These NL late inning 'no-hitters' are annoying
 

Stripling, Conley and now Rea..


Its the NL...pitchers are hitting......an AL no hitter should count 1.1 versus a 1 in the NL.......when you get 2 free outs sometimes 3 free outs....they really need to say its an "NL no hitter'...

... sorry, deleted my text while editing ... will need to re-write

I'm still not really understanding MLB's approach to pitchers. We are in a time of hyper-sensitivity towards the pitcher and still we see more TJ surgeries and arm injuries than ever. So maybe it's time to admit this doesn't work and let guys who pitch for a living pitch.

but that definitely does not apply when facing Madison Bumgarner.

right were any of the almost no hitters this year against Bumgarner

Any swinging bat is capable of getting a hit.
A MLB no-hitter is a no-hitter. Period.

(See how I used punctuation there?)

still not all no hitters are alike..... There are DHs in the AL who have 150 more hits for the year than the Pitchers spot in the NL gets all year against any team... an AL no hitter is worth a lot more than an NL no hitter

would you rather face David Ortiz or a guy that hits less than .175 on the year (can fill in 100 pitchers there)\

if you pitch 8 innings and lose the game even with no-hits its not considered a no hitter..
..you are facing only 8 real hitters in the NL for the most part while an AL pitcher faces 9 hitters

Would no-hitting the Braves only count as a 0.9 no hitter?

Since the inception of the DH the National League has averaged 1.32 no-hitters per season. The American League has averaged 1.25. I'd say 43 years is a large enough sample size to say it's no easier in any league. You can argue that they face fewer legitimate bats. I could argue they face more unfavorable match-up pinch hitters and face the liability of being dead at-bats in the late innings. Really though, just look at the numbers. The odds that any random NL game will result in a no-hitter is exactly .001% higher than doing the same with the AL.

.....less

actually those numbers prove its easier for a no-hitter in the National League.....perfect games now are really the new no-hitters. no hitters not so special anymore

I'm sorry, but this entire premise is just ridiculous. The National League is more prone to no hitters because they don't have a designated hitter? LOL, really?

There are 27 outs in a baseball game. Unless the no hitter is also a perfect game, there will be a few more plate appearances for walks, hit batters, hitters reaching on an error, etc. Assume that there are four more plate appearances, maybe slightly more (say three walks and a hit batter). Unless the DH is batting in the top four spots, they're going to get three plate appearances in a game, if that. The Major League average this year is .251. The odds are against the DH getting a hit in those three plate appearances. If a starting pitcher can keep the other eight batters in the lineup from reaching safely via hit, why is it such a stretch to think that they could get the DH, too? A designated hitter is typically an older player that cannot find a position on the field. They're not going to be fleet of foot. So, they're certainly not going to beat out an infield single. They need to get a clean hit off the pitcher, something every other hitter in the lineup has been incapable of doing. And how much of an advantage does the DH provide the American League when a starting pitcher in the National League will usually only bat a couple times in a game? As the game progresses, and a starter approaches their pitch count limit, they'll be pulled, and a pinch hitter will bat in the pitcher's place. That "weakness" in the lineup is only a glaring hole a few times a game.

Did you even bother to look at this year's statistics before starting this topic? Here are the team by team batting statistics for 2016. The Major League average for runs scored per game is 4.26. Fifteen teams in the Majors are scoring more than the Major League average. Ten of them are from the National League. Eight of the top ten scoring offenses in the Majors right now are in the National League, including six of the top seven. What about pure batting average, since a no hitter is only concerned with hits? Seven of the top ten hitting teams by batting average are in the NL.

What about the DL? American League designated hitters are hitting a combined .231 this season, twenty points below the Major League average. They're an improvement over the batting prowess of N.L. pitchers, but on the whole, they are below average American League hitters. Of the fifteen AL teams, only Seattle, Detroit, Minnesota and Boston have DH production above the .251 mark.

Kansas City's designated hitters are batting a combined .213.
Baltimore's designated hitters are batting a combined .210.
New York's designated hitters are batting a combined .200.
Texas' designated hitters are batting a combined .197.
Houston's designated hitters are batting a combined .192.
Los Angeles' designated hitters are batting a combined .188.
Oakland's designated hitters are batting a combined .162.
Tampa Bay's designated hitters are batting a combined .157.

Wow, the American League designated hitter slots are just stocked with great hitters!!

The National League, which you hypothesize is somehow "weakened" by the lack of a Designated Hitter, is kicking the crap out of American League teams, comparatively. Your "hypothesis" is completely unsupportable by the available empirical data.

I really didnt bother to look at statistics to see if the Harold Baines of the world get on base more than the Bartolo (1 homer)Colons of the world..im going to guess that the DH has the propensity to get on base more than the pitcher spot on 99% of NL teams....if you have stats they say otherwise ill re-evaluate..

also without looking at stats..im going to guess pitcher obtain more Ks in the NL v. AL.....Ks are fielding independent , you dont have to worry about a hit/error/out when theres a K....we should run whether pitchers that hit tend to strike out more than DHs.....there are a ton of DHs that k a lot too...so who knows.

By the way, when NL teams play in AL parks...how many times do we see a pitcher hit as a DH? less than 1%.....so every manager out there basically has a bench position player better than their best hitting pitcher......again i didnt run the stats..but im assuming that number is right..

in addition going by year total averages on teams per runs really doesnt matter.....like it was said..there have been more NL no hitters than AL no hitters...so not sure it matters if there are 10 more runs scored a game by the NL versus AL...or season averages in hits/runs etc are much more in NL.....it was already stated that there are more NL no hitters than AL no hitters....plus the 'almost no-hitter' like the striplings and the conleys this year seem to number more in the NL then AL.....i just think there will be a time we will be seeing at least a 2-1 ratio...if that occurred.i would think that most people would agree a no hitter is twice is more likely in the NL then AL then that cheapens the no hitter in the NL...


theres also another argument that a perfect game is much cheaper in the NL...your batting avg stats dont account for walks...and im going to guess the DH allows for more men on base than pitchers that his..plus when men are on base..hits are easier...ie. drawn in infield etc..

By the way havent 17 of the last 20 no-hitters been in the NL?....i believe thats what wikipedia says (includes team no hitter of phillies we can throw out )

but also includes a AL 'no hitter' but that was agaisnt an NL team that didnt have a real DH.....still 16 out of 20 or whatever seems to be a lot of NL no-hitters versus AL no hitters no matter what team hitting averages are if wikipedia is right..

Before that it was also 12-8 AL and 24-16 over the previous 40. I say tomato, you say something. I don't really know what, but something. If you'd like to personally count an AL no-hitter as 1.3756 no-hitters I'm all for it. Draw up the paperwork and we'll submit it to Elias together. I can see it: me and you tearing through the countryside in a rag top like a modern day Charlie and Raymond Babbitt. Ladies... watch out.

right times have changed...its 16 or 17 versus 4 in the last 20 ......thats a huge disparity.....plus the disparity of much greater than the disparity of 12-8 or 24-16..that doesnt come close to 17-3..lets see two AL no hitters in a row before bring back this thread..

.there are also additional factors...such as pitches faced....i would suspect the pitch count gets higher when facing 3 DHs versus 3 hitting pitchers....

its 1 to 1.375 like you said but trend is everything....its trending in a much greater disparity...already a few close NL no hitters this year versus zero in AL.......i wish i could pay prices from 30 years ago for a rookie mantle but i cant..cause that time has passed.....we are now in the present....

There's been a significant increase in no-nos the last five years compared to annual average. Not sure why. What I do know is 1. I won't disparage any no hitter in any league; 2. The NL plays real baseball :); and 3. If you want to asterisk NL no hitters, be sure to asterisk AL world series championships. Fair trade.

I think the increase in no hitters is simple: for a long time people were cheating. Now they're not.

i think pitchers also dont hit like they did 30 years ago in regards to the NL no hitters...but i not looking at statistics...

OK, let's equal the playing field. Get rid of the DH in American League and a no-hitter will be of equal value.

unfortunately the league is looking for that to go the other way...

no hitter is a whole different animal than a perfect game...in a no hitter you can pitch around the 8th hitter with 2 outs to get to the pitcher.

Very few 8 hole hitters are pitched around. You almost universally go aggressive at the 8 hitter. O-1 outs you want the three/four holes batting early next inning so few people are on base. 2 outs or runner on, you want the pitcher leading off.

yet the pitcher makes the third out a ton...no way you allow a real hitter drive in a runner on 2nd with 2 out in a tied game when you can get an almost free out with the pitcher...8th hitters are intentionally walked sometimes..

I don't really understand what you're saying. Pitchers hit 8th, you can pinch hit for a pitcher, you can double switch, and the pitcher is never an automatic out unless he doesn't swing the bat. The NL experiences more no hitters because it has worse hitters. That's why when an NL pitcher goes to the American League, people are wary about how good they will be. It's not because they have to face one extra guy in the line up. Most of the line up is better.

who pinch hits for a pitcher in the 2nd and 4th inning......a pitcher hitting .100 is pretty much an automatic out compared to a DH.... ..not sure why 'most of the lineup' is better in the AL.... Pujols and many AL stars was in the NL before..and theres interleague......there are guys like Lester than go 1-40 etc....good luck finding a DH that can do that and still be in the lineup..you dont have to hit even terribly if you are pitcher....you can go 0-300 (Lester almost ) and still make millions as a pitcher...you cant do that has a DH..

yes everyone that has a bat can be dangerous...but still getting on base at a .170 clip is less dangerous than a .290 clip etc...if you face a 9 pitcher lineup (take the average of all pitchers that hit) ..you are going to get a no hitter faster than facing a 9 DHs. (take the average) no i dont have statistics but will make that big leap....

Someone already posted the averages of DH hitters around the league. They were not very high. The line ups are clearly better in the American League. Again, I will use the example of the free agent NL powerhouse pitcher who AL teams are reluctant to sign because they aren't sure how good they will be. That's because the AL is a stronger hitting league and it's not because of one additional guy.

Like what example......but the one additional guy probably gets 80 more rbis and 20 more homers than the guy guy in the NL...... where every out is tough for a no hitter , one additional guy is huge.....we arent talking seasons here...we are talking about those one or two of the best starts of a season for a pitcher on a particular night...getting to face a pitcher 2 times at least......plus as long as the NL pitcher goes to the AL and does better than 90% of AL pitchers that are there thats all teams are looking for..i think you are referring to fantasty baseball statistics...i dont care if i am paying a guy 'ace' money and his era is 6.7 as long as the league average is 8.0...for example...

so Kershaw would suck in the NL i guess.....plus its very common guys in the NL that have gotten no-nos like Heston....if the hitting is so weak in the NL...then again, that would support my argument that NL no hitters dont compare to AL no hitters ...so i guess you are supporting my argument in another way....

What other answer do you expect? The AL is a superior hitting league in general. It's not the DH that makes the difference. The entire team is better in the box because the AL game is geared towards high scoring games whereas the NL game is geared toward small ball. It's not just the pitcher who bunts in the NL. Everyone is counted on for a bunt. Hardly anyone bunts in the AL. It's a different game but it's not one guy who makes the difference.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. He's convinced he's right, and nothing is going to convince him otherwise.

"There have been more no hitters in the NL the last few years...pitchers hit in the NL....therefore, the lack of a designated hitter in the NL is responsible for the increase in no hitters!"

That is about as specious as logic gets. Never mind that between 2010 and 2012, in nine of the sixteen no hitters, it was an American League team being blanked. And the same DH configuration was in place then.

It couldn't be that the pitchers that have been throwing the no hitters in the NL are the best pitchers in the game, could it? Of the thirteen no hitters thrown since the start of the 2014 season, five have been thrown in the NL by recent Cy Young Award winners: Clayton Kershaw (one), Max Scherzer (two), Jake Arrieta (two). Four of the last seven have been by Scherzer and Arrieta. Since the start of 2014, seven of the top ten pitchers in baseball by ERA + (50 minimum starts) have been in the National League: Kershaw, Arrieta, Greinke, de Grom, Cueto, Harvey and Scherzer (Scherzer was in Detroit in '14, but has been in Washington since).

so theres the Pitcher hitting issue AND that the AL is a superior hitting league.....

wouldnt that mean an NL no hitter is clearly not as valuable as a AL no hitter.? i dont see how your argument is against my premise that AL no hitters should count much more than NL no hitters......

And the other poster says that there would be concerns that these NL guys wouldnt be as good in the AL.......ERA as a whole still means nothing..

even the chris heston's of the world have a great start or two in a year.....its on these one or two starts in which the pitcher hitting makes a big difference..and evidently the lineups are much better in the AL according to others in this thread

17 of the last 20 no hitters have been in the national league..... Arreta and Scherzer and Cueto, Grenike were in the AL at one time......why arent the AL cy young winners getting no hitters at the same rate as the NL counterparts...

the fact you really cant compare AL era to NL era (7 out of 10 era leaders in NL you stated ) because NL era is going to be lower shows again its easier to obtain runs in the AL.....

the other poster clearly doesnt think NL pitching translates to the AL..... Heston didnt win a cy young... ross stripling and adam conley with their 'almost no hitter' and the reason for this thread arent cy young worthy....thats my point...all of these almost no hitters in the NL is annoying.....AL no hitters is a whole different animal ..

You aren't taking into account who is being no hit. When David Cone threw his perfect game it was against the Expos, who were in the NL. This is just an example. If an NL pitcher throws a no hitter against an AL team, or vice-versa, I don't know what your premise means in terms of an AL no hitter being worth more.

Oh, brother. :rolleyes:

http://ephesusschool.org/wp-content/...orsewater.jpeg

i would count that Cone game as an NL game since its in an NL park with no DH....so yeah i do account for it..

i guess you are the horse being pulled? :) in any event always fun to talk baseball...i can be wrong or right who knows...but its not like no one shares my opinion..

The game was in New York and Wilton Guerrero was the Montreal DH.

David Cone's perfect game was at Yankee Stadium. I was there.

The "no hitter" is such an arbitrary, generally useless, designation anyway. Perfect game? Now that means something, but going 9 giving up no hits but walking 4+ is not a better pitching performance than a complete game shutout with 1 or 2 hits allowed and no walks. (etc etc....)

It's an old fashioned designation that probably needs to go the way of the dodo, (but never will)

from what i have read, you are pretty much wrong in every hot take you have. not sure how you can even afford to buy cards, but i guess wealth doesn't correlate with intelligence.

strikeouts are at an all time high, i would suspect that adds to the uptick in no-nos. if you can make contact there's a chance it'll find a hole. as for TJ pitchers are throwing harder than ever, and kids are throwing younger and year-round. i'm also pretty certain in the 30's and 40's alot of pitchers blew out their arms and needed TJ, but they just didn't know what it was at the time.

First of all, dont you have something better to do than to attack my intelligence on a thread where the last post was months ago until someone posted yesterday about that no hitters in general are arbitrary...so with that one post, you took it upon yourself to make a stupid comment......maybe you can wait a year next time to make a witty comeback on a thread.... who are you george constanza?

I didnt realize there was a right or wrong about whether an NL no hitter is much easier than an AL no hitter....... i thought there as a debate on the issue either way..and the large majority of the last 20 no hitters were NL or NL parks..there are many people that agree with my side on many things i have stated...you need to READ before you make self serving judgment..

plus your comment about how there is less contact, TJ surgery etc..would apply to both NL and AL...yet there are more almost NL no-nos and NL no nos in recent history than AL, which was my point.

what a witty post you had......thanks for the valuable contribution...

and you sound real intelligent when you attack a poster on their intelligence....thats real classy...

people can agree or disagree on things..but to say someone is an idiot really shows what kind of person you are when all it was supposed to be was a fun debate

Can add madison Baum's to the list.....NL no hitters and almost no hitters just arent like AL ones..

as I posted on the main page:

ALMOST a no-no, unlike some of the other 'advertised / hyped" on mlb.com, but...

speculation, of course, but MY personal opinion / thought is that the 'extended' offensive inning (Giants 7th) sucked a bit of momentum out of the Giants / Bum with the 2 insurance runs.

with 14 K's and only 1 BB, and with the exception of that one - solid - hit, MadBum was otherwise untouchable.

again, JMO, but one helluva great individual performance.

I see your point, Jake - TO A POINT - but...just sayin'.

fun game to watch - was pulling for the no-no.

i agree that many of these 'almost' No-NOs' are getting annoying on the MLB hype machine and that Bum's was much better than many this year..but again he got 2 outs from Archie Bradley who would be worse than every DH in the AL, pitch count would of been higher with a DH in most cases as well.....thus an AL almost no hitter would of meant something more...like i said in he original post, we keep hearing about NL no hitters.....much more than AL

Edwin Jackson 'almost' no hitter and was another one too..

Idk if I posted this already, but the entire "NO HITTER' thing is just a big hype machine. So many of them are not even that impressive of a performance (ie. lots of walks, amazing defensive plays behind the pitcher saving his butt) but ESPN and MLB Network are in the bidness of making $$$ so hype they do.

as far as the difference between the NL and the AL, facing a pitcher 2 times vs a DH (and the days of the monster DH as a rule are mostly over with a few exceptions) just isn't that huge. All a no hitter is ,is a confluence of variables leading to a result . But since there have been nearly 300 of them in MLB history, one can't even call them rare. They just are a flukey thing that happens every once in awhile when a pitcher's on the batters off and the defense is on point.


Would you say a 9 inning no hitter with 6 walks is MORE impressive than a one hit shutout with zero walks? I would argue the latter was the superior pitched game.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/matt-wi...062249296.html

NL almost no hitters just go on and on......the actual no hitters in the NL arent that big a deal compared to the AL, so why even mention it when its a NON no hitter....

Matt Moore came within one out of a no hitter last night for the Giants against the Dodgers.

8 2/3.
 

not exactly a "nothingburger"

Right i thought the article adressed it....it was on same night as the Matt W.s on the braves.... they not even no hitters and are in the NL....can join the list of edwin jackson and many many NL others.....theres a reason this is happening more in the NL as far as almost no hitters go...

No, they should just do away with the DH.