OK since it's march madness and the ncaa tournament is in full effect.. when Christian Laettner beats Uconn with one second left and then does it against Kentucky, both in the tournament, he can't be considered clutch?
There are clutch plays, just no clutch players. If clutch players existed, then if you graphed the 'improvement in stats in key situations', let's say points/60 minutes for forwards in hockey, then you would see more than expected by randomness with high levels of improvements. Instead, at least in baseball and basketball (as I said, I haven't seen a hockey study), you get pretty much the exact distribution you'd expect if it was random. Clutch isn't a skill, it's luck.
Wake me when he scores a few big goals in crunch time.
The puck is on his stick in that picture, makes me sick to my stomach actually. He needs a big post season this year, his last couple have left more to be desired,hopefully his recent play can carry over because this team needs it with the way that they have been playing recently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotScore
OK since it's march madness and the ncaa tournament is in full effect.. when Christian Laettner beats Uconn with one second left and then does it against Kentucky, both in the tournament, he can't be considered clutch?
Some people will never buy into this whole Clutch argument, they talk about it on Mike & Mike In the Morning on ESPN radio every now and then as well. Depends on how you were brought up and view percentages I suppose, or tends to be the dividing difference between people's opinions on the matter.
But the big thing that has been happening this year specifically that gets national media attention is Miami Heat and LeBron James only hitting 1 of his 18 ( at the time i heard the broadcast ) shots to tie a game or take the lead in the final 60 seconds of a basketball game. D'wayne Wade (sp?) conversely has shot at a much higher clip over the season and career, plus has the hardware to back his case up for having the ball in his hands to take the shot. But he's apparently not the "better" player.
Certain moments in games can have weighted momentum swings/importance and often the same players find themselves to pull through in those exact situations, thus coining the term "clutch" to some people.
Anyone who thinks sinking a 21 foot jumper with the horn sounding in an NCAA Regional Final is equivalent to sinking a 21 foot jumper two minutes into a game against Appalachian State in November just isn't thinking clearly.
You're looking at two games to represent the entire history of the tournament. It's more happenstance than anything. If the team played better before those last seconds, they wouldn't have been in a position to make a "clutch" shot. They're simply playing out the game. No point counts more than any other.
No I'm not. How do you get that I'm looking at two games to represent the entire history of the tournament? I'm giving one example.
You said: "If the team played better before those last seconds, they wouldn't have been in a position to make a "clutch" shot."
You're admitting a shot can be clutch. Thank you.
The pressure is on with one second left. The game is on the line. He hits a shot and wins it for Duke.
He does the same thing against kentucky two years later in a very similar situation.
Anyone who thinks sinking a 21 foot jumper with the horn sounding in an NCAA Regional Final is equivalent to sinking a 21 foot jumper two minutes into a game against Appalachian State in November just isn't thinking clearly.
Anyone who thinks sinking a 21 foot jumper with the horn sounding in an NCAA Regional Final is equivalent to sinking a 21 foot jumper two minutes into a game against Appalachian State in November just isn't thinking clearly.
Anyone who thinks sinking a 21 foot jumper with the horn sounding in an NCAA Regional Final is equivalent to sinking a 21 foot jumper two minutes into a game against Appalachian State in November just isn't thinking clearly.
It's not the same thing, but there is no statistical evidence that certain players hit the first more or less often that the second.
The puck is on his stick in that picture, makes me sick to my stomach actually. He needs a big post season this year, his last couple have left more to be desired,hopefully his recent play can carry over because this team needs it with the way that they have been playing recently.
Some people will never buy into this whole Clutch argument, they talk about it on Mike & Mike In the Morning on ESPN radio every now and then as well. Depends on how you were brought up and view percentages I suppose, or tends to be the dividing difference between people's opinions on the matter.
But the big thing that has been happening this year specifically that gets national media attention is Miami Heat and LeBron James only hitting 1 of his 18 ( at the time i heard the broadcast ) shots to tie a game or take the lead in the final 60 seconds of a basketball game. D'wayne Wade (sp?) conversely has shot at a much higher clip over the season and career, plus has the hardware to back his case up for having the ball in his hands to take the shot. But he's apparently not the "better" player.
Certain moments in games can have weighted momentum swings/importance and often the same players find themselves to pull through in those exact situations, thus coining the term "clutch" to some people.
Good post.
Yes, Carter needs to pot some clutch goals to establish himself as a Flyer great.
The point is that you don't understand statistics. I got that a long time ago.
Speaking of Carter's lack of clutchiness, here are two games from the same playoff series in which he had the primary assist on the winning goal, once in 2OT and once with 3:04 left.
The sky is black. The blue appearance on Earth is due to the refractive properties of the atmosphere.
There are many colors of grass, not just green.
Boobs are bad on men, good on women, unless they become cancerous.
I don't get opportunities to reference Joe Dirt very often, but I take it when I do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotScore
No I'm not. How do you get that I'm looking at two games to represent the entire history of the tournament? I'm giving one example.
You said: "If the team played better before those last seconds, they wouldn't have been in a position to make a "clutch" shot."
You're admitting a shot can be clutch. Thank you.
The pressure is on with one second left. The game is on the line. He hits a shot and wins it for Duke.
He does the same thing against kentucky two years later in a very similar situation.
Clearly, this is an examples of a clutch player.
I get that you're using those two instances to represent the history of the tournament because you used them as a microcosm of clutch being real. They're either big enough to represent "clutch" all by itself, or two instances that aren't enough to support what you're saying by themselves. Either way, they're more anomalous than anything.
As for admitting the existence of clutch...it's in quotes and, in a rare instance, the grammatical aspect of something matters here. That shot becomes a story, all because the team didn't live up to their potential before that (and if they did, and were still losing, it only reinforces its anomalous nature because, statistically, they shouldn't have been in a position to win in such context).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShotScore
Exactly.
You're new here, but I'm going to let you in on something: agreeing with JXC is more frequently bad than good.
The point is that you don't understand statistics. I got that a long time ago.
Speaking of Carter's lack of clutchiness, here are two games from the same playoff series in which he had the primary assist on the winning goal, once in 2OT and once with 3:04 left.
That's how I've always seen clutch defined. How would you define it?
Not sure. I have, I think, often inferred some relativity to it, like for instance if a .300 hitter bats .300 in the playoffs while all other .300 hitters succumb to the pressure and bat .275.
