Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Trizzak

Playoffs or bust?

Recommended Posts

Metallica    1
29 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

No... Elite players get paid more cause they are elite. 

 

Sidney Crosby is a better player than Jacob de la Rose and is paid as such. 

 

He is a better player in game 1 of the regular season, in game 27 of the regular season and in the playoffs. 

 

Being a better player is not being clutch. 

 

 

My saying that clutch is a myth doesn't mean that i think every player is the same... this is a ridiculous argument that you have made.  A total strawman. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clutch_(sports)

 

Read what that says 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635

You still don't seem to understand my argument. 

 

Do people who are clutch/people who choke exist in minor hockey, in beer leagues, etc??  Sure they do... thats human nature.  Some people deal well with pressure and some don't. 

 

 

Do they exist in the NHL? NBA? MLB? etc... ?  Everyone in those leagues deals well with pressure.  If they didn't, they wouldn't be the 0.00001% of athletes who make it to these leagues. If you are going to collapse under pressure, you'll collapse before the NHL.  When everyone has the ability to perform under pressure, no one is clutch.

 

I'm trying to be patient here, but your last two posts in this clearly show that you don't understand the argument. 

 

First you argued the fact that people get paid differently shows those who get paid more are clutch... it doesn't, it just shows some players are better than others. 

Now you are arguing that psychologists notice that some people are better under pressure than others.... sure, I agree, however those who can't perform under pressure choked away the chance to make the NHL when they couldn't win a job on their junior team, or collapsed when they learned scouts were watching them. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Metallica    1

Lol you know you're wrong,  so just say so. You gave me a negative just because you can't admit that you are wrong. Thats not right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
Just now, Metallica said:

Lol you know you're wrong,  so just say so. You gave me a negative just because you can't admit that you are wrong. Thats not right.

 

No, I gave you a negative for a straw man argument.  

 

You created a fallacy (that all players are the same) and then argued against it by saying that players get paid differently. 

 

This lack of logic is what got you a negative.

 

Its okay man, you've been sold this myth for so long, you can't accept that its a myth. 

 

 

Ask yourself this.... if these players are so "clutch" why can't they do it every year? Why don't they go repeat their clutchness and keep winning 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 championships in a row? 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Metallica    1

You miss read what I wrote. I never said all  players are the same. You are the one saying all players are the same and that there no clutch players. 

 

Thats ok thought you're haven't grow up yet and still have to get your way.  That comes from someone who has been spoiled there whole life.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
6 minutes ago, Metallica said:

You miss read what I wrote. I never said all  players are the same. You are the one saying all players are the same and that there no clutch players. 

 

Thats ok thought you're haven't grow up yet and still have to get your way.  That comes from someone who has been spoiled there whole life.

 

You argued that clutch would be the reason some players make more money than others.  It was a straw man.

 

Of course you have no argument left... so now you attack me personally.  No actual argument so you say i haven't grown up and am spoiled....

 

All doing that attack does is show you have nothing left here.

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Metallica    1
4 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

You argued that clutch would be the reason some players make more money than others.  It was a straw man.

 

Of course you have no argument left... so now you attack me personally.  No actual argument so you say i haven't grown up and am spoiled....

 

All doing that attack does is show you have nothing left here.

 

 

You're the one crying about that you don't care what the Internet says even though it explains clutch.

 

And FYI  top players get paid top money because they come up big in games. THAT IS CLUTCH..

 

Thats ok I am end Ing this since you are the type that's needs to be right  all the time.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trizzak    487
53 minutes ago, Commandant said:

You still don't seem to understand my argument. 

 

Do people who are clutch/people who choke exist in minor hockey, in beer leagues, etc??  Sure they do... thats human nature.  Some people deal well with pressure and some don't. 

 

 

Do they exist in the NHL? NBA? MLB? etc... ?  Everyone in those leagues deals well with pressure.  If they didn't, they wouldn't be the 0.00001% of athletes who make it to these leagues. If you are going to collapse under pressure, you'll collapse before the NHL.  When everyone has the ability to perform under pressure, no one is clutch.

 

I'm trying to be patient here, but your last two posts in this clearly show that you don't understand the argument. 

 

First you argued the fact that people get paid differently shows those who get paid more are clutch... it doesn't, it just shows some players are better than others. 

Now you are arguing that psychologists notice that some people are better under pressure than others.... sure, I agree, however those who can't perform under pressure choked away the chance to make the NHL when they couldn't win a job on their junior team, or collapsed when they learned scouts were watching them. 

 

Horseshit. As if there aren't some NHLers who have made it there more on their skill than their mental fortitude. As if others don't compensate their lesser physical abilities with heightened determination. As if a player mentally approaches a regular season game in November the same as they do game 7 of the SC final.

 

It's the freaking playoffs; stakes are higher, nerves are higher, the opportunity to achieve a lifelong dream is being crushed or realized. Just because they're good at handling more pressure than others doesn't mean they're immune to it when it increases tenfold.

 

Water rises, pressure builds, dams break.

 

NHL players aren't robots programmed to hockey (despite what reading hockey interviews might indicate). Some players play differently in the heightened drama of playoffs, and - if you'll forgive a lazy analytics insult - trying to suggest otherwise reads like you are upset that you can't quantify human nature on a spreadsheet.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
6 hours ago, Trizzak said:

 

Horseshit. As if there aren't some NHLers who have made it there more on their skill than their mental fortitude. As if others don't compensate their lesser physical abilities with heightened determination. As if a player mentally approaches a regular season game in November the same as they do game 7 of the SC final.

 

It's the freaking playoffs; stakes are higher, nerves are higher, the opportunity to achieve a lifelong dream is being crushed or realized. Just because they're good at handling more pressure than others doesn't mean they're immune to it when it increases tenfold.

 

Water rises, pressure builds, dams break.

 

NHL players aren't robots programmed to hockey (despite what reading hockey interviews might indicate). Some players play differently in the heightened drama of playoffs, and - if you'll forgive a lazy analytics insult - trying to suggest otherwise reads like you are upset that you can't quantify human nature on a spreadsheet.

 

The playoffs is an opportunity to see a lifelong dream realized.

 

But so is the first time you learn NHL scouts are attending your game and watching you play.

 

Pressure is not the same in all situations but the fact is that the latter might be more pressure than the former.

 

Baseball is a sport with the best possible conditions for analyzing an individuals play.  The best possible sample sizes and one on one matchups removing external factors.  And yet they find no existence of the ability to replicate being "clutch" at the mlb level.

 

Why would hockey be different?

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/374519-the-clutch-myth-and-why-we-buy-into-it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    435

Clutch is real. Players know it, fans know it. Stat guys try to disprove it. 

 

Commandant's argument is that because every NHL player is the best of the best, they are all conditioned to be clutch. Although that is likely true, that each player would have been among the best in their respective groups coming up, it doesn't take into account the separation after they hit the NHL. There's always going to be guys that want the puck on their stick at the end of a a game, and guys that don't. It doesn't matter what level they are playing at. Hockey is hockey. The NHL is exponentially better than any random league, but it's still all relative. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeLassister    288

Yo.  Marie-Philip Poulin is clutch AF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stogey24    280
52 minutes ago, illWill said:

Clutch is real. Players know it, fans know it. Stat guys try to disprove it. 

 

Commandant's argument is that because every NHL player is the best of the best, they are all conditioned to be clutch. Although that is likely true, that each player would have been among the best in their respective groups coming up, it doesn't take into account the separation after they hit the NHL. There's always going to be guys that want the puck on their stick at the end of a a game, and guys that don't. It doesn't matter what level they are playing at. Hockey is hockey. The NHL is exponentially better than any random league, but it's still all relative. 

It's true. Some people can rise to occasion and feed off of the pressure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
1 hour ago, illWill said:

Clutch is real. Players know it, fans know it. Stat guys try to disprove it. 

 

Commandant's argument is that because every NHL player is the best of the best, they are all conditioned to be clutch. Although that is likely true, that each player would have been among the best in their respective groups coming up, it doesn't take into account the separation after they hit the NHL. There's always going to be guys that want the puck on their stick at the end of a a game, and guys that don't. It doesn't matter what level they are playing at. Hockey is hockey. The NHL is exponentially better than any random league, but it's still all relative. 

 

If it exists... why is no one able to repeat these clutch performances? Why is there no outliers in the statistical look at players elevating their game?

 

But even getting out of the statistics.... If players have the ability to elevate? why don't they do it all the time, knowing that scoring more goals, getting more points, performing better at all times of the season will mean more money on their next contract?  why don't baseball players treat every at bat as a clutch situation, and hit more home runs and earn more money?  Why wouldn't a basketball player?

 

If clutch is doing more in key situations, why are these "clutch" players not giving 100% effort all the time?  If you have the ability to flick a switch and decide to play better cause now its "clutch time", why wouldn't that switch always be on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635

If clutch doesn't exist in Basketball, why hockey.... take a look at free throws. 

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/923262-debunking-the-myth-of-clutch-in-the-nba-once-and-for-all

 

There's a quote from the book Scorecasting that really sticks out in my mind:

"Over the last two decades in the NBA, including more than 23,000 games, the free-throw percentage of visiting teams is 75.9 percent and that of home teams is...75.9 percent--identical even to the right of the decimal point. Are these shooting percentages any different at different points in the game, say, during the fourth quarter or in overtime, when the score is tied? No.

Even in close games, when home fans are trying their hardest to distract the opponents and exhort the home team, the percentages are identical. Sure enough, as sluggishly as the Blazers played in San Antonio, they would make 15 of their 17 free throw attempts (88.2 percent) even with fans behind the basket shouting and waving.

The Spurs, by contrast, would make 75 percent of their attempts. Evidence of the crowd significantly affecting the performance of NBA players is hard to find."

The free throw is the most human of all events in a basketball game. It's just one man standing at the foul stripe and using his mind and skill to overcome all distractions and make a simple, uncontested shot. If there is neither a difference between home and away free-throw shooting nor at various points in the game, than that proves to me that as a whole, NBA players have learned to overcome nerves.

They're different than you and I, who may miss a last-second free throw during a pickup game because we have butterflies in our stomach. We don't spend hours a day in a gym honing our form, making repetition after repetition until we're perfectly confident in our abilities. Quite simply, we aren't professionals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    162
51 minutes ago, Commandant said:

If clutch doesn't exist in Basketball, why hockey.... take a look at free throws. 

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/923262-debunking-the-myth-of-clutch-in-the-nba-once-and-for-all

 

There's a quote from the book Scorecasting that really sticks out in my mind:

"Over the last two decades in the NBA, including more than 23,000 games, the free-throw percentage of visiting teams is 75.9 percent and that of home teams is...75.9 percent--identical even to the right of the decimal point. Are these shooting percentages any different at different points in the game, say, during the fourth quarter or in overtime, when the score is tied? No.

Even in close games, when home fans are trying their hardest to distract the opponents and exhort the home team, the percentages are identical. Sure enough, as sluggishly as the Blazers played in San Antonio, they would make 15 of their 17 free throw attempts (88.2 percent) even with fans behind the basket shouting and waving.

The Spurs, by contrast, would make 75 percent of their attempts. Evidence of the crowd significantly affecting the performance of NBA players is hard to find."

The free throw is the most human of all events in a basketball game. It's just one man standing at the foul stripe and using his mind and skill to overcome all distractions and make a simple, uncontested shot. If there is neither a difference between home and away free-throw shooting nor at various points in the game, than that proves to me that as a whole, NBA players have learned to overcome nerves.

They're different than you and I, who may miss a last-second free throw during a pickup game because we have butterflies in our stomach. We don't spend hours a day in a gym honing our form, making repetition after repetition until we're perfectly confident in our abilities. Quite simply, we aren't professionals.

Here's a list of some clutch professional players from different sports.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2637926-best-clutch-players-in-sports-right-now.amp.html

 

And to answer your questions about repeated performances, or lackthereof, it is because the list of sports you have used are team sports. While an individual can be clutch, it's not going to matter if their team is being blown out, or if they don't make the playoffs.

 

Novak Djokovic is on that list and I would also add that Roger Federer is clutch. They are both great players but the best thing about Djokovic during his prime is that you knew he would have played his best point when either his opponent or himself were at Deuce or Advantage. Meaning, for those who don't know tennis terms, whoever was to win the next point would win the game. Throw him down 0-40? Don't be surprised to see him win 5 points in a row due to the simple fact that his back was against the wall. Him winning those important points became predictable. Sure, that's what made him great, but it's also what made him clutch. 

 

Clutch players can be diluted by a poor team in team sports. Placed in the right moment, and they can be counted on to be clutch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    435
1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

If it exists... why is no one able to repeat these clutch performances? Why is there no outliers in the statistical look at players elevating their game?

 

But even getting out of the statistics.... If players have the ability to elevate? why don't they do it all the time, knowing that scoring more goals, getting more points, performing better at all times of the season will mean more money on their next contract?  why don't baseball players treat every at bat as a clutch situation, and hit more home runs and earn more money?  Why wouldn't a basketball player?

 

If clutch is doing more in key situations, why are these "clutch" players not giving 100% effort all the time?  If you have the ability to flick a switch and decide to play better cause now its "clutch time", why wouldn't that switch always be on?

 

Because they are humans, not numbers on a spreadsheet. 

 

The point that you're missing is that during "clutch moments", clutch players only have to be better than their opponent. Whether that's at 100% ability or 80%, there's always going to be an opponent that will perform just a bit worse. And of course it's not always going to go in the favor of the clutch player, because that's sports. 

 

Part of being a great player is being clutch, and the two aren't necessarily related. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
38 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Here's a list of some clutch professional players from different sports.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2637926-best-clutch-players-in-sports-right-now.amp.html

 

And to answer your questions about repeated performances, or lackthereof, it is because the list of sports you have used are team sports. While an individual can be clutch, it's not going to matter if their team is being blown out, or if they don't make the playoffs.

 

Novak Djokovic is on that list and I would also add that Roger Federer is clutch. They are both great players but the best thing about Djokovic during his prime is that you knew he would have played his best point when either his opponent or himself were at Deuce or Advantage. Meaning, for those who don't know tennis terms, whoever was to win the next point would win the game. Throw him down 0-40? Don't be surprised to see him win 5 points in a row due to the simple fact that his back was against the wall. Him winning those important points became predictable. Sure, that's what made him great, but it's also what made him clutch. 

 

Clutch players can be diluted by a poor team in team sports. Placed in the right moment, and they can be counted on to be clutch.

 

That article is showing a narrative.  It doesn't do anything to actually prove that those players are clutch.  It doesn't get into any statistical analysis to show they are better in key situations than they are in the first inning, or first game, or first period.  Its just repeating narratives. 

 

and Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer are both GREAT players... that doesn't make them clutch. 

 

Narratives spun by the media cause the story of someone overcoming the odds, and stepping up to the pressure, is a heroic one, and that sells.  But we shouldn't just accept narratives as true without looking at them critically. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
24 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

Because they are humans, not numbers on a spreadsheet. 

 

The point that you're missing is that during "clutch moments", clutch players only have to be better than their opponent. Whether that's at 100% ability or 80%, there's always going to be an opponent that will perform just a bit worse. And of course it's not always going to go in the favor of the clutch player, because that's sports. 

 

Part of being a great player is being clutch, and the two aren't necessarily related. 

 

 

 

4

 

There are "crucial moments" in every sport.  A crucial shot, or pitch, or throw that can define a game in a close game. 

 

And yes, one team will win and one team will lose.  

 

If Clutch is a skill, then its repeatable.  Then someone who has this "clutch" ability will show it time and time again.  While they won't be perfect in crucial moments, and you can't always win... you would still see a statistically significant improvement in performance in crucial moments.  You'd be able to identify these players statistically as being better in those crucial moments than they are at other times of the season and game.  

 

But people who have studied this can't do it.  There is no statistically significant evidence in any professional sport that makes the case for the existence of "clutch" as an ability that some pros have more than others. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2017 at 0:06 AM, Commandant said:

 

Cammalleri was a streaky scorer.  For two years he hit hot streaks during the playoffs.  

 

In 2008-09 when he was with Calgary he didn't hit a hot streak in the playoffs.

 

It would be interesting if he made the playoffs in any other year in his career, to see if its more than that.  However, I suspect like every other streaky scorer, he is unable to control when those streaks happen. 

 

On a long enough timeline, every sniper is streaky.

 

Back to back he led the league in the playoffs. On teams that weren't very good at scoring. Even with the Calgary series the season before he's a point per game in the playoffs. 32 in 32. The Canadiens only made it to ECF but he was already the fourth best playoff goal scoring in a playoff year player in Canadiens history (13 goals is better than Richard, Beliveau, and Lafleur) but it was just a hot streak? It was his Sergei Samsonov moment?

 

Again, I don't buy into clutch the way others do. I think like grit and fighting it's a concept that's overinflated to create narratives. But I think just dismissing as a hot streak anyone who defies the statistic is an eye roller. Kind of like when people argued quality of shot doesn't matter because percentage wise it's just shot that matters.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    37
On ‎2017‎-‎12‎-‎04 at 10:43 PM, Commandant said:

 

No, I gave you a negative for a straw man argument.  

 

You created a fallacy (that all players are the same) and then argued against it by saying that players get paid differently. 

 

This lack of logic is what got you a negative.

 

Its okay man, you've been sold this myth for so long, you can't accept that its a myth. 

 

 

Ask yourself this.... if these players are so "clutch" why can't they do it every year? Why don't they go repeat their clutchness and keep winning 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 championships in a row? 

 

 

Mario Rivera did repeat awesome playoff performances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
1 hour ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

On a long enough timeline, every sniper is streaky.

 

Back to back he led the league in the playoffs. On teams that weren't very good at scoring. Even with the Calgary series the season before he's a point per game in the playoffs. 32 in 32. The Canadiens only made it to ECF but he was already the fourth best playoff goal scoring in a playoff year player in Canadiens history (13 goals is better than Richard, Beliveau, and Lafleur) but it was just a hot streak? It was his Sergei Samsonov moment?

 

Again, I don't buy into clutch the way others do. I think like grit and fighting it's a concept that's overinflated to create narratives. But I think just dismissing as a hot streak anyone who defies the statistic is an eye roller. Kind of like when people argued quality of shot doesn't matter because percentage wise it's just shot that matters.

 

 

 

 

But he didn't score any goals in that ECF... so what happened to his clutchness, once the Flyers series started?  Where did it go?  Why?

 

Again, give him some more playoff rounds and I bet it is seen as just one hot year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
12 minutes ago, DON said:

Mario Rivera did repeat awesome playoff performances.

 

2 things.

1) Mariano Rivera was Great.  He was great in the regular season.  He's a Hall of Fame level closer, a rare thing.  Repeated strong performances in both the regular season and the playoffs isn't showing you are clutch... it is showing you are a great pitcher. 


2) Mariano Rivera choked in the World Series against Arizona.  For all his "clutchness", he choked that one away. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, this is convenient.

 

Not only are you deciding clutch doesn't exist, but you are creating your own parameters for what clutch means, which to you means you have to always be great and can never be shut down by a greater player, or have one bad game/year.

 

Funny that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
16 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Oh, this is convenient.

 

Not only are you deciding clutch doesn't exist, but you are creating your own parameters for what clutch means, which to you means you have to always be great and can never be shut down by a greater player, or have one bad game/year.

 

Funny that.

 

 

I didn't say you can't have one bad game a year. 

But "If Clutch is a skill, then its repeatable.  Then someone who has this "clutch" ability will show it time and time again.  While they won't be perfect in crucial moments, and you can't always win... you would still see a statistically significant improvement in performance in crucial moments.  You'd be able to identify these players statistically as being better in those crucial moments than they are at other times of the season and game.  "

In Cammalleri's case, you can't see that "statistically significant" improvement.  The sample size is too small.  We need more playoff games out of him, before we declare him the one outlier who is clutch.  No one has been able to do that over a statistically significant amount of time.  Why would we assume its an actual clutch skill and not just a hot streak.  Heck we have 3 series he performed great in during his playoff career (Washington 10, Pittsburgh 10, Boston 11), two series he scored zero goals and a few assists (Flames 08 Playoffs, Flyers 10).  3 good series, 2 bad series, does not prove he is a clutch player. It is more likely he is a streaky scorer who had a good month. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    635
21 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

Oh, this is convenient.

 

Not only are you deciding clutch doesn't exist, but you are creating your own parameters for what clutch means, which to you means you have to always be great and can never be shut down by a greater player, or have one bad game/year.

 

Funny that.

 

As for Rivera. I point out his bad games (2 of them in the 2001 World Series) because that means his save rate in the postseason is consistent with his regular season save rate.  In both cases he is great the majority of the time with a few hiccups. 

 

That shows he's not better in the postseason than he was in the regular season.  In both cases he is mostly great with a few hiccups. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×