Back to Boards



Impressive as it is , Madison Bumgarner's 7 inning no hitter is not considered an official no hitter. D backs only gave up 1 hit in 14 ip


I think it is ridiculous that it is not counted. MLB changed the rules for double headers this year, so it has to count. If all other stats are being counted, then no-hitters need to count as well. BTW... I wish the double headers were still 9 innings.

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

Harold Reynolds actually said it well. Watch how the players react. If they just line up and shake hands as if it were any other victory, then don't count it. If they celebrate it like it was 9 innings then count it.
Obviously they mobbed him on the mound.
I get those last 6 outs are crazy tough. But when you know it's a 7 inning game, I can assure you the pressure and excitement in the 6th and 7th innings are there. On both sides.


Just like Harvey Haddix is not considered a no hitter its still an amazing feat. Arizona only allowed 1 hit yesterday that was amazing too.


So if the game had been rained out after 7 would we look at it the same way? Seems like if enough innings are played to be an official game it should be a no-no.

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

MLB changed the rules in 1991 ,I think the 7 inning doubleheader and runner on 2nd to start extra innings should be scrapped.


I don't mind the 7 inning DH. I disdain using the 2nd base runner in extras in the majors. Minors OK.
In the Atlantic league, an independent league, they are playing with the pitchers mound at 61'6" instead of 60'6".
They are also using a special DH rule. You are allowed a DH as long as your starting pitcher is still in the game. Once you pull your starter you lose the DH. The pitcher must bat or you have to waste a PH.

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

i have an idea for a hybrid dh rule. from innings 1 thru 8 you can insert your dh in to bat anywhere each time thru the lineup without losing the player he batted for, of course most of the time it would be the pitchers spot but there would be strategy. From innings 9 on it would be NL rules and the dh would have to play a defensive pos or be removed.


These new rules are in there to avoid crippling the pitching staff... and to avoid those crazy 10 hours games...

I absolutely hate the backing up the mound stuff...

I personnaly think the 2 x 7 innings double header are so-so...

But I absolutely love the runner on 2nd extra innings for the regular season...its very dynamic, something will happen every innings... I canT stand the never ending games in regular season...

one thing I can't see anymore is those teams with 2 players on the bench and a full squad of 10 interchangeable fireballer, they have no personality, no identity.... its like having 10 clones in the bullpen

It was ridiculous to see that LA had to use in desperation Kershaw as a pinch hitter in the 10th in crunch time the other day..... We don't pay or spend our time watching a ball game to see a pitcher hitting...

anyway... half of these fireballers are going to last 30 to 40 innings during the season or max 2 season and they all end up subscribing to join the massive Tommy John surgery waiting list afterwards...

+ it's on the hitters to exploit these guys and the special defense and stretch the field when hitting so they can take advantage later...

Teams should carry a max amount of pitchers in their lineup... time to give value back to the rubber arms, the crafty pitchers who will eat some innings...

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

I think the idea with the rubber back a foot is to cut down on the HR or K every at bat. Currently the league as a whole is striking out over 24% of the time. An all time high.

I love the you get a DH as long as the starter is in the game. You will have to let your starter go a little longer or use up pinch hitters. Ans as the previous gentleman stated, there are too many arms in the pen.
This rule will force teams to keep an extra bat on the bench and less in the pen.


The 24% strikeout rate is way more on the hitters than on the pitchers...

As the new hitting approach now says that it is better to take a hack even at 2 strikes and pray for a homerun... and accept the strikeout as a results instead of trying to protect the plate and go for contact with 2 strikes....

I saw a game the other day... the game leadoff hitter for the Jays was Biggio, hitting way below Mendoza line and whiffing at a ridiculous rate... facing Scherzer with a defensive switch on top of it....

With no 3rd baseman in place, he opened up the game by bunting on the absent third base side for an easy leadoff bunt hit and an easy on base presence to open the game... With red hot Bichette and Guerrero coming up, for me this is just a no brainer of a move by Biggio...

Why are these guys just not pulling this more often is killing me....

For me this should be repeated until the special defense dies...
Most of the hitters succefull at doing so will see their average jump by 50 points just by having the defense strectched out for every body in the lineup...

It's not like the new approach of all out HR vs K gives out such a huge jump in runs scored per games...

+ it kills any game in game strategy, making it games fairly boring to watch....

I can't believe players aren't taking the bag when it is offer on a silver plate or even going opposite more often...

Most of the times these opposite field base hits are killers.... If I can recall just couple of years ago Anthony rendon won the world series by himself just spreading the ball around the field...

the record low of this year global offensive stats are plain ridiculous and way more on hitters stubborn robotic approach...

leagues avg .232 / OBP .309 / SLG .389 / 9.09 K per games / OPS .696 / 7,6 hit per game....

Just by exploiting the special defense couple of times a game at a 50% succes rate, the hit per game will jump and make a big difference in end game results...

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

Agree totally about hitting against the shift. If you don't want to see teams shift, move them out of it by "hitting it where they aint".
Right now viewership is way up on TV. ESPN said they are getting 4 million a game avg. Mostly this to Dodgers/Padres hype (they were fun games).
Back to hitting. I bought this year so I could watch the Royals. (Masochist). So far they are pleasing me, lol.
Whit Merrifield, who the KC announcers call "two hit Whit" and now "multi-hit Whit". Does what you described vs shift. He actually had the longes streak in the majors with 30+ at bats without a K.
Pretty pathetic that, that was the longest going.
The HR or nothing thing drives me nuts as well, lol.


I agree that this is almost all about strikeouts and hitters swinging for the fences on every pitch regardless of situation or count.

I don't think the shift is that successful actually. Take a look at these numbers from baseball reference:

Batting Average on Balls in Play
1961: .279
1971: .276
1981: .279
2021: .283

Batting Average on Ground Balls

1988 (first year with data): .214
2021: .226

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

Could be selection bias. Is there any sort of exit velo (for when that has been tracked) vs. BA on ground ball data over the past few years?

Perhaps without the shift, that number would have increased much much more


It could be selection bias, and this article suggests the shift works:
But, this article does not compare the same data to previous seasons like 1989 when the shift was much more rare. So, the real answer is: who knows?

It may be that batters hit all balls harder now and without shifts, batting average on grounders would have soared and shifts are keeping them relatively similar.

It may be that grounders were hit harder in the past because there were guys trying to hit the ball on the ground in the 70s and 80s, whereas now all grounders are accidents.

It could be that defensive positioning through advanced analytics makes defenses better.

It could also be that by having analysts (through coaches) tell young players where to position themselves vs every batter, those young players lose the opportunity to learn how to read a hitter and a pitcher and position themselves. Thus, defensive positioning is based off of averages and not off of specific situations where the defender can see things about the batter and pitcher than lead him to shift himself. It is my belief that guys like Cal Ripken were experts at this (why his dWar is so high) and Jeter, while athletic, was not good at this (why his dwar is so low). Maybe the gains from the shift are canceled out by making fielders a little bit worse overall.

It is impossible to tell because we don't have data for the past and there are so many aspects that play into batting average on balls in play or on ground balls.

All I know is that batting averages are plummeting and it isn't because averages on balls in play is dropping. It is because batters are striking out at insane rates. Runs scored per game are not at all time levels, so the offensive strategy of swing for the fences doesn't really seem to be the best at the team level (even if it is the best at the individual level).

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

The runs per game thing might also be selection bias, given the quality of pitching. Perhaps if hitters still had old approaches, runs would be way down (not out of the question with velocity increases).

Interesting point about general defenses. That does make sense about instinct and positioning and all that, but I would hope it is still captured in the data. It might not be.

Finally, boiling down whether or not the shift is successful to BA on ground balls is a little simplistic, in my opinion. For example, if a hitter isn't shifted on, he might hit normally with a distribution of singles, doubles, homers, etc. If a hitter is shifted on, he might alter his approach to increase batting average because he has half the field open to him and hit more singles that way. But that isn't the way he naturally hits, and even if he is hitting for a higher average as a whole, his ISO might be down and he might be a worse hitter.


Good points all around. It is a very complicated issue.

I'm in the camp of believing too much emphasis is put on throwing hard and hitting the ball hard to the point that there are declining returns.

Velocity is great, but control matters. Spin rate matters even at low velocity. Being smart and having a variety of deliveries and pitches to keep a hitter off balance matters.

By the same token, hitting hard is great, but not when most the hitters on a team can't make contact with a runner on 3B and 0 outs because they are all swinging out of their shoes.

I feel the game has gotten younger and faster, but skill/baseball IQ is declining. Not in the superstars- Nolan Ryan threw as hard as anyone and Mike Trout has as a high a baseball IQ as Mays or anyone else- but the average player.

I'm not so sure it doesn't all wash out- increase in velocity (throwing and exit) is balanced out by decrease in baseball IQ. I am sure that it is hurting the entertainment value of the game.

I feel like things have come full circle- in the past traditionalists knew everything because they were experts, and Sabermeticians like Bill James came along and showed the baseball world that they were wrong about a lot. That was good for the game, imo. But now we have a game run by data analysts that are sure they know everything because of the data, but the truth is they only know A) what the data they have allows them to know, and B) what they have thought of to ask the data. That is, they are also limited. I hope Sabermetricians will come along and point out where today's game is wrong about what they believe and keep improving it.

Re: Re: NO NO-NO

If a guy like Ichiro ,Gwynn or Boggs nowaday would show up... they would kill their skills, tell them to elevate the ball instead and aim for a ,230 batting avg, 28 hrs and 200 K season...

Greg Maddux would be force to play in an Independant League Baseball because is fastball is not good enough....


Unsure about the first point. There are a few contact, lack of strikeout guys in the league. There are just fewer of them. If the trio you mentioned were coming up through the system, they would make it and then hit enough to stay up the way they are.