Game score is one of the dumbest sports related concepts ever.

If a pitcher retires 27 batsmen (or more, if the game goes into extras) in a row without any of them reaching base via any method, he gets awarded a perfect game.

Always happy to explain baseball to you, Frank Frenchtoast.

1) According to the update I heard on The Score this morning, MLB no longer recognizes games that go into extra innings as a perfect game, or a no hitter.

Then IMU is wrong. Shocking.

How am I wrong. Rich Hill could have gotten a no hitter if he pitched 10 no hit innings and the Dodgers won. Or 11 or 18 or however many innings. As my post said, 27 or more hitters.

As bad as ERA, Pitching Wins, and OPS+

"finish what?" - Trig

"you'll know when it happens." - Frank

#anhistoryofbaseball

Uh...what?

You can always have a better more informed opinion on everything. I'm comfortable with mine on this topic. Anything arguing imperfect is better than perfect is pretty severely flawed.

:lol:

Good luck convincing Sox fans that nuance exists in baseball/life.

You can't just say some dumb shit and then call it nuance.

It's judging the performance not the result.

I mean a perfect game could technically be 27 rockets robbed from home runs by the outfield.

I think saying that type of performance is better than striking out 26 with a groundout and a hbp is wrong.

But the whole point of these advance stars os to project the future, not judge the past. So you like the 20k guy more than the guy who pitched well but got a lot of luck and or defense behind them.

My scenario explains perfectly why results do not always line up equally with performance.

Especially since the results are tied to other players (defense, opponent) and we're trying to judge a single performance.

In your belief system, Willie Harris making a great catch made Buehrles performance better than guys who had worse fielders behind them make errors late in perfect games on routine grounders, which is ridiculous.

Dewayne Wise

Oh man. And after I mocked the MANY times announcers mixed up Heyward and Fowler last year


Harris scored the most important run in White Sox history though.

But the whole point of these advance stars os to project the future, not judge the past. So you like the 20k guy more than the guy who pitched well but got a lot of luck and or defense behind them.

My scenario explains perfectly why results do not always line up equally with performance.

Especially since the results are tied to other players (defense, opponent) and we're trying to judge a single performance.

In your belief system, Willie Harris making a great catch made Buehrles performance better than guys who had worse fielders behind them make errors late in perfect games on routine grounders, which is ridiculous.

Yes. White Sox hero.

It's better than saying dumb shit and calling it a good thought. Ah-hem!

If you take it further though it could have been on that same catch that the batter closed his eyes and swung randomly and got incredibly lucky on a great pitch. That's why it is better to judge the result.

We should take it a step further and not even look at the result of a pitch. Just look at position and velocity and determine what is good and bad. Then do the same for batters in how good they swung. Ignore strikes and balls and hits and home runs as neither can control 100% of the pitching matchup. Or we could just watch darts.

Sounds good. Happy Friday.

You can't just say some dumb shit and then call it nuance.