Fangraphs has done a great analysis on streaks and streakiness.
As with clutch, there has long been analysts, professional and amateur, who assign streakiness as a characteristic of a player -- usually in the form of its converse consistency.
But there's an important distinction between the historical artifact of a streak and the idea that players possess an inherent ability related to consistency. Any stat geek such as myself will assert that streaks are bound to occur even when no such skill underlies it. But that doesn't really prove either way if the skill exists -- just that observing streaks is insufficient proof (particularly in light of the human instinct to see pattens everywhere, even where they don't exist, and the fundamental attribution error -- inappropriately ascribing outcomes to human characteristics).
That all said, I highly recommend people read the article.
And for the lazy among us, the conclusion:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index...reaking-again/So what, ultimately, can we take away from all of this? Although the analysis is complicated, the lessons it teaches us are straightforward. Streaky seasons undoubtedly exist. However, it appears that there is no such thing as a streaky or unstreaky player. Rather, the truth seems to be that all players are streaky players. Being human, they have their ups and downs, and they are inherently streakier than random chance would dictate.