Long-time fans, tell me why I ought to be excited about Branch.

[shmessy]

I don't think you 'ought' to be excited much, longterm fans are praising him for things that won't show much, maybe in key moments but that is something we have to see. I have been a fan since long before he joined and I don't see the huge fascination, good depth addition? Sure but am I screaming in joy and dusting off his old jersey? Not really.

One thing I can say about him is he has great SB numbers, that will be something if we make it and need someone mentally ready for the pressure, I think of all the active multiple SB recievers (Wayne, Ward etc.) he probably has the best stats in the SB.

Let's put this in perspective: Decent value for one of our two 4th round picks?

 

[aluminum seats]

And no stats to prove it. Russell probably scored less in the playoffs, because he knew feeding the other four was more efficient and left him free to play devastating defense.

Baseball is the only sport where clutch can be identified statistically.
take the Brady example again. In the season where he piled on regular season statistics, the team focus and strategy was flawed to the extent our offense was decimated when it counted and provided one of our least clutch performances ever.

Passing teams can win, but

Gaudy passing statistics ? clutch performance ? playoff success.

Rams, Colts, 2007 Pats.

Mostly on the same page, but disagree w/the bolded--not to turn this into a baseball discussion, but just to point out that trying to precisely quantify clutch situations, apart from some very broad strokes, is incredibly difficult to do, and goes beyond easily identifiable game situations, for example.

 

[emoney_33]

I think it's clutch to drive a team to a winning field goal as time is running out even if you start off with decent field position.

I think it's even more clutch to to be able to put behind you the interception you threw just moments before and still drive down the field for a winning field goal.

Of course it would be most clutch to not throw that Interception in the first place. Brady is a great QB, keep giving him the ball and he will succeed more often than not.

Hmmmmm. I think you're taking what we know about the human brain currently (amazingly little) and taking an intellectual stolen base in the process.

The human brain "is incapable of doing with large amounts of data?" I think we might not be able to describe the process of how we come to certain conclusions, but it doesn't mean they're inaccurate (see Malcolm Gladwell's Blink.)

It's not a question of shrinking the sample size, just the opposite. Point is, the complexity of "clutch" moments has too many moving parts to be easily quantifiable.

The human mind cannot process that much information objectively. Well perhaps if it were trained differently from birth to value such objective analysis it may be better suited, but the human brain uses tons of resources just to communicate effectively with others. The human mind retains the abnormal much more than the "normal". For example you may see thousands and thousands of people on the street and about 10 of them holding a cigarette. Later on your "eyes" would be sure that they saw a much much higher percentage of smokers than you really did.

Hell the human brain sometimes won't even let you realize 2 different people in front of your face. (look up change blindness). So especially if you are watching sports without specifically looking for all possible clutch and non clutch situations, your brain cannot be trusted with what it "sees".

Bill Russell? lol

Seriously, I believe scientists have studied this and it's a physiological thing whereby a player gets so focused and calm that everything seems to slow down, including heartbeat, nerves etc., not unlike those meditating Yogi's

I think everyone has had that one basketball game where everything just swished, then went back to throwing bricks. these exceptional athletes train and will themselves into a stae where they can block out all distractions.

I believe there were studies on the effect of adrenaline on the body/mind. But I don't believe they tested professional athletes and found that ONLY SOME of them had that effect. Sure, most people unused to pressure and adrenaline and being in the spotlight will react differently but the question is relative to all other professional athletes. I'd bet that known "losers" like Alex Rodriguez have the same physiological effect in "pressure".

Brady's in a team sport. three rings is the numbers that matter.

And it's impossible to attribute a percentage of responsibility to individuals in a team win. Brady didn't win in 02, 05, 06, 07 nor 09. So we can say for sure that Brady doesn't possess a magical win-with-anyone ability.

If we had the lead and ran the ball, does that make what he did to win less clutch?

By definition yes.

Try an individual sport like baseball if you just want to run numbers.

If he passed more and lost playoff games as a result, would that make him more clutch? 10-0 in his first ten playoffs.

So he suddenly lost this "clutch" ability after 10 games? Or did his team get significantly worse after those "10" games.

He's 4-4 after those 10 games. What if he never played with great defenses in 03-04, would he all of a sudden be a worse QB and not possess this magical clutch ability?

 

[aluminum seats]

The human mind cannot process that much information objectively. Well perhaps if it were trained differently from birth to value such objective analysis it may be better suited, but the human brain uses tons of resources just to communicate effectively with others. The human mind retains the abnormal much more than the "normal". For example you may see thousands and thousands of people on the street and about 10 of them holding a cigarette. Later on your "eyes" would be sure that they saw a much much higher percentage of smokers than you really did.

Hell the human brain sometimes won't even let you realize 2 different people in front of your face. (look up change blindness). So especially if you are watching sports without specifically looking for all possible clutch and non clutch situations, your brain cannot be trusted with what it "sees".

Again, I think you're being far too glib about what the human brain can and can't do. Our knowledge of the brain is incredibly limited.

Anyway, fun topic. I gotta run for now, but will check in later on.

 

[Joker]

Hell the human brain sometimes won't even let you realize 2 different people in front of your face. (look up change blindness).

Aha!! I KNEW there was something fishy about the time I first met my ex-wife...call the lawyer,kids....I want the house back!

 

[emoney_33]

Again, I think you're being far too glib about what the human brain can and can't do. Our knowledge of the brain is incredibly limited.

Anyway, fun topic. I gotta run for now, but will check in later on.

Fair enough, I shouldn't speak in such absolute terms as if I could possibly KNOW such things about the human brain. And we do know the human brain is incredibly precise with geometric calculations and adjustments on the fly (hence the term "muscle memory").


And I'd really much rather talk completely positively about Brady so I'm going to stop now

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

You oughtn't.

At the moment he's an overpriced insurance policy with his own not too distant injury history. He needs to prove himself just as any other player would. That he's rejiggered his contract to give NE some financial wiggle room is to his credit. That he and Tommy are still friends and excited to be working together again is meaningless until it proves itself on game days. As RayClay noted somewhere, he came at the market price, which to my mind was excessive, but Bill & Co. felt otherwise. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but people drooling over this due to his NE history are choosing to discount more recent history - their choice. I recommend you relax and enjoy the ride, and not get excited prematurely.

 

[eagle eye]

You oughtn't.

At the moment he's an overpriced insurance policy with his own not too distant injury history. He needs to prove himself just as any other player would. That he's rejiggered his contract to give NE some financial wiggle room is to his credit. That he and Tommy are still friends and excited to be working together again is meaningless until it proves itself on game days. As RayClay noted somewhere, he came at the market price, which to my mind was excessive, but Bill & Co. felt otherwise. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but people drooling over this due to his NE history are choosing to discount more recent history - their choice. I recommend you relax and enjoy the ride, and not get excited prematurely.

Fully with you here. I'll give him some love when he deserves it and right now he has to prove himself all over again.

 

[stcjones]

My thread title is in no way facetious. I came in to football fandom and adopting Boston sports as my fanhood anchor in 2006. It was well into 2007 before I was learning all the players names and understanding the team's history, etc...

For those who've been watching since Branch was here (or longer), what can you tell me about him that makes you excited he's back?

I know the gist of what went down when he left, and I know he the MVP in one of the Superbowls, but that's about it. Hook a Canadian brother up with your memories?

Thanks guys.

J

When he was in his prime here...he was one of the most clutch receivers that the pats ever had. He and Brady were almost telekinetic together....and always on same page....branch always made the big catch when it was needed most.....then things got sour when he wanted a big time contract...which I guess he deserved....and he held out....and the pats moved him. Sadly, if he had stayed here he might have been greatest WR in Pats history....(although he has been often injured...so who knows). Now the facts are presently, that branch is 31 yrs old now, has had numerous knee surgeries (major), and is NOT the same receiver he was....but he can still fill a vital role here sporadically and Brady is confident with him here...which is extremely important....keeping tom's psyche happy!!! Just hope for the best....maybe he will come back and magically be the old Branch!!! GO PATS!!!!

 

[RayClay]

Mostly on the same page, but disagree w/the bolded--not to turn this into a baseball discussion, but just to point out that trying to precisely quantify clutch situations, apart from some very broad strokes, is incredibly difficult to do, and goes beyond easily identifiable game situations, for example.

Well, in baseball it's not as hard if you eliminate clutch situations to playoff and do or die games.

Admittedly, nothing is proven by statistics because people can change the sample, criteris, outside bias etc.

Yaz is a pretty damned good example of clutch vs non-clutch if you use strict criteria.

 

[emoney_33]

Well, in baseball it's not as hard if you eliminate clutch situations to playoff and do or die games.

Admittedly, nothing is proven by statistics because people can change the sample, criteris, outside bias etc.

Yaz is a pretty damned good example of clutch vs non-clutch if you use strict criteria.

What exactly shows this in Yaz?

 

[RayClay]

You oughtn't.

At the moment he's an overpriced insurance policy with his own not too distant injury history. He needs to prove himself just as any other player would. That he's rejiggered his contract to give NE some financial wiggle room is to his credit. That he and Tommy are still friends and excited to be working together again is meaningless until it proves itself on game days. As RayClay noted somewhere, he came at the market price, which to my mind was excessive, but Bill & Co. felt otherwise. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but people drooling over this due to his NE history are choosing to discount more recent history - their choice. I recommend you relax and enjoy the ride, and not get excited prematurely.

Well, insurance is about limiting risk. If we assume he's healthy now, this acquisition has way way less risk than a receiver that might/might not thrive in the system.

He's not starting from scratch, he's trying to do what he proved adept at before. Galloway and other busts proved past performance elsewhere doesn't mean much.

There is no market price for a football player to any individual football team. It's not a vegetable stand.

Is BB an idiot? Was Derrick Burgess worth a third and a fourth on the open market? Could anyone pick up Randy Moss for a fourth? That would make Derrick Burgess worth about 2 1/2 times what Moss was at the same age.

You go into the market and get a Tom Brady for a 6th, but need to pay a 2nd overal in the first for Ryan Leaf?

Man, if I go in my local store and Porterhouse Steaks are .10 cents, while an apple is $10, I'll go for the "set market price" theory.

Until then, there seems to be some sort of discrepancy.

A market is only a fictional concept where a buyer and seller meet.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

The guy would be a Brown-esque folk hero had he never left and I'm thrilled to have him back.

Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

 

[RayClay]

What exactly shows this in Yaz?

It's a huge thread, but Every playoff, world series, must win twins series (both games must wins) in 1967 and the one game playoff in 1978.

Statistics says that he should regress to the mean eventually (regular season performance).

Originally Posted by RayClay
My intent was just to see if great player rise to the occasion in big games. Though the approach has it's faults (sample size) it is easy to understand a comparison, even without complicated math.

There's one game I did not include that one poster rightly mentioned as an example of Yaz not coming through in the clutch. Of course everyone expected him to and this one conspicuous at bat he popped out.

To be complete, I thought I should add this failure to his total "big game" performance. I have the box score here. I will say I think every at bat is crucial in the post season since the best pitchers are there and many games have only 1 or 2 runs total.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/box-...d=197810020BOS


In his "failure" game he actually went 2 for 5 with two runs scored and 2 RBIs.

That's .400 at age 38.

So these are his "big game" totals. Looking at those home run and RBI totals makes me think I'm short changing him just using batting average.


1967 (two game pennant sweep) .875 1 HR 6 RBI

1967 W.S. .400 3 HR 5 RBI

1975 playoffs .455 with 1 HR and 2 RBI

1975 W.S. .310 4 RBI

1978 (one game Playoff ) .400 1 HR 2 RBI

Career postseason RBI totals work out to 153.9 RBIs and 48.6 HRs over a 162 game season.

He only hit more than 28 home runs 3 times in 23 years for comparison (44 in 1967 his best).

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...could-benefit-learning-page44.html#post631586

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Well, insurance is about limiting risk. If we assume he's healthy now, this acquisition has way way less risk than a receiver that might/might not thrive in the system.

He's not starting from scratch, he's trying to do what he proved adept at before. Galloway and other busts proved past performance elsewhere doesn't mean much.

There is no market price for a football player to any individual football team. It's not a vegetable stand.

Is BB an idiot? Was Derrick Burgess worth a third and a fourth on the open market? Could anyone pick up Randy Moss for a fourth? That would make Derrick Burgess worth about 2 1/2 times what Moss was at the same age.

You go into the market and get a Tom Brady for a 6th, but need to pay a 2nd overal in the first for Ryan Leaf?

Man, if I go in my local store and Porterhouse Steaks are .10 cents, while an apple is $10, I'll go for the "set market price" theory.

Until then, there seems to be some sort of discrepancy.

A market is only a fictional concept where a buyer and seller meet.

The market is hardly fictional at the meeting, yet a buyer, or seller, may make a deal which in hindsight was outside the range of similar "meetings" going on at the time. It is what it is, I'm not excited by having Branch, the ball is in his court, he's got a pretty good QB and supporting cast to help him prove me overly pessimistic - now he can get to it.

 

[emoney_33]

It's a huge thread, but Every playoff, world series, must win twins series (both games must wins) in 1967 and the one game playoff in 1978.

Statistics says that he should regress to the mean eventually (regular season performance).

And I argue you keep getting him in the playoffs and his numbers average out. (Like Derek Jeter's big playoff sample size is the same as his regular season big sample size).

You can find multiple examples of small samples from Yaz hitting .400 etc... Just because one of those small samples is in the playoffs that doesn't mean he had an ability to decide when that streak would happen.

That's the main point of contention with the "clutch" believers, their proof is in a small sample size and they use the results to prove the cause.

I'd argue that Yaz was no more or less likely to hit .400 in any 25 AB streak. In the 75 WS he hit .310, slugged .310 with 0 extra base hits.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...could-benefit-learning-page44.html#post631586

I can pick out a 50 AB streak from Yaz in the regular season and find anything that correlates like "he was wearing striped socks those days". It will be 2 facts neither of which prove causation of the other.

 

[RayClay]

The market is hardly fictional at the meeting, yet a buyer, or seller, may make a deal which in hindsight was outside the range of similar "meetings" going on at the time. It is what it is, I'm not excited by having Branch, the ball is in his court, he's got a pretty good QB and supporting cast to help him prove me overly pessimistic - now he can get to it.

Two apples are more similar than different. There is a market price for a certain type of "apple".

Football players and teams are more different, than the same at any point in time. There might be a vague market price range for a slot receiver, less so for players who bring different size, speed, ability, temperaments.

College players are all unproven in the NFL, so they might be more like a commodity, given excellent knowledge due to scouting. They have a market price, meaning a smart coach can bargain knowing what you need and pick up extra picks for example. College players are like buying futures, nobody really knows, everyone tries to set a value.

I'm not excited about Branch because i hate his guts and think he has no honor. I can see it only as a rational way to maximize our immediate performance due to his familiarity.

 

[TBradyOwnsYou]

Welker has been clutch.
Welker has outperformed his contract by far.
Welker has a mind meld with Brady.
Welker has not held out in the middle of his contract and forced a trade.
You can say how many of these for Branch?

Alas, he is here, BB has no ill will, Brady is happy... I will begrudgingly give him the benifit of the doubt for now. I certainly don't expect him to have any type of unbelievable statistical season or anything, but he is a another veteran presence that is lacking amongst our WRs and I think he will help the team.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

I'm not excited about Branch because i hate his guts and think he has no honor. I can see it only as a rational way to maximize our immediate performance due to his familiarity.

Well okay then.

 

[RayClay]

And I argue you keep getting him in the playoffs and his numbers average out. (Like Derek Jeter's big playoff sample size is the same as his regular season big sample size).

You can find multiple examples of small samples from Yaz hitting .400 etc... Just because one of those small samples is in the playoffs that doesn't mean he had an ability to decide when that streak would happen.

That's the main point of contention with the "clutch" believers, their proof is in a small sample size and they use the results to prove the cause.

I'd argue that Yaz was no more or less likely to hit .400 in any 25 AB streak. In the 75 WS he hit .310, slugged .310 with 0 extra base hits.




I can pick out a 50 AB streak from Yaz in the regular season and find anything that correlates like "he was wearing striped socks those days". It will be 2 facts neither of which prove causation of the other.

That's not an argument. You don't understand statistics.

If Yaz was 10% above his regular season stats, or 60% of his performances were better than average, that might be considered statistically significant.

His differences over average are so off the charts, they would be considered proof, in an experiment.

Just using your Chrystal ball is not an argument.

A statistical hypothesis test is a method of making decisions using experimental data. In statistics, a result is called statistically significant if it is unlikely to have occurred by chance. The phrase "test of significance" was coined by Ronald Fisher: "Critical tests of this kind may be called tests of significance, and when such tests are available we may discover whether a second sample is or is not significantly different from the first."[1]

Statistical hypothesis testing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia