Liriano
Posted by Andy on May 3, 2011
As I watch to see if Liriano can finish this no-hitter, three things occur to me:
1. Holy cow, he has a very low strike percentage in this game--I guess that's one way of being unhittable
2. How fitting that Edwin Jackson was the opposing pitcher
3. I wonder if anybody ever had as bad an ERA+ at the time of throwing a no-hitter.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:29 pm
That was an INCREDIBLY nerve-wracking no-hitter. I mean, a 1-0 game with a bunch of DPs. What an enjoyable game!
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:46 pm
Looks like Liriano's Game Score is 89. Wow.
And here's one for someone to look up: Are there any other pitchers who have tossed a no-no as their first CG?
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:49 pm
@2: Well, I think Bobo Holloman and Bumpus Jones would both qualify.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:53 pm
Bud Smith is another one whose no-no was his 1st CG
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:54 pm
. . . .and Anibal Sanchez
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:55 pm
Clay Buchholz's no-hitter must have been his first CG.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:58 pm
Dallas Braden's perfect game was his first complete game, too, I believe.
May 3rd, 2011 at 10:59 pm
. . . .and Jose Jimenez
Fun one about Jimenez - his no-no was against Randy Johnson and the DBacks on June 25, 1999: http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI199906250.shtml The Unit went the distance giving up 2 hits & 1 run with 14 Ks and 2BBs and, of course, taking the loss.
2 starts later, Jimenez threw his only other CG and it too was a shutout. . . . .against Randy Johnson and the DBacks. Unit went 8 giving up 4 hits and 1 run with 12 Ks and 4 BBs, JImenez 2 hits and 1 run.
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:04 pm
I was wondering the same thing on point 3. as Frankie has been awful in April.
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:06 pm
@Dan, his GS was 83, don't forget to subtact the 6 BB's!
only Cliff Chambers (8BB, 4K) had such a low Game Score in a 9+IP no-no since 1919
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:15 pm
...and Mike Warren of the A's (only one)
Another question: how many 1-0 no-hitters have there been where the only run was a solo HR?
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:18 pm
My mistake re:Mike Warren (had 3 CGs; no-hitter was only shutout) but solo HR query is legit.
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:23 pm
...and Wilson Alvarez
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:25 pm
Charlie Lea had a horrible one in '81, & he tossed a no-no
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:31 pm
Liriano is also 11th on the list of players with the most games started before his first complete Game (94). He was 3rd active on this list behind Scott Olsen (127) & Jorge de la Rosa (121).
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:34 pm
@11, Nick C -- In Edwin Jackson's no-hitter last year, Adam LaRoche hit a HR for the game's only run.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TBA/TBA201006250.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:36 pm
Another HR in a 1-0 no-hitter: Kevin Millwood's 2003 no-no, Rickey Ledee hit the HR.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI200304270.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:38 pm
In the Jimenez '99 no-no, the Cards scored the only run in the top of the 9th.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ARI/ARI199906250.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
Still looking for a lone run scored in walk-off fashion....
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:41 pm
Another solo HR in a 1-0 no-no: Ron Hunt backing Gaylord Perry, 1968.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SFN/SFN196809170.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:42 pm
Jim Maloney 10-inning no-hitter, 1965; Leo Cardenas homered in the top of the 10th:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN196508191.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:44 pm
@ Andy Point 3. Bill Dietrich's ERA was 10.12 in 1937 when he no hit the St. Louis Browns on June 1st. His gamelog does not show his ERA+
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=dietrbi01&t=p&year=1937
May 3rd, 2011 at 11:53 pm
Walk-off HR in a 1-0 no-hitter:
5-15-1952, Virgil Trucks did the pitching; Vic Wertz homered with 2 out in the bottom of the 9th ... in front of 2,215 fans in Briggs (later Tiger) Stadium.
The Tigers were 6-18 before the game. The tough-luck loser was Bob Porterfield.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/DET/DET195205150.shtml?utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool
Trucks began the game, his 6th of the year (5th start), with an 8.47 ERA and no wins.
Trucks threw another 1-0 no-hitter later in the year, in Yankee Stadium. That game improved his record to 5-15, but with a 3.35 ERA. He finished the year 5-19, 3.97; three of his wins were shutouts. The Tigers were very bad that year (50-104); they scored 3 runs or less in 21 of his 29 starts.
May 4th, 2011 at 12:10 am
Flipping the HR theme around for a second, has a no-no ever been LOST via a walk-off homer? I began wondering as Dunn came to bat in the bottom of the 9th as the winning run...
May 4th, 2011 at 12:19 am
@ Nate #23 - Harvey Haddix baby! Lost the perfecto in the 13th and the no-no with a HR by Joe Adcock with 2 outs in the 13th. (Because Hank Aaron inexplicably left the bases, Adcock was officially called out for passing Aaron and only credited with a double but it was a HR.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Haddix
May 4th, 2011 at 12:25 am
@17
Ledee also caught the final out in the outfield, for some nice symmetry after hitting the HR in the 1st.
May 4th, 2011 at 1:20 am
3-run walk-off HR in a 3-0 10-inning no-hitter (have ticket stubs)...
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PIT/PIT199707120.shtml
May 4th, 2011 at 8:22 am
...and what about all of those Mets who pitched no-hitters? Just kidding.
May 4th, 2011 at 10:40 am
@Anon/24 - Oh, of course! I guess I had limited myself to thinking about 9 inning games for some reason, but Haddix definitely fits, with the toughest-luck performance in MLB history.
May 4th, 2011 at 11:23 am
>> 1. Holy cow, he has a very low strike percentage in this game--I guess that's one way of being unhittable
http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/CooqH
Third-lowest, among no-hitters with pitch-count data in P-I. The previously-mentioned Edwin Jackson game, and AJ Burnett's 2001 no-no were the only worse strike-percentage no-no's.
May 4th, 2011 at 11:23 am
Was this the first time a guy has been on both ends of a 1-0 no-hitter?
May 4th, 2011 at 11:42 am
On Sept. 19, 1986 Joe Cowley of the White Sox beat the Angels
7-1 with a no-hitter in which he walked 7.
It was his last win of the season. Next year he went 0-4 with the
Phillies, which marked the end of his career.
He therefore became I think the only pitcher in baseball history to
have his final win be a no-hitter.
May 4th, 2011 at 12:40 pm
Low no-hit game score (possibly): Andy Hawkins: July 1, 1990, 72 points (and the loss)
May 4th, 2011 at 12:59 pm
Who has he lowest ratio of ShOs to no-hitters? CGs to no-hitters? Ws to no-hitters?
May 4th, 2011 at 1:07 pm
Actually, the Hawkins game is not recognized by MLB as a no-hitter. They issued a formal definition in 1991:
"An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings." (emphasis added)
Many games previously considered no-hitters were excluded by this rule, including Harvey Haddix's 12 perfect innings.
May 4th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
@33, BSK -- One question at a time, sir!
(Data are for 1919-present.)
The following no-hit pitchers have exactly 1 career shutout:
Francisco Liriano, Jonathan Sanchez, Bud Smith, Kent Mercker, Joe Cowley, Mike Warren, Bobo Holloman.
May 4th, 2011 at 1:14 pm
Since 1919, the following no-hit pitchers have exactly 1 career CG:
Francisco Liriano, Jonathan Sanchez, Bud Smith, Bobo Holloman.
(Kent Mercker and Jose Jimenez each had 2 CG.)
May 4th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
Since 1919, here are the no-hit pitchers with the fewest career wins:
-- 3, Bobo Holloman
-- 7, Bud Smith
-- 9, Mike Warren
May 4th, 2011 at 1:16 pm
BSK, you can do these searches yourself in a two-tiered manner. First do a game-finder for CG with no hits. Save that search, and use it as the basis for a season finder (summed for career) for fewest CG, fewest W, etc.
May 4th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
What's interesting is if not for the no hitter, this game wasn't even pitched that well. 6 walks is pretty damn bad no matter how you look at it, and 2 Ks mean he was also very lucky on balls in play. Still very cool accomplishment though.
It IS interesting however that if he gave up 1 hit and zero walks, this game would pretty much never be mentioned again, but because it was six walks and no hits, I guess it will live in the highlights forever.
May 4th, 2011 at 2:18 pm
JA-
Thanks.
Andy-
I'm still learning the PI. Thanks for the tips. Didn't know you could compound the searches that way.
Rich-
Great point. I've always wondered what the record book would look like if we counted "No Walkers" the same way we count "No Hitters". It'd be a screwy stat because A) it'd happen a lot more often and B) a pitcher who is close and winning in a blow-out could just throw meatballs and hope for outs. But it is interesting to think about how our perception of an effort is colored by the novelty of an acomplishment, independent of its value. When I was younger, I would get mad that a no-hitter or perfect game didn't really have any more impact on a fantasy season than a 1-hitter because it SEEMED so much better.
May 4th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
@34 JA - "Actually, the Hawkins game is not recognized by MLB as a no-hitter. They issued a formal definition in 1991:
"An official no-hit game occurs when a pitcher (or pitchers) allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings." (emphasis added)
Many games previously considered no-hitters were excluded by this rule, including Harvey Haddix's 12 perfect innings."
This has always bugged me. Does this annoy anyone else (besides me)? I think the 9 innings rule is silly. Because Hawkins was pitching on the road and his team was losing, he didn't pitch in the 9th inning. That's not his fault he didn't have the opportunity to pitch in the 9th inning. He should still get credit for the no-hitter IMO.
(and technically, the rule isn't even written correctly..."when a pitcher allows no hits during the entire course of a game, which consists of at least nine innings" ...well the game DID consist of nine innings. Hawkins didn't pitch nine innings because that was impossible as mentioned above. But the game itself was nine innings).
A player who loses a hitting streak in a game in which his team is the home team and his team wins before batting in the 9th, well he still loses his hitting streak. Even though he didn't bat in the 9th. And that's as it should be, as its just common sense IMO. I think the same should be true for Hawkins and his no-hitter (and all other pitchers in that situation).
May 4th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
It's a fair point to note that "no-hitter" does not necessarily equal "very well-pitched game."
That's one reason why Bill James came up with the idea of Game Score.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/pi_glossary.shtml
May 4th, 2011 at 2:35 pm
@41, Dave V -- I agree that the rule is ambiguously worded.
As to counting 8-inning no-hitters (by visiting & losing pitchers):
Where, then, would you draw the line for games shortened by rain, etc.?
(This is not a rhetorical question; I'm genuinely curious.)
May 4th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
"A player who loses a hitting streak in a game in which his team is the home team and his team wins before batting in the 9th, well he still loses his hitting streak."
OK, but is there any reasonable alternative to that? Do you want to say that a hitting streak is not broken by a hitless game if his team didn't get at least 9 batting innings? -- or only if he was due to bat in the (unplayed) 9th? And again, what about rain-shortened games?
May 4th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
@44 - I don't want to say that and that's not what happens. If tonight's Dodgers game gets called after 5 innings and Ethier doesn't have a hit by the time the game is called, his hitting streak is gone. Even though he didn't have a full 9 innings to play. MLB recognizes the game as a complete game and whatever happens in the game hit streak-wise is maintained one way or the other.
Likewise for no-hitters, whatever the pitcher did should be maintained one way or the other IMO. If a game is shortened by weather/disaster, etc and a pitcher happens to have a no-hitter, I think the no-hitter should stand (so that's my answer @43).
Yes, the no-hitter is not nearly as impressive as a 9-inning no-hitter. Lots of guys have pitched 5 no-hit innings, continued to pitch and given up hits. So guys from rain-shortened games would be lucky. But MLB already gives them credit for a CG (and shutout, if they still have one) in such an instance, so why not the no-hitter too? JMO.
I did a quick check...it looks like there'd be 11 extra pitchers with no-hitters to their credit if the rule was amended as far as weather-shortened games. And 2 pitchers (including Hawkins) with no-hitters in games they only pitched 8 innings because their team was away & their team lost by the time the top of the 9th was concluded.
May 4th, 2011 at 3:06 pm
RE: losing no-hitter to walk-off HR - I remembered this site which has all sorts of detail on near no-hitters since 1961: http://milkeespress.com/lostninth.html#trivia
I make no representation as to his accuracy but it details every no-hitter lost in the 9th. Unfortunately, it doesn't provide much detail on the hit type for no-hitters lost with 0 or 1 out but does indicate the type of hit for all no-hitters lost with 2 outs. I checked all the 2 out no-hitters lost to a HR and none of them are walkoff HRs.
I'll leave it to someone with more time than me to go game by game through all the 97 no-hitters lost with 0 or 1 out 🙂
May 4th, 2011 at 3:13 pm
Hitting streaks have nothing to do with the number of innings played in the games.
Playing a complete game will sometimes get you 0 ABs (or 3 PAs), or it might get you 10 ABs. There's really never been anything completely fair about hitting streaks anyway.
May 4th, 2011 at 3:15 pm
I remember watching this game, Mariners at Athletics
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK199004200.shtml
With one swing, Brian Holman of the Mariners lost a perfect game, no-hitter and shutout with 2 outs in the 9th, on a first-pitch pinch-hit homer by former Mariner Ken Phelps.
At least, he didn't lose the game.
May 4th, 2011 at 3:33 pm
@47 Statboy - agreed and that was my point in bringing up hitting streaks; I don't think no-hitters should have anything to do with the number of innings either. If a pitcher pitches a complete game and allowed no hits, my personal opinion is he should get credit for the no-hitter.
Try explaining this to a kid who is learning MLB rules; he'll probably think MLB is stupid and lose interest:
--Son: "Wow Dad, Mariano Pettitte just threw a no-hitter! They called the game after 6 innings and he still hadn't given up a hit, so its a no-hitter!"
--Dad: "Well, sorry to tell you son, but it isn't a no-hitter because he didn't pitch 9 innings."
--S: "But the game is over and his team won. They played as long as they could and he didn't give up any hits, so how can that not be a no-hitter?"
--D: "Because MLB chganged the rules a while back."
--S: "But doesn't Mariano Pettitte still get credit for a complete game?"
--D: "Yes, son."
--S: "And his team won 14-0. So doesn't he get credit for a shutout too?"
--D: "Yes, son."
--S: "But I thought you said since he didn't pitch 9 innings, he doesn't get credit for a no-hitter?"
--D: "He doesn't, son."
--S: "But a normal complete game or shutout is 9 innings, Dad."
--D: "You're right, son."
--S: "So MLB gives Mariano credit for the complete game and shutout even though the game was called due to rain, since he was the only pitcher who pitched for the team? And those stats (a complete game and shutout) go in his personal records right?"
--D: "Yup, they do."
--S: "Well then I don't understand why he doesn't get credit for his no-hitter, Dad. Its the same thing."
--D: "ummmm..."
--S: "MLB has stupid rules, Dad."
--D: "That they do, son...that they do."
May 4th, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Dave V-
In high school ball, my teammate threw 5 perfect innings in a torrential downpour. The ump actually stretched the game out well beyond what was reasonable in part because of what the kid had going on. We considered it a perfect game and mobbed him at the pitchers mound regardless of what any official tally indicated. I still don't know how it was recorded. Who cares. We went bananas.
The rules are dumb. Many rules are dumb. I'm inclined to agree with you, but don't care enough to raise a fuss. I'm more bothered by guys who get screwed by extra innings.
May 4th, 2011 at 3:49 pm
My point @44 was to question parallel Dave V had drawn between "no-hitters" of less than 9 innings pitched, and hitting streaks stopped by a game of less than 9 innings batted. To make my point more explicit:
You can't have "consistent" rules for no-hitters and hitting streaks, because they are different types of feats.
The no-hitter is a one-game feat. Thus, setting strict parameters on the length of game that counts as an official no-hitter is simple and encounters no significant complications. I happen to find the 9-inning requirement reasonable; many potential no-hitters have been broken up in the 9th. (I would, however, like to get rid of the CG requirement.)
A streak, on the other hand, is a multi-game feat. True, there are not equivalent opportunities in each game. But if you tried to draft a rule that accounted for that fact, you would quickly run into problems.
May 4th, 2011 at 4:05 pm
A no-hitter or perfect game is remembered because it is a supremely difficult accomplishment. There is a quantum difference in difficulty between a 5-inning perfect game and a 9-inning perfect game. Given normal on-base percentages, it is at least 100 times harder to retire 27 batters in a row than 15.
A no-hitter or perfect game also tends to be associated with high drama and a thrilling finish. How much no-no drama has built up after 5 innings? And what kind of thrilling finish do you get when a game is called after a long rain delay?
I'm not buying into historic pitching feats of 5 innings.
May 4th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
JA-
Are you suggesting some sort of cache factor? Maybe a new stat! CAR... cache above replacement! :-p
May 4th, 2011 at 4:46 pm
@52 - surely you do not believe the pitcher should be credited with a CG or shutout in those situations then?
As it stands right now, a pitcher could end up leading the league in either category with the addition of a rain-shortened game. Who knows, those extra stats might allow him to achieve a contract bonus, get named to an All-Star team, win the Cy Young, etc? If MLB is willing to allow that (the crediting of a CG/shutout) to happen with a rain-shortened game, why not a no-hitter too? It should be consistent across the board.
You mention no-hitters or perfect games are associated with high drama or a thrilling finish and ask how much drama has built up after 5 innings. What about 8 innings then? That's not a rhetorical question and I'll answer with my opinion 🙂 I'd say quite a bit of drama has come up after 8 no-hit innings. Same with games such as the Andy Hawkins game. You want fans to have a thrilling finish? How much of a thrilling finish is it to tell someone a game they watched for 8 innings in which no hits were allowed by one pitcher wasn't in fact a no-hitter?
Its not like this happens a lot. Between the CG 8-inning losses and rain-shortened games, it has happened 13 times in MLB history. So its not like this will open the floodgates to a ton of schmoes with no hitters to their credit. And these games WERE considered no-hitters until the "rule clarification" in 1991. Going back in time to say something didn't happen after MLB said it did is something I don't buy into (especially when it did happen, as no hits allowed is a no-hitter).
My belief is that you can have consistent rules for no-hitters and hitting streaks despite them being different type of events. Count the stats and any milestones once the game ends/is made official. With that, MLB is perfectly consistent. Again, MLB already does it in so far as counting the CG and shutout part of the game. That's a one-game feat just as a no-hitter is.
@50 BSK - that's pretty cool to be able to say you were a part of a game like that. I would have celebrated and went bananas along with you, if I were in your shoes 🙂 You guys know it was a perfect game regardless of what the rules say one way or the other.
May 4th, 2011 at 6:45 pm
Dave-
I was actually quite fortunate, because the pitcher that day was our regular starting SS and I was his backup, so I was actually playing the game. Made a pretty difficult over-the-shoulder catch in the 5th (IIRC) so I like to think I actually had a part to play (I'm not sure another ball came my way; he was humming along and most of the other kids were happy to just get back into the dry dugout).
May 4th, 2011 at 7:28 pm
In the past 90 years, no pitcher has thrown a no-hitter while coming into a game with a higher ERA than Liriano's was.
May 4th, 2011 at 10:03 pm
BSK - that's awesome; good timing and good stuff!
May 5th, 2011 at 7:55 am
Late to the party but Dave V. I'm a Yankees fan and I watched that Hawkins game on TV (it was great and awful at the same time as one can imagine). I've always thought the rule change too narrowly defined no-hitters, regardless of the ambiguity in the language. I'm completely fine with chucking the rain-shortened no-hitters but I have a problem with penalizing a guy that can't pitch/finish the 9th if he loses a no-hitter on the road in a game that doesn't go to extra innings. To me, the proper definition of a no-hitter is when a pitcher allows no hits in pitching a complete game that ends under normal conditions, not shortened by weather or any other factor preventing a normal conclusion.
May 5th, 2011 at 11:08 am
@54, Dave V: "surely you do not believe the pitcher should be credited with a CG or shutout in [a rain-shortened game]?"
If MLB were to redefine "complete game" or "shutout" to require a minimum number of innings, I would not favor the redefinition, but I would not object strongly, either. (And I don't care a whit how it might affect bonus clauses.)
I take the same position on a hypothetical redefinition of "no-hitter" to recognize complete games that go just 8 IP because the home team wins without batting in the 9th: I would not favor it, but I would not object strongly.
To me, the crux of the issue is the historic significance of the event. Complete games and shutouts are fairly commonplace. For the 10 years 2001-10, there were:
-- 1,671 complete games
-- 648 shutouts
-- 20 "no-hitters" (using the loose definition)
Even in an era where we consider complete games and shutouts relative rarel, CG were 83 times as frequent as "no-hitters," and shutouts were 32 times as frequent as "no-hitters."
Simply put, in terms of the historical and even the quotidian narrative of the game, the stringency of the defined requirements for a CG or shutout is not very important, because those events are generally not talked about and written about beyond a few days or weeks of their occurrence. They don't "go down in history."
There's an old saying about "a foolish consistency." I won't be painted into a corner of expecting identical historical treatment of events whose historical impact is so disparate, just to be technically consistent.
Since you drew a parallel with hitting streaks, consider the MLB definition:
"A consecutive-game hitting streak shall not be terminated if all the player's plate appearances (one or more) results in a base on balls, hit batsman, defensive interference or a sacrifice bunt. The streak shall terminate if the player has a sacrifice fly and no hit. The player's individual consecutive-game hitting streak shall be determined by the consecutive games in which the player appears and is not determined by his club's games. "
Where's the logical consistency in that? He batted in the game; he didn't get a hit -- end of streak, right? Imagine a guy has a 55-game hitting streak, and in game 56 he comes up in the 9th, having walked in each of his previous trips, and now he's facing Carlos Marmol with the tying run on 1st, one out and the pitcher's spot due up next (because of a double-switch). Feeling he doesn't have much chance to get a swinging hit off Marmol, he drag bunts (hoping for a hit); he is thrown out, but the runner moves up. The official scorer is liable to call it a sacrifice, and thus by rule the hitting streak is not broken.
Why aren't you raising hell about that rule?
May 5th, 2011 at 1:26 pm
@59 JA - I'm not "raising hell" about it. I brought it up here on the board, that's it. Its not ruining my life or keeping me up at night, I assure you. I thought we were all free to discuss things on this board.
The hitting streak rule you mention is indeed stupid and should be changed. Just because MLB has a stupid rule towards hitting streaks doesn't mean other stupid rules should be accepted though and I'll leave it at that, as we're all free to have our opinions.
@58 Fireworks - I watched the Hawkins game live as well. That's the only game that made me throw a mattress (I guess I was raising hell there) 🙂 And overall, those type of games are the ones that I really feel should be given no-hitter credit, as to me, they were in every sense of the word. The weather-shortened games don't bother me nearly as much (which is why I never mentioned them in my oriinal post) 😉
May 5th, 2011 at 1:55 pm
Dave V -- I never questioned your right to bring up any issue or express any opinion. I simply disagreed with you. I didn't think I was raising the volume or the intensity level; I apologize if it came across that way.
May 5th, 2011 at 2:12 pm
@ the hitting streak theory...
I think Paul Moliter was on Deck when a walk-off was hit to end the game and his 30+ hit streak.
Tough luck.
May 5th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
@61 JA - no worries. Thought you were getting annoyed with the hitting streak example & raising hell comment but glad to hear that's not the case and apologies for misinterpreting.
By the way, I never knew about that hitting streak technicality. I almost hope that happens with Andre Ethier (or some other player) in the near future, as I'd love to see Selig and company try to deal with that mess. It really is a horrendous rule. IF a guy does ever tie or surpass Joe D's record because he had a game during the "streak" with such a technicality, while MLB might recognize it, I know for sure I wouldn't 🙂
May 5th, 2011 at 6:57 pm
Are we sure that JoeD didn't have such a game during his streak?
May 5th, 2011 at 7:00 pm
He, in fact, did not.
May 5th, 2011 at 8:12 pm
But he did get some possible gift base hits from the scorer.
May 6th, 2011 at 7:59 am
@ Dave V, John Autin: my two cents: "Franchise" Liriano has been so bad this year, Andy Hawkins is all but forgotten;)