These NL late inning 'no-hitters' are annoying

[packs]

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

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....

[packs]

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

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....

[packs]

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.

[the 'stache]

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).

Originally Posted by packs

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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).

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 ..

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

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.

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......