NFBC Message Boards

Should Tim Lincecum's no-hitter today get an asterisk because it was against the Padres?

In all seriousness, does anyone recall a worse offensive team than the 2014 Padres? I can't.

Mike

Probably the Tiger team that broke the record for futility back in what year was that? 200*?

Bronx Yankees wrote:Should Tim Lincecum's no-hitter today get an asterisk because it was against the Padres?

In all seriousness, does anyone recall a worse offensive team than the 2014 Padres? I can't.

Mike

The Padres are hitting .213 as a team. Only the 1968 Mets have hit that poorly (.214) in the last 100 years. This is a historically bad Padres team, but no-hitting them with only one walk is still an amazing feat. Kudos to the man with the cool moustache!!

Greg Ambrosius wrote:

Bronx Yankees wrote:Should Tim Lincecum's no-hitter today get an asterisk because it was against the Padres?

In all seriousness, does anyone recall a worse offensive team than the 2014 Padres? I can't.

Mike

The Padres are hitting .213 as a team. Only the 1968 Mets have hit that poorly (.214) in the last 100 years. This is a historically bad Padres team, but no-hitting them with only one walk is still an amazing feat. Kudos to the man with the cool moustache!!

They get two hits out of every ten at bats on average. This would be 6 hits in 30 at bats. Essentially, all Lincecum did was prevent about 4-5 hits they would normally get per game from happening. Is this really such a feat?

Padres average 7 hits a game, not 4-5.

Here's a list of all the other pitchers that have no-hit the Padres this year and last.
































.

ToddZ wrote:Padres average 7 hits a game, not 4-5.

Here's a list of all the other pitchers that have no-hit the Padres this year and last.
































.

GetALife wrote:

Greg Ambrosius wrote:

Bronx Yankees wrote:Should Tim Lincecum's no-hitter today get an asterisk because it was against the Padres?

In all seriousness, does anyone recall a worse offensive team than the 2014 Padres? I can't.

Mike

The Padres are hitting .213 as a team. Only the 1968 Mets have hit that poorly (.214) in the last 100 years. This is a historically bad Padres team, but no-hitting them with only one walk is still an amazing feat. Kudos to the man with the cool moustache!!

They get two hits out of every ten at bats on average. This would be 6 hits in 30 at bats. Essentially, all Lincecum did was prevent about 4-5 hits they would normally get per game from happening. Is this really such a feat?

The pressure on the pitcher builds as he gets deeper into a no-hitter because everybody dreams about throwing one. Also, teams don't particularly enjoy the attention that accompanies being no-hit, so they're bearing down to try and break it up.

Now, if you're proposing asterisks for home runs hit off Vidal Nuno, I might be willing to listen.

For a short spell, I was in the "no-hitters are more luck than anything else" crowd.

Then I remembered I really, really love baseball.

Granted, there's some luck, for sure. I believe a 20-K, 0 BB, 3-hitter is a better pitched game than most no-hitters.

But I really, really love baseball.

And one reason is baseball has more of these unique game events than any other sport. Others are more into the history of the game than I but no one derives as much pleasure from simply watching a game as I do. Stuff like a no-hitter embellishes that.

That said, the attention given for hitting for the cycle is goofy.

ToddZ wrote:For a short spell, I was in the "no-hitters are more luck than anything else" crowd.

Then I remembered I really, really love baseball.

Granted, there's some luck, for sure. I believe a 20-K, 0 BB, 3-hitter is a better pitched game than most no-hitters.

But I really, really love baseball.

And one reason is baseball has more of these unique game events than any other sport. Others are more into the history of the game than I but no one derives as much pleasure from simply watching a game as I do. Stuff like a no-hitter embellishes that.

That said, the attention given for hitting for the cycle is goofy.

I totally agree.

I have the baseball TV package, have had it for 6 or 7 years. I watch a lot of baseball. Yet I can't remember the last time I watched a Giants game in the last five years that didn't include the Cubs.

Oh wait, I remember....

I turned them on yesterday in the 7th inning when I heard Lincecum had a no-hitter going, and I turned them on two years ago when Matt Cain had his Perfect Game going.

As a baseball fan, watching something special happen on the field is fun.

I hope I can see a no-hitter in person some day.