NBA Season 2010-2011: Redefining The Definition Of Clutch

A few weeks ago, my buddy Sundermann and I got into a serious discussion about LeBron James.  For the first time in it seemed months, we didn't talk about "The Decision" or how D-Wade, LeBron and Bosh will co-exist. 

Instead we brought back an old and well-treaded upon topic:  Is LeBron clutch?  We traded points and counterpoints back and forth.  I used my usual arsenal of stats, facts and examples to propagate my argument for LeBron, while Sundermann used Lebron's recent failings in the last year's postseason as well as his dubious record with the ball in his hand during the last seconds, most notably his pension for being a facilitator rather than an instigator, to further his anti-LeBron sentiments.

I was thinking about that conversation a few days ago and realized that neither one of us were right or wrong.   There was something missing from our argument.  We both were making too valid arguments for one of us to be completely wrong, while at the same time unable to find cracks in the other person's arguments to be completely right.

So I really thought about the basis of what we were talking about.  I then realized the essence of what we were arguing wasn't simply LeBron, but was more general.  We were arguing over the definition of clutch.

Think about how loosely the word clutch is thrown around.  We as basketball fans, sportscasters and writers use the word constantly to describe players, but do we actually have a universal definition for clutch?  Are we describing the same thing when heaping praise on a clutch performance as when we laud someone for hitting a clutch shot at the end of the game?

Take Magic's Game 6 of the 1980 NBA Finals.  He starts at center, goes off for 42-15-7, and leads the Lakers to the title.  The game requires no last-second heroics due to Magic's performance.  By our current definition (or non-definition) of clutch, is that then a less clutch performance than Jordan hitting the game-winning shot over Russell in the 1998 NBA Finals? 

We need to try and have a better system for categorizing what we now broadly define as clutch in the NBA so we are not comparing apples to oranges.  The way I see it, the NBA breaks down into to categories: clutch and guts.

Clutch defines a full body of work, an entire game, an entire series, a string of great performances.  Guts defines what happens in the last minute of the game.  Does the player have the guts to take and make the last shot, or his he afraid to miss? 

Let's look at more examples or players and performances to better define the difference.

Strictly Clutch

These are the guys who would put up great numbers for a series or for a season, but for some reason were unable to consistently come up with the big plays during crunch time.  There are obviously many more, so feel free to leave more examples of these in comments so we can discuss their classification.

Shaquille O'Neal—Dominant performances for seasons and for playoff series.  Consistent winner.  What keeps him out of the "guts" group is his free-throw shooting.  If a game was on the line and you needed two free throws, would Shaq come through?  Would you feel comfortable with him on the line?

Kevin Garnett—As a Timberwolves fan, I love Garnett.  He was awesome to watch, gave great effort and had some tremendous seasons here.  He is most definitely clutch, remember his 33-point, 21-rebound game against Sacramento in Game 7 of the 2004 Semifinals?  But Garnett doesn't have that killer instinct that wants the ball to take the last shot.  Remember some of his passes in the NBA finals last year.

Strictly Guts

These are the guys who will shoot you into or out of any given game. They are never afraid to take the last shot.  They are capable of the highest level clutch performances but only on a game-by-game basis.

Kobe Bryant—I know I am gonna catch some heat for this one, but look up the stats if you don't believe me.  What keeps him here is his inconsistency in big games and series.  He has won series single-handedly (Phoenix last year) and lost series single-handedly (Detroit 04).  Kobe has the biggest stones in the NBA, no doubt.  He is never afraid to take the last shot and always wants the ball in his hands.  (He was also 6-24 in Game 7 of the NBA Finals.)

Allen Iverson—The ultimate gunslinger.  Iverson had all the guts and moxie in the world.  Popping off for 48 against the Lakers in Game 1 of the '01 Finals proves that. 

Clutch and Guts

These are greatest players in NBA history.  They are blessed with both of these traits.  Magic, Bird, Jordan, etc.  It is important to note that many players we would consider in this category would have at one point in their career spent time in one of the other two categories above. 

Examples:  Magic in the clutch category until his sky hook against the Celtics, or Jordan in the guts category until his triumph over the Lakers in the '91 Finals. 

It's what separates the great players from the transcendent ones. 

So as the 2010-2011 season dawns, where does LeBron fit in our new definitions?  He definitely has clutch performances on his resume as well as the capability to dominate an entire series. (See Eastern Conference Finals '07 versus Pistons or Game 7 of the 2008 Eastern Semis against the Celtics).  But he always seems to lack that "it" factor in the last minute or so of the game.

He is an enigma.  We have never seen a player like him, nor have we ever watched a player more closely.  Logical arguments can be made either way and right now he doesn't really fit into either clutch or guts category. 

LeBron's move to Miami and the manner in which he did it only placed more pressure on to define his place among the great and transcendent players in the NBA.

Luckily for LeBron, legacies and classifications are not written in stone until the basketball stops bouncing on a career.