Chalk mark or kicked up dirt?
Mets fans have waited a long time for the game they saw last night at CitiField. 8,019 games and 52 years to be exact. In the interim, they had 6 no-hitters pitched against them, 35 1-hitters pitched for them and seemingly countless ex-Mets (Ryan, Seaver, Gooden, Cone, Humber, etc) pitch no-no’s and perfect games either before or after being affiliated with the club. Websites have been devoted to this cause, and radio broadcaster Howie Rose has been chasing this white whale to the ends of the Earth for at least the past 20 years.
Amidst the joy and celebration of the Johan Santana no hitter and that huge monkey being lifted off the collective backs of Mets fans last night, we had some of the usual fare from various questioning the validity of last night’s outcome. Its straight from the media playbook. In every no-hitter there has to be at least one great defensive play and one controversial call by an umpire. Has to. The media is a business like any other, and every business has tried and true techniques to get people to do what they want, in this case to generate interest and discussion about an event. The added public interest makes the event seem important on the surface, the same way that playoff games feel more important than regular season games. But at the end of the day it’s all just baseball, and luck is weaved heavily throughout the game. Whether in a playoff game, a no-hitter or a Tuesday game in May, it has always struck me as displaying a fundamental lack of understanding about the game to attribute credit or assign blame for an outcome based on any one or two plays. There are so many variables, so much randomness that can occur on every one of the 27 outs. The difference in a batter producing the trajectory that sends the ball past a fielder’s glove is literally millimeters on the bat off a 90+ MPH pitch that is bending and sinking either toward or away from him. If we are to closely examine any one play, to be fair we should go back and micro-analyze all of the other 26 outs. We should also go through every pitch to see which borderline pitches were actually strikes and which weren’t. If we did that, we would quickly be led away from scapegoating and toward a larger truth.
Nolan Ryan, who knows a thing or two about throwing no-hitters, has often been quoted saying he had better stuff and better control in some of his one-hitters and two-hitters. But in those games some bottom-of-the-lineup batter was beaten on a pitch, took a half-hearted defensive swing and blooped the ball over the head of one of the infielders. Or dribbled a swinging bunt in the no man’s land between the pitcher and third baseman. Conversely, in some of his no-hitters he had innings where he threw some awful pitches, the hitters crushed the ball, but they went right at a fielder. So clearly the skill contribution on the part of the pitcher isn’t enough to get you from the pedestrian land of 1 hitters to the promised land of no-hitters. The difference between a 1 (or 2) hitter and a no hitter is really all about luck. Have the Mets up to this point been unlucky as a franchise? Bill Buckner would beg to differ. Beating the juggernaut Oriole’s in 1969 is still considered a miracle to this day. It may have taken 52 years to have the no-hitter come up on the Mets roulette wheel, but that’s life in the casino.
So congratulations go out to Mets fans, and now that you’ve got that monkey off your collective backs you can take a step back and see these games for what they are. Just a roll of baseball’s slot machine where the three 7s finally comes up. Last night was your night, and maybe after your long drought you have some mojo heading your way.
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
I think there’s a big difference between the luck involved in having a ball hit right at a fielder and an obvious blown call by an umpire. Both no-hitters this year have had the benefit of what can, at the least, be called questionable umpiring decisions. I don’t want to rain on Santana’s or the Mets’ parade but this “no-hitter” does have a taint on it as does Humber’s “perfect game” earlier this year.
Yes, luck is involved in baseball but many other no-hitters have not rested on it in such an obvious way.
Yes, luck is involved in baseball but many other no-hitters have not rested on it in such an obvious way.
Maybe not in obvious ways, but someone with your appreciation of the game can see how deeply interwoven luck is throughout the game. What about balls and strikes? A pitch called a strike that is outside the zone is a blown call by an umpire, and can dramatically change an AB. It could decide whether the hitter or pitcher is in the driver’s seat, or send the hitter back to the dugout and give the pitcher one of his 27 outs unjustly.
I’m simply arguing that no-hitter’s really aren’t that big of a deal. Except in the cases of a Ryan or Verlander (who can be unhittable on some nights) they’re largely a function of luck, and getting calls by the umpire is part of being lucky. People make way too much of these anomalies. Look at the list of pitchers who’ve thrown no-hitters and perfect games, its loaded with mediocrity.
As to previous no-hitters, with all the networks and camera angles we have today, I would argue we are more aware of blown calls. I grew up when there were just two cameras for regular season broadcasts, and you didn’t have more until the playoffs. I’ve read accounts of Don Larsen’s perfect game that had his final pitch a foot out of the zone. 54 years later, no one cares or should. The perfect games and no-hitters of the past were all called by umpires, many of whom were worse than the current group we have today. We can’t count some and not others unless we can prove the others are pristine, which you and I both know they weren’t.
I kind of half agree with you on the significance of no-hitters. Not all of them are created equally (see under Cowley, Joe; Hawkins, Andy; Burnett, AJ) and they are sometimes more of a curiosity than a work of pitching art.
One of the best pitched games I’ve ever seen was Mike Mussina’s near perfect game in 2001 (one strike away! ruined by a moron who doesn’t believe dinosaurs existed!) and that wasn’t a no-hitter.
And yes, as I’ve acknowledged, luck is always involved in some way. But I can’t equate ball and strike calls (and yes, Larsen’s last pitch to Dale Mitchell looked way out of the strike zone on the rebroadcast; they also had the hitter’s background down and a lot of white shirts sitting in the CF bleachers) with the blown call in Santana’s game.
The fact is that Santana gave up a base hit that was incorrectly ruled a foul ball by an egregiously bad umpiring decision. That’s an enormous difference from a pitch off the plate that might have been hit safely or a line drive that would have fallen for a hit if a fielder had not been in the way (maybe it was good positioning?).
But there are no-hitters and perfect games that do live up to the standards of pitching mastery and not a product of lucky breaks. I’m sure some of Sandy Koufax’ no-hitters qualify and I have seen the replay of Randy Johnson’s perfect game and he was just plain un-hittable that night:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Johnson%27s_perfect_game
13 Ks, only 3-ball count and only one play close to a base hit.
By the logic of your position we should credit Armando Gallardo with a perfect game because an even more egregiously bad umpiring decision resulted in a runner who was obviously out being called safe.
I don’t completely reject your argument – I just think you’re carrying it too far. Yes, Santana gets credit for a no-hitter because that’s what it says in the box score and no, it’s not the first dubious no-hitter. But all of those are tainted and so is Santana’s.
Nothing worse than bad analysis wrapped in a cloak of supposed intelligence with an kick of the media to boot!
The fact is every no hitter does not have a great defensive play or a questionable umpires call. The vast, vast, majority do not which is precisely why this is a story for at least today. Nobody disputes that luck plays a part in no hitters but that’s not the point. This was not a questionable call. It was a blown call. When Gallaraga had his perfect game taken away by a blown call, while it may not be “official”,most fans rightly consider that he threw a perfect game. While this instance may not be as blatant it certainly does merit people and the media being able to talk about it which pretty much makes your entire post moot.