07 January 2009

Choke On This: #2 In A Series

In 2002, Barry Bonds won his fifth MVP award with one of the greatest batting years of all time. He hit .370/.582/.799, earned a record 198 walks and smashed 46 home runs. He even stole 9 of 11 bases while leading the Giants to the World Series.

In a six game series, Bonds hit a paltry .125/.364/.188 with no home runs or RBIs. He made an error in the field. His team lost four of the six games. Is that because he's not clutch? Did he succumb to pressure? Did he fail to -- I love this one -- step up?

But wait. That wasn't his World Series; this stretch of games came at the end of April. Even in what might have been the greatest batting year of all time, Bonds had some stretches when he didn't hit real well. Sometimes you're the windshield; sometimes you're the bug.

No one would accuse Bonds of choking just because he endured a six-game skid in April. But shift that week to mid-October and all of a sudden we feel empowered to ascribe all kinds of personal characteristics to the batter. I suspect there are players who crack in the limelight, but we can't tell that by a couple of bad playoff rounds.

Early in Bonds' career, critics did brand him a choker. He hit .196 in his first four playoff series, all of which his team lost. That talk evaporated when he cracked eight home runs, walked 35 times and knocked in 18 runs in his next four series, leading the Giants to the World Series in '02. Apparently he started to catch his breath.

Some radical number crunchers argue the idea of clutch is complete hokum because all MLB players have excelled in key situations through all their years of playing ball. This strikes me as almost equally fatuous as the prevailing wisdom. With the chips on the line -- really on the line -- how can it not be possible that some athletes focus better while others lose their nerve? How can human psychology be a factor in every other endeavor in life except baseball?

Reggie Jackson and Alex Rodriguez are the exemplars of the theory of clutch. Reggie's attention seemed to ebb and flow during the long season, but come October he really did appear to dig in. Conversely, ARod doesn't just have a history of gagging, it's apparent that he's trying too hard. Ever since he signed the big contract with the Rangers, he's clearly been trying to please everyone. So far only Madonna is satisfied.

I guess that makes me a clutch Agnostic. I believe there are rare instances of players who are eager (or anxious) to have the game or season in their hands, but performance alone -- particularly over a handful of games or at bats -- provides very little evidence of it, and is almost always a function of something else.

By the way, on the subject of clutch, which of these players is the guy you want in October?

Player A .309/.377/.469, 16 SB/4 CS
Player B .316/.387/.458, 22 SB/6 CS

They look like almost exactly the same player, don't they? It's because they are. Player A is Derek Jeter in 123 games of postseason play. Player B is Derek Jeter in 1,985 games of his 14 year career. If you can see "clutch" in there, you have better eyesight than I have.

No comments: