To: mishedlo who wrote (213670 ) 1/10/2003 12:00:19 PM From: reaper Respond to of 436258 the stats would suggest that he was, but you have to consider that its a small sample size (as it was with all of these guys). for example, the numbers for Rose and Perez would suggest that they are "anti-clutch" (i.e. they performed worse in the World Series); i am not making that case at all i'm simply saying that they weren't clutch. now Reggie had an ungodly career 1197 OPS in the World Series in years when he was typically putting up 900-950 OPS in the regular season. but curiously, if you take ALL his post-season at bats (so league championship series as well) his OPS falls to 881 (which means his OPS in the LCS was in the 800-825 range, much worse than his regular season stats). so he sure as heck didn't play worse in important games, and in the World Series at least he played better. on those Oakland teams, i don't think you give certain players enought credit. Joe Rudi was a FANTASTIC hitter; in both 1972 and 1974 he was more than 40% better than the average player, and gold-glove caliber outfield defense to boot. Sal Bando, while a terrible third-sacker, was 40% better than league average in 1973 & 1974. Gene Tenace was also 30% better than league average. those are not "mediocre" players. that said, the pitching was fantastic. for all three of those years they had all of Catfish, Holtzman, Blue Moon Odom and Vida Blue, in their primes (in 1972, Holtzman, Hunter and Odom were all 27 and Blue was 22). plus they had a young Rollie Fingers (25 at the beginning of the dynasty) coming out of the pen for 110-125 innings (i.e. twice as much as a guy like Troy Percival will pitch today) plus Darold Knowles and Paul Lindblad (the two 'crafty lefties') who would soak up 150 or so quality innings between them. all the people who rave about Hudson/Mulder/Zito today need to remember that Oakland staff. Cheers