For Your Eyes Only: Clutch Hitting & the Value of What We See
by DGU on May 5, 2009 11:58 AM CDT
Email
PrintA fascinating mini-story showed up in John Perotto's May 3 "On the Beat" column at Baseball Prospectus (unfortunately, subscription required). Perotto asks if there is a scapegoat for the Mets' disappointing start to the season. Skipper Jerry Manuel believes the Mets are lacking in clutch hitting. He says
When we get in a position where we’re trailing late in games, it almost seems like it’s an insurmountable lead. Our anxiety takes over at that time.
Now, presumably, of all people, Jerry Manuel is watching the Mets closer than anyone. He should be watching their games live with his discriminating eye. He should be watching tape, reviewing games with focused precision.
And he should know what he's looking at. Jerry Manuel played over 1300 games of pro ball, including over a 100 games of major league baseball. He played in the post-season. [Quick trivia - without looking it up, does anyone remember who the Cubs traded to get Jerry Manuel?] He's managed 6 full seasons, with the 2000 AL manager of the year award to his credit. He's into his second season as manager of the Mets.
He should know what he's talking about when he makes observations about the Mets. But he's flat wrong about the Mets' clutch hitting. John Perotto looks up the stats:
According to baseball-reference.com, in high-leverage at-bats, Mets hitters have an OPS+ of 100, exactly average, while generating slash stats of .272/.373/.401.
So, I have two questions. First, if Jerry Manuel's eyes are lying to him about what's happening on the field, how much should we discount the value of what the common fan sees happening?
This is different than talking about professional scouting data on specific hitters and pitchers. I'm talking about the conclusions we draw on much broader topics.
The second question is the poll.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
79 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yes, clutch hitting exists.
I don’t know if it can or cannot be proven statistically, and frankly I don’t care.
Thinking logically, it’s pretty easy to conclude that some players perform better under pressure, just as some cripple under pressure. Realizing that every human being has a psyche, it’s plain to me that some players stress in big spots and therefore don’t perform as well when they’re thinking too much. And others genuinely enjoy being “the man” in big spots and as a result tend to perform better.
Agreed.
I’m also not sure it can be proven and I also do not care. I don’t know the stats, nor do I want to look them up, all I know is if the game is on the line and one at bat can mean W or L I want a guy like Aramis up. I felt the same way about Edmonds as well. I’m sure someone can come out with stats that make them look horrible in “clutch” situations, but Aramis is the guy I would want at all times.
Why don't you care about the stats (on this particular issue)?
For the record, baseball-reference.com has a heading under split stats for things they might think could count as clutch hitting:
2 Outs, RISP
Late & Close
Within 1 Run
W/in 2 Runs
W/in 3 Runs
W/in 4 Runs
Would you argue those stats aren’t relevant to how you define “clutch hitting”?
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 5, 2009 2:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, and
for 2008, Aramis looks very clutch according to their stats.
His overall OPS in 2008 was .898, but in games that were late and close, he hit 1.426. In tie games, he hit .970. Within 1 R, he hit .949.
He also upped his OBP .040 pts when there were 2 outs and RISP, although his SLG was down from overall season.
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 5, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions
I guess...
I shouldn’t say I don’t care, and I do think they are relevant…I guess what I meant to say is that I believe it exists regardless of stats. They certainly help the case of there being examples of clutch hitters.
let me just say from personal experience from other sports as well as HS baseball
clutch performance exists—-period. In golf when the pressure is on to succeed or perform most players change emotionally—-most for the worst, they get tense, and therefore cannot execute—-I learned to actually find ways to calm myself, reduce my focus—-tunnel vision so to speak, deep breathing and almost walking hypnosis (so to speak as my brother used to say, I was oblivious to even an approaching tornado when the game was on the line), in your mind you kept positive key visions of what you wanted to do.
In basketball I came to know a few genuine superstars in their college days and both told me they slowed the game down in their minds, while others seemed to flail they remained as quick on their feet but in their minds things slowed, they found that rhythm or zone.
In HS baseball there were players who would do the same near the end of the game, they could predict how they were being pitched and what they needed to do to drive home a game winner. In the field there were always players who wanted the ball hit to them and those who dreaded the opportunity.
Clutch exists——
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
Trying to pin this down...
At first you seem to suggest that clutch hitting is not-choking, the ability to steel your nerves.
Then, you hint that in baseball, some hitters might have learned enough about how they are being pitches to do better later in the game, regardless of the score or situation.
What exactly do you think clutch hitting is?
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 5, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions
One other question -
you referenced HS baseball. One thing I wondered is if there was such a thing as clutchness, if performing at the major league level practically required nearly all the athletes who succeed at the ML level to exercise that ability, just to be able to hit in front of that many people against other competitors that good.
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 5, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions
In major league baseball
There has been shown to be almost zero year-to-year correlation of players being clutch.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
Predictable response.
I’m saying that you don’t need to get your stat book out for everything. Sometimes common sense tells you all you need to know. That common sense being, some people react differently in stressful situations — whether that’s baseball players, police officers, a person about to get bit by a dog, etc.
But common sense is subjective
you may think that a certain player is clutch, because you have seen a couple of big at bats in which he got a hit, but if his clutch stats (which actually measure his success rate in clutch situations) says that he isn’t, you should believe that latter.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
Okay, you're right.
Stats are the end all, be all. Got it. Actually closing the laptop and watching the game is meaningless, as we can just go to BP and find out all we need to know about the game.
that's not
what he’s saying.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 7, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions
as much as the rest of the team.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 1:21 PM CDT up reply actions
That would seem to be more of an argument of choking than clutchness...
As in, people can fold under the pressure and thus do worse in pressure situations. That’s an idea which I certainly believe.
But players performing better in the clutch? That would suggest that they aren’t playing at their best most of the time. If that’s the case, then I’d argue that “clutch” players are really just lazy players who don’t focus all of the time.
Wait...
So players can perform worse in certain situations but not better? That’s some interesting logic.
Read better - I didn't say it couldn't happen...
I didn’t say players couldn’t play better under pressure. I simply asked if you would agree that such performance should be an indictment of their play in non-pressure situations? In other words, we villify chokers. Shouldn’t we villify “clutch” players for not trying harder?
No, I don't think so.
It’s not about trying harder. Not to sound all supernatural, but to me it’s about a player rising to another level when the situation demands it. I don’t think it’s a matter of his physical effort — to me, it’s more mental.
trying harder can be physical or mental...
as in, I’d argue that “clutchness” is more representative of a
Moving to the other issue, shouldn’t this be something that can be proven with stats? If it exists and players have an innate ability, that should show up in stats, right? I mean, Aramis Ramirez is a better hitter than Aaron Miles. The stats back that up. Similarly, if there is some supernatural ability allowing a player to rise above himself in pressure situations, this should show up in the stats.
I’m not saying that clutchness doesn’t exist. But if it does exist, I can’t accept the idea that stats don’t support it. If it’s there, logic dictates that the stats should back it up.
Also, I suspect that people do a pretty poor job of accurately assessing what they believe to be clutch. In other words, while it might exist, I think people are more likely to let their eyes fool them into believing a player is clutch (or not clutch) based on small sample sizes of personal recollection.
Uggh, my editing skills suck...
first paragraph, try #2:
as in, I’d argue that “clutchness” is more representative of a player not focusing (i.e., not trying hard enough mentally) in non-pressure situations.
But obviously, that’s getting into territory that can’t be proven (can’t get inside people’s heads). hence I moved on to paragraph 2.
What you are talking about though
Is supernatural BS. A player who could do that should do it ALL the time then. 1st inning please, let’s not even get to those ‘clutch situations’.
Rather a player who is put in a pressure situation doesn’t suck. They are clutch.
CLutch hitting is a myth
anyone can come thru based on odds at any given time. playing under pressure in an important moment is being headstrong and consistant, not clutch.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I find the whole premise clutch hitting rediculous
Basically, people define it as elevating you’re game when it matters most. So that would mean that you have to be better in high leverage situations that you are normally. Are you starting to see how wrong that is? Players try to do their best all of the time; they don’t save their best for when it matters most.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
I think that's one of the questions here: how do people define clutch hitting?
Is it just not-choking? Do David Ortiz and Aramis Ramirez have reputations as clutch hitters just because they’ve generally been good hitters and likely to hit with men on base, given the lineups around them?
Or is it, as you and SouthernCub are saying, a type where people step up their game, “when it really counts”? I can see a type of player who is less focused most of the time, but able to really bear down in important situations. But, then, as you and S.Cub suggest, why is that something to praise that player for? Given the $ they’re being paid, shouldn’t they learn to focus every AB?
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 5, 2009 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Adrenaline
I think the heat of a game changing situation provides some players with some of those magic chemicals that help you focus more and work harder. Some people THRIVE on that.
Not me… but others. I prefer a walk in the park.
Jackie likes the smell of cut grass, he used to play ball on Saturdays, Playin in the sun...
Clutch hitting does exist
But a lot of players are over exaggerated clutch hitters.
"Check the magic of a winning season and there are always reasons beyond the talent." Ned Colleti
What about pitchers?
One would think that in clutch situations, pitchers would be just as likely to step up their game as hitters. I would think this effect should be even more pronounced in statistics than clutch hitting.
You can see some evidence of this by looking at closers in baseball. Some pitchers just have that closer’s mentality while others do not and cannot find success in a closing role. You also have closers that seem to struggle when brought into non-save situations. This evidence is more anecdotal, but I would think that the effect does exist and can be proven statistically.
However, I think the significance of being clutch is way overblown. The best clutch hitters tend to be the best hitters, period, in the strict sense of production. If you’re looking for players who perform better in clutch situations than they do regularly, the lists you come up with statistically will baffle you – few superstars and mostly mediocre hitters. Statistical studies have shown it to be either completely meaningless or at most, a few percent effect on ability. If you’re interested in the statistical side of clutch, check out this (and the linked articles within):
http://spiff.rit.edu/richmond/baseball/wpa/wpa_2007/no_clutch.html
if you believe there is clutch hitting
what about clutch pitching, or clutch fielding?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Right
Maybe all you have to do to be considered a “clutch hitter” is to maintain your level of play while the pitcher chokes under the pressure?
it is as much luck as clutch
since the luck allows you to be in that position to do so. can you be “clutch” and never once hit in the 9th inning? can you be clutch and make a diving grab when its all on the line?
being “clutch” is a myth IMO
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
You can choke in the clutch in the field too.
Witness Alex Gonzalex, game 6 2003, or Mark DeRosa, game 2 last year.
Great thread.
Or Aramis & Soriano
in the entire 2007 & 2008 playoffs.
There was a book
Published by the Baseball Prospectus people that used stats to prove David Ortiz wasn’t a clutch hitter, and proved a lot of other interesting things. I think it was called “Baseball Between the Numbers.”
"Check the magic of a winning season and there are always reasons beyond the talent." Ned Colleti
Clutch hitting is another form of kryptonite for the sabermagicians
But rest assured it exists. Just watch late in close ballgame the impact of clutch hitters. Like for example when Aramis Ramirez comes up to bat in a game situation. Best clutch hitter on the Cubs in recent years has been Ramirez. And by a wide margin. But alas, the sabermagicians will poke holes in the theory because that is what their exposure to the game via near exclusively the computer screen results in.
The window for winning a World Series may have waned.
You would agree that the playoffs are the most 'clutch' part of season?
Please tell me what Aramis’ playoff stats in 2007 & 2008 were. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t even have an RBI.
During the regular season he has saved us multiple times in the 9th inning but when we REALLY REALLY need him, he hasn’t done squat.
without all those 9th inning wins
we don’t GET to the post.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions
You aren't getting the point
I’m not saying that Aramis is bad but if clutch does exist and Aramis is in fact ‘clutch’, why can’t he be clutch for the playoffs?
Please separate yourself from any other argument than clutch. I’m not suggesting we trade Aramis or bench him in the playoffs. I’m just talking about clutch.
well
I think that clutch players can be not clutch. :D
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 2:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Now here's the funny thing.
BLou says it’s the guys watching on computers who don’t get clutch hitting. And yet, here’s Jerry Manuel, watching, not from a computer, but from the dugout, with lots of experience, and he saw it wrong.
Or maybe, you’re arguing that even though the stats say they are average, that the stats are wrong and Manuel is right. In which case, how much baseball experience do you need to be able to make the call on clutch hitting? Does Manuel’s trump Johan Santana’s (who didn’t think the clutch hitting was a proble), or does Johan get the trump, since he’s played better at a higher level?
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 6, 2009 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions
so-called "clutch hitting" is a myth.
This is not to say that clutch plays do not happen, do not confuse the two.
To be “clutch” would mean that the player has a special ability to perform above his true talent level in high-pressure situations. This is an illusion.
The problem with trying to rate clutch hitting:
1. How does a player have a skill set that that he ia a .250 hitter in “non clutch” situations magically becomes a .300 hitter when the game is on the line?
2. What causes the above to happen?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
it has to do with
how they handle pressure. Mark DeRosa talked about during 2008, how the noise at the stadium was so loud and intense, he had to raise his glove to his face and SCREAM into it to relieve the pressure.
It’s making sure that when the pressure ratchets up, you handle it the same way you handle anything, as opposed to getting more tense and more tight and pressing.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions
you handle it the same way you handle anything
“being clutch” suggests that you can go above and beyond your averages under “clutch situations”
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
but that's not what happens
lots of people get tighter and stressed when they’re under pressure. Good players — and I include Rami in this — DON’T get stressed under pressure, and thus are able to continue to perform. It’s not a matter of going up, it’s a matter of not going down.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 2:23 PM CDT up reply actions
what about those who are a 250 hitter
and are not tense or stressed in that same position, but strike out 3 out of 4 times, and gets a single that fourth time? would that be clutch since he was not tense or stressed, he just happens to be a lesser hitter stat wise
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I don't know
I don’t think it’s something measurable.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 2:52 PM CDT up reply actions
I too do not believe it can be measured
it is more myth and an illusion.
part of being clutch would have to include being in position to produce at that time. You cannot control when you bat in an inning (i.e. if you do not bat in the 8th or 9th how can you be considered clutch or not)
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I agree
on the other hand, remember when Riot was leading off two weeks ago? The number of times he came up in critical game situations where runs would have scored with a hit was… remarkable. Four or five times.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Clutch
is more opinion than fact
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
If it can't be measured than it probably isn't meaningful
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
I'm not sure I agree with that
but I’m not going to try to argue with it, because I think it’s too subjective.
But, for example — how to you measure Z’s intensity? I don’t know. But I know it’s part of what makes him the great player he is.
"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella
by drewishdrewid on May 6, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions
+1
kind of like how do you measure the level of scrappy a player has
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
You may not be able to measure Z's intesity
but if it truly has an impact, than it will show up in his performance.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
I'm not far off on your opinion in general (I'm a sabermetrics guy)
but I’m not sure I agree with you on the notion that all meaningful things are measureable (if that’s a fair description of what you’re saying).
Kind of goes to the heart of the age old debate in all social sciences about the tension between qualitative vs. quantitative study, though it’s probably not worth going into the whole debate here.
But as a small example, I doubt it’s true to say that all causal factors in an event (such as an at-bat) are meaningfully translated into quantifiable after-effects that we perceive. In theory, maybe we should be able to somehow quantify everything, but that doesn’t mean we do.
Take a pitcher like Nolan Ryan, who purportedly had a large intimidating effect on batters because of 1)his ability to throw very hard, 2)his lack of control, and 3)his penchant for hitting a batter for any number of reasons.
Now, let’s suppose that the threat of bodily harm might impact a players approach at the plate (being it stepping out, opening your stance, moving off the plate, what have you). And let’s suppose that those adjustments can be demonstrated (ie perceived) to inhibit the production of hitters on average.
We have quantified statistics for Nolan Ryans career, indicating all sorts of things. But at least to my knowledge, we don’t have any way to measure the degree of impact that his “intimidation” had in shaping his career statistics, as apart from the impact that his physical delivery (velocity, movement, location, etc.) had in creating them.
In this scenario, we know that intimidation played a part of creating the quantitative result that we measure, but we don’t have any way of measuring its level because of the complexity of the relationship.
by CubsWin!Oregon on May 6, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions
how many noogies did he give Ventura
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
I understand that
I completely agree that they are other factors in performance besides just a players peripheral stats. However, the bottom line is that they all affect the same goal. If Z is 3.60 ERA guy (which is the only thing that we care about) it’s a combination of his peripheral stats (walks, hits, homers, strikeouts) and his “intensity” or any other intangibles.
A pet peeve of mine, is someone saying that a player is better than his actual production because he has intangibles.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
Agreed about intangibles.
It is annoying…especially because so much of sports journalism is based off of such idiocy.
I kind of understand it for the average fan though. We all have reasons why we like some players more than others (they have a better work-ethic, are scrappy, aren’t named Fernando Vina, etc.). And we all feel like we have to justify it more than just “I really like his goatee.” As you said, the trouble is just when we start trying to use those reasons to justify why a player is better on a peformance metric.
It makes the game more interesting for us too I suppose. If we all just liked guys because they performed the best, what fun would that be? :)
by CubsWin!Oregon on May 6, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh sure
My favorite non-Pujols player is Yadier Molina (his pickoffs are a thing of beauty); however, when he was hitting .215 in 06, I knew he was having a shit year and was hurting the team. Although he has since turned it around and is now an above average hitter.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 6, 2009 11:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Yadier Molina is turning into an excellent, excellent ballplayer.
Derrek Lee is good.
by DGU on May 7, 2009 8:39 AM CDT up reply actions
If this power he has shown this year is for real
Than he might be one of the best 10 players in the NL, when you consider defense.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
by vivaelpujols on May 7, 2009 11:49 PM CDT up reply actions
That's an absolutely ridiculous statement.
Yadier Molina one of the top 10 players in the NL? Please.
Sigh...
This year, Yadi is putting up a .323/.390/.484 line, that is good for .382 wOBA which makes him about as good of a hitter as Aramis Ramirez was last year. However, when you consider the fact that the average catcher hits much worse than the average third baseman, his hitting becomes a lot more valuable. Add in excellent defense, and he would certainly be one of the best 10 players in the NL if he could keep up this hitting pace.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
Now you're talking about value...
Which is different from your original statement that he’s one of the 10 “best.”
He’s not even top 30 in OPS… and throwing out 6 baserunners doesn’t move him up anywhere near the top 10. So yes, saying he’s one of the “ten best” in the league is absurd.
It's been asked before
But what defines clutch? It would be nice if everyone could state their opinion on the matter.
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
here is what i defined it as above
not saying i am right or not
To be "clutch" would mean that the player has a special ability to perform above his true talent level in high-pressure situations.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
agree to a certain extent
would change “true talent level” to “current performance indicators” meaning if a guys hits .325 in high-pressure situations and is a .265 hitter, then he is “clutch.” Not sure true talent level matters.
what is a high pressure situation
and does it matter 325 is against a bunch of Cotts’ where the 265 BA is against the Haren’s of the league. It is impossible to truly say someone is clutch beacuse each stat would have to be made up of every minor variable to decide what the “median” should have been in that situation
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
you tell me what is a high-pressure situation
and I’ll agree with you. I’m not debating what constitutes a high-pressure situation. I think 2 outs with a runner on 2B in a 0-0 game versus Santana is equal of a high pressure situation as facing a closer in the 9th inning with the winning run on base.
I was simplifying the argument that if a player exceeds his “norm” in the “HPS” then he is clutch. I just disagree with talent-level as the base. Or maybe I am not following what you mean by talent-level.
if the hitter has a lifetime BA against Santana of .700
is it clutch or is it what he does always against him?
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
every clutch AB would be one also
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
going 2-3
against Santana when losing 9-2 when he is center-cutting pitches is not “clutch” per se. I was speaking to a specific leveraged situation.
I was speaking to a player who exceeds his norms in the “clutch” situations is “clutch”—not based on a perceived talent-level.
I guess I am now confused as to your position on this matter. I thought we were in agreement with a little “semantics” in play, but after reading your replies, I am not so sure. Thanks for the diologue.
I believe clutch is a myth and illusion
there are so many variables, then the “luck factor” (hitting a bad pitch that a pitcher hung, etc).
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Well that kind of clutch has been proven to be a myth
St. Louis Cardinals... defying win expectancy since 2008
clutch in general is a myth
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
how can a player who fails 7 out of 10 times be called clutch?
even the greatest leave RISP in the 9th often.
baseball is a game of outs......pop out, ground out, line out, pitch out, strike out, fly out, and Fox and Bud's favorite black out
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
MLB 12 The Show Marlins Park Trailer, complete with the monstrosity and the fish. Here's the link...
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Photo: Padres fan regrets letting mother capture moment with Trevor Hoffman
- Marlins agree to unretire No. 5 for Logan Morrison, who will honor his father’s favorite player
- Weatherman Derek Holland does Dallas TV
- Ask Alex: Will Julio Teheran or Matt Moore win rookie of the year?
- Ku Klux Klan, umpires and bowling: Why the minor leagues tossed out Jim Evans academy
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
