Sports... performance under pressure and inclement weather...

[Orlando Magic]

Why is the ability to perform a sport under pressure or in certain weather conditions taken into account when judging someone's ability to perform/talent level at said sport? Does someone performing under pressure actually make them a better basketball, football, or baseball player? Does someone that handles cold weather better than others make that person actually better at football or baseball?

These are things I've never fully understood. Of course, I'm not suggesting that they can be completely ignored nor are they to be discounted when you're looking at trying to accomplish a goal such as making it through a postseason and getting a title. In that sense, they are extremely relevant questions and there is no denying their importance. However, from a purely objective standpoint when evaluating someone's ability at the sport while minimizing external factors, why would a guy playing poorly only in the playoffs make him a lesser player in people's eyes? I understand legacies are often built on what is accomplished in the postseason. That's not my point, either. I fully understand that aside from the fun of it, the point of sports is to win, and the final result is winning a title. Not the point I'm trying to make here... I do get that.

Let's give a ridiculous hypothetical... some NBA star comes along and averages 35 ppg, 15 rpg and 15 apg along with stellar defense during the regular season for his career and he did it numerous times against all teams, not just bottom feeders. Let's say that same said NBA star "only" averages 25 ppg, 6 rpg, and 8apg with mediocre defense during the playoffs along with zero titles across the span of his entire career.

Ignoring the factor of teammates, does that make the guy a lesser basketball player or does it just mean that's he's not mentally tough? Why is "mentally tough" something that is factored in the discussion of one's ACTUAL TALENT AND ABILITY to perform the sport?

Another hypothetical... same NBA star... same regular season stats... except this time... there are no fans present during any games all year nor in the postseason, there are no road nor home games, and the teams are not made aware of the length of a season nor what time the playoffs will start nor even how long a series will be. They are only aware that any given game could be their last. Now under these conditions let's say that the aforementioned guy goes on to win 10 titles and puts up the same stats that he did in the regular season? Does that mean he's suddenly a better player because these external psychological factors were removed? Does it really? I find the idea laughable.

The only sport that jumps into my mind that mental toughness can't be ignored, minimized nor discounted in any way shape or form when evaluating one's talent level is golf... it will truly **** you up if you aren't mentally tough and the pressure is ALWAYS easy to let in and it's there regardless of what event or time of year.

The regular season might just be more important when evaluating an individual's ability and talent at their respective sport. Postseason performance is overrated when looking at individual players.

[ArbitraryWater]

Because sports is a competition, battle of the fittest, and to win one, you have to be strong mentally as well (under normal circumstances). Its a natural part of the whole thing.

You adressed a huge thing and kind of centered in on the playoff thing.

One could equally argue, why should his regular season performance be of any value, when he cant perform at the actually highest level of competition, where its actually required and what you are judged on? Why would the regular season feats make him a better player?

You could make more of an interesting topic on the weather conditioning thing, but there is no set in stone environment for any sport, deemed 'right', so adapting to the situation, is part of the process, not just in sports, but in any profession.

[ArbitraryWater]

What you could say probably, is that the term 'choked' is just way overused, and that alot of performance simply goes into the environment, and what a player has to deal with.

But again, I swayed my mind on that lately, as the mental capabilities are simly crucial. And one should be able to play at the required level even with say a bad PG to his side, or a poor front office. Not enough talent may make things harder, and can be taken into context no doubt, but they're not an eternally valid excuse.

[warriorfan]

[HenryGarfunkle]

Since when do people judge players based solely on talent?

When discussing who's better, which is mainly what people talk about, everything gets taken into account including post-season feats, ability to fit with teammates, etc.

Carmelo is one of the most talented players in the world, probably top 5, but it's the other factors like his mental weakness and complacency that gets him ranked down near 20.

Nobody every makes a thread asking who's the most "talented".. that would be gay af, talent is immeasurable and talking about it would be pointless, would be just a bunch of shitty opinions

[Orlando Magic]

Nobody every makes a thread asking who's the most "talented".. that would be gay af, talent is immeasurable and talking about it would be pointless, would be just a bunch of shitty opinions

Nobody really elevates their play in the postseason... maybe for one year but it's not a consistent thing. The difference is that some people are able to remain focused and at their peak in inclement weather or pressure situations. I'm not strictly talking about talent... results matter. I just happen to be of the opinion that the best player in the regular season is actually the best player in the league and posteasons are overrated.

Also... as to your quote... lol... you act like that's not what already happens.

[Orlando Magic]

Because sports is a competition, battle of the fittest, and to win one, you have to be strong mentally as well (under normal circumstances). Its a natural part of the whole thing.

You adressed a huge thing and kind of centered in on the playoff thing.

One could equally argue, why should his regular season performance be of any value, when he cant perform at the actually highest level of competition, where its actually required and what you are judged on? Why would the regular season feats make him a better player?

You could make more of an interesting topic on the weather conditioning thing, but there is no set in stone environment for any sport, deemed 'right', so adapting to the situation, is part of the process, not just in sports, but in any profession.

Regular season matters because it's a fairer comparison of actual ability. That's why. The sport does exist outside of postseason play believe it or not and in fact that is where >99% of play takes place when you include average joes.

[sd3035]

[Nilocon165]

When you're too stupid to comprehend anything more than 3 paragraphs