Clutchness is in absolutely no way, shape, or form, predictable. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or doesn't happen. If a career .150 hitter has 3 game winning hits in 2 weeks, that's clutch, but it doesn't predict future 'clutchness' at all. If Kotsay's ZIPs for the rest of the season say he's going to hit about .260, I'd expect him to hit .260 in clutch situations. That doesn't mean he will, it just means with a large enough sample, that would be the expected production. That is the only thing I think the 'statheads' are trying to say here. For some reason, 'statheads' and 'SABR' have seemingly become dirty words around here. So in theory, if Gamel, Green, or anyone else is predicted to do better than Kotsay in 'normal' at bat situations, there's no reason to assume they'd do worse in 'clutch' situations. That's not to say that there's not a human factor. I agree that being a 'gritty vet' may provide some unmeasurable benefit in such situations, but I don't know if that's something that roster decisions should be based on. I don't know that there's any substantial evidence that Gamel or Green would feel overwhelmed or daunted by pressure at bats in a playoff scenario. These aren't 13 year olds in the little leauge world series, they're professional ball players who've been preparing for the better part of the last decade to play in the major leagues. Like any prospect, they may pan out, they may not. But decisions shouldn't be being made based on Mark Kotsay being a 'grizzled vet' when he's supplying the offensive punch of a backup catcher. Clearly, in 2003, Miguel Cabrera's lack of veteran grittyness did not hold the Marlins back, nor did it prevent him from putting up an OPS over 1.100 in the LCS against the Cubs.