No Hitter

AirmenSmith · 08-07-2019, 08:50 AM

One thing I have noticed about this season is the huge emphasis on Team No Hitters. I don't remember there being so much "Excitement" around these until this year. I'm old school so maybe these Team no hitters just emphasize what I already dislike which is the way pitchers are used.

Good bye No hitters

Cobra Mgr · 08-07-2019, 09:05 AM

Cleveland leads the league in CG's w/5. There are 10 teams w/0. Ten yrs ago, Roy Halladay led the league w/9. Randy Johnson paced the majors 20 yrs ago w/12. I remember when having an innings eater to give your bullpen a break was a plus. Now teams don't care if they have one or not. 3rd time thru the lineup, he's out.

This is an area where football is superior to baseball, IMO. Football has different styles & strategies that teams employ to win. They can base it on their personnel or their personal philosophy. And it's nice to see those differing styles clash against the other. Baseball, everyone tries to copy one another now. You used to have some teams built on pitching, others on small ball, some on power hitting etc. Now everyone is trying to win the sabermetric game. It's boring.

Westheim · 08-07-2019, 09:09 AM

There can't be excitement where there is nothing to be excited about, in the sense of combined no-hitters being a recent thing exactly because pitcher usage is rapidly "developing" (and not for the better).

See the list of MLB no-hitters here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...all_no-hitters

There was exactly ONE combined no-hitter in all of the major leagues prior to 1967 (the Ernie Shore "perfect game" after Babe Ruth was ejected), one in 1967, one in 1975, and four in the 1990s. There was one in 2003 that doesn't really count because the starter (Roy Oswalt) left with an injury. one in 2012 that gets an asterisk for the same reason, one in 2014, and three since last year.

It *is* a new phenomenon.

I still think that the actual, single-pitcher no-hitters get more attention than combined no-hitters, which seem to be a 1-day story.

PocketsAintFull · 08-08-2019, 02:03 AM

I mean, the other team still goes hitless either way, so it's still a great achievement (though not as impressive as a single pitcher, of course).

08-07-2019, 08:50 AM	#1
AirmenSmith Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Corpus Christi TX Posts: 2,090	No Hitter One thing I have noticed about this season is the huge emphasis on Team No Hitters. I don't remember there being so much "Excitement" around these until this year. I'm old school so maybe these Team no hitters just emphasize what I already dislike which is the way pitchers are used. Good bye No hitters __________________ Come join me on my Twitch Channel for gaming at its excellence Twitch Link

08-07-2019, 09:05 AM	#2
Cobra Mgr Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Parts unknown Posts: 6,388	Cleveland leads the league in CG's w/5. There are 10 teams w/0. Ten yrs ago, Roy Halladay led the league w/9. Randy Johnson paced the majors 20 yrs ago w/12. I remember when having an innings eater to give your bullpen a break was a plus. Now teams don't care if they have one or not. 3rd time thru the lineup, he's out. This is an area where football is superior to baseball, IMO. Football has different styles & strategies that teams employ to win. They can base it on their personnel or their personal philosophy. And it's nice to see those differing styles clash against the other. Baseball, everyone tries to copy one another now. You used to have some teams built on pitching, others on small ball, some on power hitting etc. Now everyone is trying to win the sabermetric game. It's boring. __________________ If a man is guilty 4 what goes on inside of his mind, then let me get the electric chair 4 all my future crimes. - Prince Batdance June 7, 1958 - Apr 21, 2016

08-07-2019, 09:09 AM	#3
Westheim Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Germany Posts: 11,903	There can't be excitement where there is nothing to be excited about, in the sense of combined no-hitters being a recent thing exactly because pitcher usage is rapidly "developing" (and not for the better). See the list of MLB no-hitters here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...all_no-hitters There was exactly ONE combined no-hitter in all of the major leagues prior to 1967 (the Ernie Shore "perfect game" after Babe Ruth was ejected), one in 1967, one in 1975, and four in the 1990s. There was one in 2003 that doesn't really count because the starter (Roy Oswalt) left with an injury. one in 2012 that gets an asterisk for the same reason, one in 2014, and three since last year. It is a new phenomenon. I still think that the actual, single-pitcher no-hitters get more attention than combined no-hitters, which seem to be a 1-day story. __________________ Portland Raccoons, 83 years of excell-.... of baseball: Furballs here! 1983 * 1989 * 1991 * 1992 * 1993 * 1995 * 1996 * 2010 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 * 2026 * 2028 * 2035 * 2037 * 2044 * 2045 * 2046 * 2047 * 2048 * 2051 * 2054 * 2055 1 OSANAI : 2 POWELL : 7 NOMURA \| RAMOS : 8 REECE : 10 BROWN : 15 HALL : 27 FERNANDEZ : 28 CASAS : 31 CARMONA : 32 WEST : 39 TONER : 46 SAITO Resident Mets Cynic - The Mets from 1962 onwards, here.

08-08-2019, 02:03 AM	#4
PocketsAintFull All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Birmingham, UK Posts: 1,771	I mean, the other team still goes hitless either way, so it's still a great achievement (though not as impressive as a single pitcher, of course). __________________