Non-clutch Kickers

[BestServedCold]

Quote: Originally Posted by HeavyHitter55

I don't know if this has been discussed previously in another thread or not, so forgive me if it has... But do we know what happens when a non-clutch kicker is put into a clutch kick? What exactly happens? Does his rating drop (and if so, by how much)? Do we see him "freeze" up somehow? I think this would be very interesting to know, because it would/could be a game changer.

What happens? This is what happens:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCHZFwDCNyA

[TheBleedingRed21]

Quote: Originally Posted by thegreatusurper512

Should not be included since there is no such thing as clutch. Even "the greatest clutch kicker" of all time, Adam Vinatieri, has the exact same kicking percentage in all "clutch" situations as he has in non clutch situations. Don't add stuff that doesn't exist. The numbers are buried somewhere in this article. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/sp...pagewanted=all There is more evidence on football outsiders. Sorry, but clutch kicking doesn't exist. It's just a matter of sample size bias and anecdotal bias. There are no long range numbers supporting it.

.....you are joking right?

No such thing as clutch?

[RogueHominid]

Quote: Originally Posted by BestServedCold

What happens? This is what happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCHZFwDCNyA

Poor Scott Norwood. I remember watching that Super Bowl as a kid--probably my favorite one ever since I've been watching the game.

The problem with the argument that he's classic proof that "choke" ability, which implies "clutch" ability, exists, is that Norwood's career FG % on attempts from 40-49 yards is 60% according to profootballreference. His numbers from 50+ are worse, with just a 20% conversion rate. His miss in the Super Bowl was from 47 yards, so toward the far end of the 60% expected conversion rate and on the near end of the total failure rate of 20%.

My point? That kick looks to be perfectly in keeping with his normal performance. 47 yards looks to be a distance where you'd expect him to have a 50% chance of conversion or less. It's very hard on the basis of that evidence to argue that his performance indicates anything about his clutch or choke ability.

Relative to Madden, I don't want them to start dealing with the absence of clutch as a negative factor because establishing the positive existence of clutch ability statistically is already difficult enough. Heck, establishing the precise definition of clutch ability is hard in itself. Is it performing normally in spite of pressure, performing better under pressure than normal relative to one's own performance, performing better under pressure than one's peers typically do, or something else?

[CcAaRrSsOoNn3]

David Buehler's clutch rating would be a 0.

[Johnny "Too Tall"]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Poor Scott Norwood. I remember watching that Super Bowl as a kid--probably my favorite one ever since I've been watching the game. The problem with the argument that he's classic proof that "choke" ability, which implies "clutch" ability, exists, is that Norwood's career FG % on attempts from 40-49 yards is 60% according to profootballreference. His numbers from 50+ are worse, with just a 20% conversion rate. His miss in the Super Bowl was from 47 yards, so toward the far end of the 60% expected conversion rate and on the near end of the total failure rate of 20%. My point? That kick looks to be perfectly in keeping with his normal performance. 47 yards looks to be a distance where you'd expect him to have a 50% chance of conversion or less. It's very hard on the basis of that evidence to argue that his performance indicates anything about his clutch or choke ability. Relative to Madden, I don't want them to start dealing with the absence of clutch as a negative factor because establishing the positive existence of clutch ability statistically is already difficult enough. Heck, establishing the precise definition of clutch ability is hard in itself. Is it performing normally in spite of pressure, performing better under pressure than normal relative to one's own performance, performing better under pressure than one's peers typically do, or something else?

Calling a missed 47 yd field goal from someone who hits at 60% from that range a "choke' is debatable at the least... I would say he didn't choke. Was he clutch? Obviously not.

those three things pretty much sum up what clutch can mean in regards to kickers.

[BestServedCold]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Poor Scott Norwood. I remember watching that Super Bowl as a kid--probably my favorite one ever since I've been watching the game. The problem with the argument that he's classic proof that "choke" ability, which implies "clutch" ability, exists, is that Norwood's career FG % on attempts from 40-49 yards is 60% according to profootballreference. His numbers from 50+ are worse, with just a 20% conversion rate. His miss in the Super Bowl was from 47 yards, so toward the far end of the 60% expected conversion rate and on the near end of the total failure rate of 20%. My point? That kick looks to be perfectly in keeping with his normal performance. 47 yards looks to be a distance where you'd expect him to have a 50% chance of conversion or less. It's very hard on the basis of that evidence to argue that his performance indicates anything about his clutch or choke ability. Relative to Madden, I don't want them to start dealing with the absence of clutch as a negative factor because establishing the positive existence of clutch ability statistically is already difficult enough. Heck, establishing the precise definition of clutch ability is hard in itself. Is it performing normally in spite of pressure, performing better under pressure than normal relative to one's own performance, performing better under pressure than one's peers typically do, or something else?

The point was he's not clutch, so he missed it :P

[RogueHominid]

Quote: Originally Posted by BestServedCold

The point was he's not clutch, so he missed it :P

Right. I'm just saying that it doesn't necessarily make sense to have a penalty applied to people in clutch situations who don't have a clutch attribute, which is an issue brought up by the thread. Players in such situations should just be subject to their normal tendencies.

Folks usually invoke Norwood as an example of a guy who chokes. Given his stats, he's not a choker, he doesn't appear to have forgotten how to perform like he normally does in that situation. He did just what he normally does statistically at that distance.

Of all the attributes, I like clutch the least, so as little as that can impact the game, the better as far as I'm concerned.

[Kahuma]

If a player proves unreliable in game-winning situations then he is not clutch. There is no argument about it.