that weights a players performance in an AB/IP based upon the importance of the event?

 

Javy Vazquez pitches well in games that don't matter

Jim Thome hits home runs in bunches, when a game is out of reach

Scott Podsednik/Joe Crede hits well in clutch situations

Alexei Ramirez hits well in extra innings.

 

"A clutch-o-meter?"

Doubtful, but I'm not a big SABER guy. If there is one, it's probably somewhere on http://www.fangraphs.com/.

 

Good luck.

Not sure about anything specific, but baseball-reference has stats for players in low, medium, and high pressure situations. And there are certainly stats for extra innings.

There's a clutch stat on FanGraphs called "Clutch" and here's the definition of it:

 

Clutch: A measurement of how much better or worse a player does in high leverage situations than he would have done in a context neutral environment.

 

Vazquez is a -4.58 career, but not knowing the stat, I'm not sure if that's only bad or if it's terrible.

that weights a players performance in an AB/IP based upon the importance of the event?

 

Javy Vazquez pitches well in games that don't matter

Jim Thome hits home runs in bunches, when a game is out of reach

Scott Podsednik/Joe Crede hits well in clutch situations

Alexei Ramirez hits well in extra innings.

 

"A clutch-o-meter?"

 

For hitters, there is something called LIPS. It stands for Late Inning Pressure Situations, and it's basically the splits of the player from the 7th, 8th, or 9th inning in any game in which the margin between the leading team and trailing team is 3 or fewer runs. What studies of LIPS over the years have found is that the term "clutch" is a myth, as no player's LIPS stats have a large margin of difference from their career stats overall.

 

For hitters, there is something called LIPS. It stands for Late Inning Pressure Situations, and it's basically the splits of the player from the 7th, 8th, or 9th inning in any game in which the margin between the leading team and trailing team is 3 or fewer runs. What studies of LIPS over the years have found is that the term "clutch" is a myth, as no player's LIPS stats have a large margin of difference from their career stats overall.

I think people think certain players are clutch because they have succeeded in a larger number of situations in high leverage situations than other players simply because they had more opportunities to do so...so even though a player's percentage of success in those situations may be similar to their career numbers, the sheer number of opportunities they have experienced, and the corresponding number of times they have succeeded, presents the illusion that they have been "clutch," even though it is more likely that they simply have had more opportunities. Case in point is Mr. Jeter.

For hitters, there is something called LIPS. It stands for Late Inning Pressure Situations, and it's basically the splits of the player from the 7th, 8th, or 9th inning in any game in which the margin between the leading team and trailing team is 3 or fewer runs. What studies of LIPS over the years have found is that the term "clutch" is a myth, as no player's LIPS stats have a large margin of difference from their career stats overall.

Yeah The Book debunked the notion of clutch also due to the same reason.

I think people think certain players are clutch because they have succeeded in a larger number of situations in high leverage situations than other players simply because they had more opportunities to do so...so even though a player's percentage of success in those situations may be similar to their career numbers, the sheer number of opportunities they have experienced, and the corresponding number of times they have succeeded, presents the illusion that they have been "clutch," even though it is more likely that they simply have had more opportunities. Case in point is Mr. Jeter.

 

Maybe this is me, but did you just contradict yourself here? First you said certain players are clutch, then you said that due to more opportunities over a career, some players can appear to be clutch.

I think people think certain players are clutch because they have succeeded in a larger number of situations in high leverage situations than other players simply because they had more opportunities to do so...so even though a player's percentage of success in those situations may be similar to their career numbers, the sheer number of opportunities they have experienced, and the corresponding number of times they have succeeded, presents the illusion that they have been "clutch," even though it is more likely that they simply have had more opportunities. Case in point is Mr. Jeter.

Firejoemorgan did a blog about this one day where he thoroughly debunked the concept of "clutch." My favorite line was the one he did about Derek Jeter.

 

Derek Jeter's Career Splits: .317/.388/.463

 

Derek Jeter's Career Postseason splits: .314/.384/.479

 

Mr. Clutch is actually Mr. Exactly the Same No Matter What Month You Are Talking About. He is Mr. Equally Excellent Hitting SS Every Month from April to November. He is Mr. Outrageously Similar Statistics Every 30 Days.

 

Second favorite part:

Still, come on ... no such thing as clutch?

 

What, then, of Reggie Jackson launching those three home runs in a World Series game?

 

He hit 563 HR in the regular season. He was excellent at hitting HR. It was probably his greatest skill. One day, in a big game, he hit 3.

 

What of Michael Jordan nailing that last-second jumper to sink Utah?

 

He was the best basketball player ever in history.

Maybe this is me, but did you just contradict yourself here? First you said certain players are clutch, then you said that due to more opportunities over a career, some players can appear to be clutch.

No, I said "I think people think certain players are clutch..."