Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

[Blzer]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

Ya, I don't know why people keep bringing this up...it really had nothing to do with the no-no imo.

Sorry, I didn't see the play so I didn't know.

But anyway, as I was indicating in my post, I would take Tim Hudson's line tonight over Liriano's any day of the week. I think most people would agree, but I also think the no-hitter thing gets looked at way too heavily. Tim threw first pitch strikes to 90% of the batters that he faced and didn't walk anyone until Weeks with two outs in the ninth. That's not throwing around anyone to avoid getting hit (which he only allowed one, also to Weeks). That's what I call a studly performance; not that Liriano's wasn't obviously, but it's an indication of what it could take to obtain a no-hitter (and how some as of late have actually earned theirs).

I just wanted to make the point that perfect games and no-hitters should always be treated as two different achievements, and IMO a no-hitter is closer to a one-hitter than it is to a perfect game.

[SPTO]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

But anyway, as I was indicating in my post, I would take Tim Hudson's line tonight over Liriano's any day of the week.

This is interesting because last year after Brandon Morrow's 1 hitter against the Rays there were some numbers crunching and Morrow's 1 hitter was determined to be the 7th greatest single game performance by a starter.

I wish I remembered where they got the info but I know for a fact that what I just said is true.

[JBH3]

The blown call was on a fielder's choice, not a hit.

....and since the runner was called out, but was safe there was one less batter in the game. No? That doesn't effect anything?

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

....and since the runner was called out, but was safe there was one less batter in the game. No? That doesn't effect anything?

Like I said in my post, 33 other batters had a chance to get a hit and didn't. I don't get why some people have to nitpick this or any other no-hitter. It's not the first or last time there's going to be an ugly no-hitter. Let's just call it that and move on. I believe that's what we did with Edwin Jackson's last year.

EDIT: I just found the Edwin Jackson thread. It's pretty much the exact same thing as this thread, lol. Blzer even defended the honor of the perfect game in that one too!

[JBH3]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

Like I said in my post, 33 other batters had a chance to get a hit and didn't. I don't get why some people have to nitpick this or any other no-hitter. It's not the first or last time there's going to be an ugly no-hitter. Let's just call it that and move on. I believe that's what we did with Edwin Jackson's last year.

EDIT: I just found the Edwin Jackson thread. It's pretty much the exact same thing as this thread, lol. Blzer even defended the honor of the perfect game in that one too!

lol @ "defending the honor"....

"33 other batters had a chance".....yea, but all it takes is just one to get a hit. That "one" could've been the next hitter w/ a safe call at first.

[Blzer]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

EDIT: I just found the Edwin Jackson thread. It's pretty much the exact same thing as this thread, lol. Blzer even defended the honor of the perfect game in that one too!

And I'll do it to death haha. Perfect games and no-hitters are two different leagues of excellence (even though both should be considered so short-lived and have no bearing on how good a pitcher truly is).

[ImTellinTim]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

And I'll do it to death haha. Perfect games and no-hitters are two different leagues of excellence (even though both should be considered so short-lived and have no bearing on how good a pitcher truly is).

I called Jackson's no-hitter "junky", lol.

[snepp]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

....and since the runner was called out, but was safe there was one less batter in the game. No? That doesn't effect anything?

Theoretically it could have, but unlike the blown call in the Gallaraga game it didn't directly affect the status of the no-hitter/perfecto.

Are you going to play that same game with every ball that should have been called a strike, or every strike that should have been a ball? They could have led to additional plate appearances. Where does it end?

[JBH3]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

Theoretically it could have, but unlike the blown call in the Gallaraga game it didn't directly affect the status of the no-hitter/perfecto.

Hindsight being 20/20, you are correct.

Are you going to play that same game with every ball that should have been called a strike, or every strike that should have been a ball? They could have led to additional plate appearances. Where does it end?

No - My thought process was only extended to balls in play.

[djep]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

It was only a 1-0 game so I definitely don't think it was the worst ever. He didn't have any margin for error when it came to winning the game. That said I've seen much more dominant starts from guys who've given up a couple runs and 5+ hits.

[CabreraMVP]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

No hitters like Jackson's and burnetts aren't that impressive. They threw them because they were effectively wild. It says a lot about a pitcher if it takes 150 pitches to get 27 outs with no hits.

Verlander was different. He threw 112 pitches, 12 strikeouts, 4 walks, and was throwing 100 in the 9th. Dominant.

Halladay just goes out there and throws his no hitters in what seems like 30 minutes. Dominant pitchers, impressive no hitters.

But when a guy is walking 8 or 9 people, and the team is contemplating skipping your next 2 starts just because they felt the need to stretch you out to 2423423 pitches to finish off the game, I don't think it's very special.

Liriano's was not the prettiest, but I feel like it was much better than Jackson's or Burnett's. It was somewhere in the middle.

He loses some points because of how terrible Chicago is right now. Lol. I mean Brad Penny 1 hit them last week through 7 innings and that 1 hit was a bad scoring decision which should have been an error.

[mgoblue678]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

No hitters like Jackson's and burnetts aren't that impressive. They threw them because they were effectively wild. It says a lot about a pitcher if it takes 150 pitches to get 27 outs with no hits.

Verlander was different. He threw 112 pitches, 12 strikeouts, 4 walks, and was throwing 100 in the 9th. Dominant.

Halladay just goes out there and throws his no hitters in what seems like 30 minutes. Dominant pitchers, impressive no hitters.

But when a guy is walking 8 or 9 people, and the team is contemplating skipping your next 2 starts just because they felt the need to stretch you out to 2423423 pitches to finish off the game, I don't think it's very special.

Liriano's was not the prettiest, but I feel like it was much better than Jackson's or Burnett's. It was somewhere in the middle.

He loses some points because of how terrible Chicago is right now. Lol. I mean Brad Penny 1 hit them last week through 7 innings and that 1 hit was a bad scoring decision which should have been an error.

While to be fair Brad Penny has an ERA under 2 in his last 4 starts. He is only 2.5-3 years removed from starting in the All-Star game.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

I don't know if it's "the worst"....but homerism aside, I think Hudson's one-hitter last week was much more impressive.

[55]

Re: Was Liriano's No-No the Worst Ever?

No hitters like Jackson's and burnetts aren't that impressive.

There have been over 390,000 major league baseball games played and there have been 271 no-hitters, or 263 if you discount the times it took more than one pitcher to no-hit an opponent. That means a no-hitter occurs about once every 1,500 games played, which is less than twice per season since there are now exactly 2,430 major league games played per year. I fail to see how something so rare is not impressive regardless of how many pitches they throw and/or how many walks they issue. Any way you slice it, the pitcher needs to get 27 outs without issuing a base hit to pull it off. No matter the circumstances, that is pretty damn impressive to me.

[Dog]

There have been over 390,000 major league baseball games played and there have been 271 no-hitters, or 263 if you discount the times it took more than one pitcher to no-hit an opponent. That means a no-hitter occurs about once every 1,500 games played, which is less than twice per season since there are now exactly 2,430 major league games played per year. I fail to see how something so rare is not impressive regardless of how many pitches they throw and/or how many walks they issue. Any way you slice it, the pitcher needs to get 27 outs without issuing a base hit to pull it off. No matter the circumstances, that is pretty damn impressive to me.

Or lucky. Or the opposing offense was just really off. Or the defense behind the pitcher was really good. Or a combination of all of that.


It's like hitting for the cycle - pretty rare feat, but doesn't really mean that the player is all that good.

It's impressive to the extent that it's so rare in my opinion

Sent from my LG Ally using Tapatalk