These NL late inning 'no-hitters' are annoying

[celoknob]

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

[sbfinley]

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

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.

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

[HRBAKER]

Originally Posted by celoknob

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

.....less