These NL late inning 'no-hitters' are annoying

[the 'stache]

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

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..

[1952boyntoncollector]

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..

[sbfinley]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

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.

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by sbfinley

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....

[Dewey]

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.

[packs]

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