Clutch update
You know who is super unclutch? Fucking Tom Brady, that’s who. He’s the least clutch dude ever. Or so says Dan Wetzel anyhow, based on a sample of exactly four games. Which four games?
- The 2008 Super Bowl
- The 2010 Wild Card game
- The 2011 Division game
- Last week’s game against the Ravens
Wetzel’s conclusion? That Tom Brady is a gutless choker because he lost three of these four games cherry-picked over four years. Does it work like that? It counts as a "recent trend" if you have to bend, spindle, and mutilate four years of data to come up with four data points?
And, wait, what about the Broncos game? Does that one somehow not count, then? You remember that game. That was the one where Tom Brady tied the all-time record for touchdown passes in a playoff game en route to a 45-10 slaughter of God’s chosen team. Threw for 363 yards. He was ridiculous. You’d think that might be more important in terms of "recent trends" than a wild card game in 2010, but apparently you’d be wrong. And get this:
Then there are the ugly five touchdowns against six interceptions – disastrous compared to his 4.1-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio (153-37) during those four years.
His four-playoff game passer rating is a weak 69.5, a precipitous drop from the 107.5 he posted during those same regular seasons.
Would somebody at Yahoo please explain to this man what "sample size" means?
It’s also, as time passes, easy to forget that this happens to the best of them. Montana lost three consecutive playoff games with the San Francisco 49ers from 1985-87 in which he threw zero touchdown passes and a combined four picks. The next season he won another Super Bowl. Two years later he won it again.
Oh, so Montana wasn’t clutchless and finished because he had three bad games? Who would’ve thought? Glad you wrote this article anyhow.
Still, what to make of Brady’s mini recent track record?
There’s no simple answer here. There isn’t even a simple question.
Wrong and wrong. The simple question is "does this matter at all?" and the simple answer is "no it does not." Four games is a uselessly small sample, and explicitly choosing only bad games doesn’t make your argument better. Here, watch as I prove that Edgar Renteria is a better shortstop than Troy Tulowitzki using your logic:
Edgar Renteria, last playoff series: .412 / .444 / .765 / 1.209, 2 HR
Troy Tulowitzki, last playoff series: .250 / .278 / .375 / .653, 0 HR
You willing to do this, Dan? Renteria for Tulo, straight-up? Tulo may be better in the regular season, but it’s now been scientifically proven to your exacting standards that he doesn’t have what it takes to win in the playoffs! His most recent four games were just awful.
In New England it’s always started with Tom Brady. There’s never been a doubt that he’s the team’s most valuable player, its heart and soul, its unqualified leader. The supporting cast comes and goes. Brady stays.
Yes, Dan, he is the quarterback. Do you know much about football?
So while, yes, everyone does need to be at their best, the Patriots stand little chance if Tom Brady plays like he said he played against the Ravens.
Didn’t the Patriots win that game? Oh.
