I believe the quantification of scouting will become the next major area of study. Pitch F/x to be the beginning of the next major revolution, which will eventually seek to quantify all those things which scouts are responsible for (makeup/tools/stuff). However, I also believe that we're far from entirely understanding the game solely through statistical analysis. Defense, baserunning, and yes, "clutch" are all still wonderfully enigmatic, and strides are being made by people like Dan Fox of BP to quantify them more accurately.* Someday, basically everything that goes on during a baseball game will be quantified and available in easy-to-swallow stat form. And the beauty of the game is that there will still be people who say that numbers don't tell the whole story, and they'll be right.

* Tom Tango has set up a new study to see which players are "clutch". However, I believe his basic premise to be flawed. Clutch isn't as much about "which hitter" you'd like to have up at the plate in a pressure situation as who you'd least like to face. Due to the largely static nature of the batting order and the understandable desire to start your best players, it is very hard for a team to select who they would like to have up. However, it remains possible for the opposing team to "choose" which player to face (Walk Papi to face Manny?) Moreover, clutch would intuitively be about who is better at remaining at their level, rather than regressing due to the pressure and more difficult circumstance (closers with fresh arms) of late game situations.

I personally believe clutch is much more readily apparent in who didn't choke than who suddenly became a slugger. Anyway, look for yourself at : http://www.tangotiger.net/clutch/