Hitting for a Cycle..whats the big deal

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Runscott

We got your point that it is not as important to the team as other feats, but your questioning why it is celebrated is still a head-scratcher.

But I also question why Karl would want to throw his old furniture in a volcano. It is normal to not understand everyone, and in some cases desirable.

If i understood everyone on this forum, I would be seeing a shrink in the morning.

[Econteachert205]

Would it be similar to say what is so great about a hat trick in hockey... From the perspective of if I score two goals and assist on two then technically I was involved in four scores versus just a hat trick with no assist? It's not a perfect comparison. There is no comparable for football or basketball, but what has always set baseball apart in my mind is the statistical obsession, which I like. That was what was so terrible about steroids, baseball is a stat guys dream.

[digdugdig]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Would it be similar to say what is so great about a hat trick in hockey... From the perspective of if I score two goals and assist on two then technically I was involved in four scores versus just a hat trick with no assist? It's not a perfect comparison. There is no comparable for football or basketball, but what has always set baseball apart in my mind is the statistical obsession, which I like. That was what was so terrible about steroids, baseball is a stat guys dream.

Mario Lemieux once had a 5 goal game in which he scored 1 goal in each of the 5 ways you can score (statistically) ... even strength, powerplay, shorthanded, penalty shot, and empty net. I can't remember his personal best for goals scored in one game but I do remember that.
It's an individual accomplishment that's just plain and simply "kinda cool".
Like an unassisted triple play as opposed to one with multiple players involved ... "kinda cool".

Evidently, the players think so as well. Read where Brock Holt was told by his teammates (needing a 3B in his last AB) ... you hit one in the gap, you just keep running.

[drcy]

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by drcy

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

If you already have two Yahtzees and need a straight...

[drcy]

A home run is a home run is a home run, but when a ball goes over the fence via bouncing off of Jose Canseco's head, now that's special.

[Runscott]

After last year's debacle regarding what constituted a 'catch', and the debacle years back where they tried to call high strikes accurately...oh yes, and the 'designated hitter' debacle, here's what I propose for MLB's next major rule screw-up:

• if the ball hits any part of a player or his glove while any part of the player's body is touching the field, then the ball is treated as if it hit the field.
• if the ball touches any part of the player or his glove, and NO part of his body is in contact with the field, then the ball is treated as if it is still in the air.

Under this proposed new rule, the ball off Jose's head would only be a HR if he were in the air when it hit his head; otherwise it would be a ground rule double.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by drcy

While not unimpressive, a cycle as a particularly special event is a human cognitive bias. Two doubles, a triple and a home run is a better game. Two home runs and two doubles is a better game.

While getting those cycle hits makes for an impressive game, its perceived specialness is akin to numerology. I remember it was said that one player going for a cycle and needing just the double, purposely slowed down to make a triple into a double-- which says all you need to know. He made what in reality would be a more productive game (higher slugging percentage) into a less productive one in order to hit the numerology eye candy mark.

yeah you said that better than I was trying to say it..people been attacking my example of staying on third if hit a home run for the cycle..but the issue of staying for a single versus a double must of happened I thought, and it appears there was an issue of that in reality...not hard to think that that would happen.......and as far has numerology, they need a HBP and a walk as well for a full cycle...heck maybe getting on base on a K and on a catcher interference.(which may mean by error)..that's 7 ways to get on base...any other ways?


Also Kelly Gruber said this when all he needed was a singe for the cycle April 16, 1989...to even consider this shows you how silly the cycle is and how hitting 2 homers and 2 doubles is much better

“That was the toughest at bat I can remember having. Anytime you have to come up there looking for a single, there’s extra pressure. Do I go for two if I have the chance? Or do I stay on first and look silly?”

[packs]

I never understood the allure of the perfect game. The fans want to see homers and doubles. Not fly outs and grounders. So why don't the pitchers stop being so selfish and let a guy get some licks? It's what people want and it's good for everyone's stats.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by packs

I never understood the allure of the perfect game. The fans want to see homers and doubles. Not fly outs and grounders. So why don't the pitchers stop being so selfish and let a guy get some licks? It's what people want and it's good for everyone's stats.

Right but its not like the Pitcher can do 'something less' to get a perfect game.....even for a 'no-hitter' the pitcher can throw wildly un purpose on a close play at first to maybe get an 'error' and preserve the no-hitter...they can also on a 3-0 count just throw ball 4 to not let the hitter get some good swings in that are more likely to get a hit..... a Perfect game is light years better than a no hitter...plus its more of a team stat cause other players on defense cant commit an error...