's "plus" clutch hitting ability apparently is priced into his salary.