Ceetar wrote: Bay at .187 Davis at.188 Valdespin at .190 We should take bets on which of these poinies hits the tape first. 1:2 Davis 5:1 Bay 10:1 Valdespin Fifty kwacha on Jordany.
Well, not really. While we have more runs gained than yielded, a Pythag. surplus will come when our Pythagorean winning percentage exceeds our actual winning percentage.
Edgy DC wrote: I'm coming around to the (absolutely stupid) notion that no-hitters will be like opening day wins for us --- a thing that we go from being associated with only in terms of failure to being associated with in earnest. Like we'll be reading "Yet Another No-Hitter for the Mets!" How's that for crazy giddy stupid? Almost, huh?
John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: It was obvious to me that Wright flubbed the play because he was aware Upton had wheels and rushed as a result but I want to call it an error because he failed to pick it cleanly, whether or not he had a shot with a strong throw we'll never know. Man, if anybody should have a scouting report on a member of the Norfolk Mafia, Wright should.
Can't imagine his agent asking for less than, say, Oliver Perez. Three years, $39 million. If I was negotiating with him now I'd imagine we'd be around there with perhaps performance clauses taking me to $45 million. If he continues anything like his currently level of success, $45 becomes a floor in two months. If he wins the Cy Young, well, that's Sandy's headache. There's just so little precedent for this. A journeyman pitcher who has a negligible impact (0.2 WAR) through 34, and then becomes one of the top pitchers in the league from 35 onward? There were Hollafamers who had checked out by 34. (Catfish Hunter, f'rinstance.) This freak was just getting started.
Yeah, it's still a no-hitter, just not a complete game affair. Neil Allen had one of those once also. Not a no-hitter, but a game he entered in relief with no outs in the first, and he went on to complete it. Under the old rules, he got credited with a complete came, but no more. OE: HA! He replaced Leiter! http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK198805310.shtml
There's the ongoing issue that there really aren't professional standards among official scorers. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it's still a safe bet that tough calls are more likely to fall on the side of giving a hit to the home player. And the league office is the objective arbiter. I guess what I mean to the say is the league should be reviewing close calls without a team having to pettily diminish themselves by filing a protest.