[nanwynnfan]

"so a player can perform worse than they usually do in "clutch" situations, and still measure "clutch"?"


If one is measuring MLB hitters competing at the highest levels in heightened pressure situations, I would suggest that there must be a starting point; and the one I have selected @ .270 has already dropped pitchers from the equations [where pitchers are permitted to bat]. Thus, players who significantly outperform their peers overall, I would argue, need not jump higher hoops just to qualify. The short answer may be, "YES."

Take, for example a hitter whose seasonal average is .340 in 600 AB. Has has gone 204 - for - 600; and his subsets look like this:

None on, None Out = 115 - for - 324 = .355

Men on, 2 Out = 35 - for - 104 = .337

Man on 3B < 2 Out = 14 - for - 41 = .341

His heightened tension performance, for the sake of this example, is 49 - for - 145 = .338. Yes, his performance in these situations is under his performance @ "neutral" and below his overall BA @ .340. However, he is still far above the mean for the samples selected and thus qualifies as "clutch."

Now, thus far in answer to your question, we have a player with 164 hits in 469 AB [accounted for and NOT allowing much duplication] with a BA of .350.

Let's say his further breakdown is like this:

Runners on 1st and 2nd; 7 - for 34 = .206
Man on 1B, None Out = 11 - for 43 = .256
Bases Loaded = 9 - for 20 = .450
RISP, 2 Outs = 13 - for 34 = .382

One who can't see a strong suggestion of "clutch" in this profile will not see clutch under any circumstances.

I selected certain situations for players to qualify in a first run. Then I raised the bar for a second run. No player is so TIDY as to have a cleavered distinction between relatively neutral and dramatically elevated at-bats. That, I believe, is accommodated by this approach.