Aramis Ramirez' quest to prove the existence of clutch...

[TruffleShuffle]

overall career stats: .283/.341/.501/.842

 

 

bases empty: .275/.325/.485/.810

men on base: .292/.358/.520/.878

RISP: .294/.370/.538/.907

bases loaded: .343/.346/.638/.985

close & late: .286/.358/.504/.862

 

high leverage: .306/.360/.549/.910

medium leverage: .277/.340/.493/.832

low leverage: .277/.332/.485/.817

[Schwarber Fan]

I'll help you out...

 

59 out of the 95 homers Aramis hit from 2005-2007 were to tie the game or put the Cubs ahead. (62%)

 

79 of the 95 were with the Cubs losing, the score tied, or the Cubs up by 2 runs or less. (83%)

 

Just insane.

[C.C.]

overall career stats: .283/.341/.501/.842

 

 

bases empty: .275/.325/.485/.810

men on base: .292/.358/.520/.878

RISP: .294/.370/.538/.907

bases loaded: .343/.346/.638/.985

close & late: .286/.358/.504/.862

 

high leverage: .306/.360/.549/.910

medium leverage: .277/.340/.493/.832

low leverage: .277/.332/.485/.817

 

 

What do you mean by High, medium, and low leverage?

 

Edit: I just looked it up. I never even heard of this stat before...

[ChiCubsfan0502]

But he doesn't hustle. :roll: 8-)

[Old Style]

Man, he is amazing. This whole team is so much fun to watch. NEVER SAY DIE!

[erik316wttn]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

[abuck1220]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

all I did was giggle when they walked Lee. I knew something big was coming, though I expected a single or a gapper

[jersey cubs fan]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

 

He knows the Cubs couldn't afford to keep him if he was putting up a 1000 OPS every year, so he dogs it a little when it doesn't matter so he can stay on his favorite team.

[David]

Couldn't we just say that the guys who are clutch are the ones who *don't* crumble in the high pressure spots and do perform at least to their normal abilities and be done with it?

[mul21]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

 

So you don't believe there are certain guys who are able to focus their concentration a little better than normal in high pressure situations and end up doing a better job than they normally might?

 

I really don't see it as an "enhancement of ability" as much as I see it as a higher concentration level. I guess my best recollection of this off the top of my head is Rumeal Robinson of Michigan and his free throw shooting. He was like a 65% FT shooter overall but his FT% in the last 2 minutes of games was over 80%. Again, numbers off the top of my head and may not be exact, but they're close.

[abuck1220]

sounds like he should have used that special concentration power during the rest of the game.

[SouthSideRyan]

Awesome considering many of the braindeads out there argue against him for being un-clutch.

[Warren Brusstar]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

 

You're missing the point entirely. And no, his logic is absolutely sound.

 

If, as you concede, there are certain players that are "anti-clutch" -- that choke in certain situations, the players that do not "choke" in those situations will show an improved level of performance simply by maintaining their focus and ability in those same situations.

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

[David]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

 

You're missing the point entirely. And no, his logic is absolutely sound.

 

If, as you concede, there are certain players that are "anti-clutch" -- that choke in certain situations, the players that do not "choke" in those situations will show an improved level of performance simply by maintaining their focus and ability in those same situations.

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

You had me till you used that word.

[Peoriaman]

when I hear this argument I think of Ron Santo and Billy Williams. Then I realize there is a difference in clutch vs non-clutch.

[Warren Brusstar]

Like I've said, if anti-clutch exists, so does clutch.

 

this is, of course, ridiculous and really, really terrible logic.

 

i believe in choking, as it's obvious someone can crumble under pressure. but the idea that someone can magically enhance their ability in certain situations is enough to make me not believe in "clutch."

 

if ramirez had the ability to turn it on in certain spots or enhance his focus in certain situations, he would do it all the time and make millions and millions of more dollars. unless it's like video game power that can only be used for so long...like the wings in super mario 3.

 

You're missing the point entirely. And no, his logic is absolutely sound.

 

If, as you concede, there are certain players that are "anti-clutch" -- that choke in certain situations, the players that do not "choke" in those situations will show an improved level of performance simply by maintaining their focus and ability in those same situations.

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

You had me till you used that word.

 

What word?

[Sorianos hop]

It's the high socks I tell ya.

[abuck1220]

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

well, that's just stupid. what law dictates you're either worse or better in "clutch" spots?

[abuck1220]

when I hear this argument I think of Ron Santo and Billy Williams. Then I realize there is a difference in clutch vs non-clutch.

 

what.

[Warren Brusstar]

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

well, that's just stupid. what law dictates you're either worse or better in "clutch" spots?

 

No law dictates anything.

 

You should go argue with Nate Silver who demonstrated in Baseball Between the Numbers that hitters with high walk/low strikeout rates maximize win expectancy better than other hitters.

[David]

What word?

 

 

The one in bold.

[David]

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

well, that's just stupid. what law dictates you're either worse or better in "clutch" spots?

 

 

How about just worse or not worse?

[abuck1220]

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

well, that's just stupid. what law dictates you're either worse or better in "clutch" spots?

 

No law dictates anything.

 

 

then how come you assume if 25% of guys do worse in the clutch, 75% must do better? that's absurd.

 

You should go argue with Nate Silver who demonstrated in Baseball Between the Numbers that hitters with high walk/low strikeout rates maximize win expectancy better than other hitters.

 

what the hell are you talking about.

[abuck1220]

 

This isn't complicated. If 25% of players have "anti-clutch" traits that result in poorer performance in high leverage situations, the other 75% will on whole show greater performance in those same situations.

 

well, that's just stupid. what law dictates you're either worse or better in "clutch" spots?

 

 

How about just worse or not worse?

 

right.