I like the idea, but it seems odd that as soon as you throw sac flies into the mix there is suddenly a preponderance of evidence for clutch hitting. Not that sac flies aren't clutch (they very well can be), but they don't strike me as particularly more clutch that they could shift the whole conclusion. What you come up with in this case, once again, is that statistics only tell you what you put into them, which is why, no matter what, they should ALWAYS be taken with a grain of salt. Now, let's see the data!
