Play Fantasy Use your Fantasy skills to win Cash Prizes. Join or start a league today. Play Now
Blog Entry

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

Posted on: June 25, 2010 11:07 pm
 
The pitch-count police are no doubt screaming.

I'm not. I can't. I'm too stunned to scream.

Another no-hitter? With eight walks? On 149 pitches?

Really?

Oh yeah, another no-hitter, and this time it's Edwin Jackson of the Diamondbacks, against the Rays, the team that traded him away a year and a half ago. It's the Rays, the team that has been the loser in two perfect games in the last 12 months, now losing an imperfect game.

And it really was 149 pitches, with eight walks, a hit batter and a wild pitch.

Really.

Yes, 149 pitches, the most anyone had thrown in a major-league game in almost five years (and the most anyone other than Livan Hernandez had thrown in more than six years). And the most anyone had thrown in a no-hitter in all the history that baseball-reference.com has recorded.

The pitch-count police are not going to like that. They're going to say that Diamondbacks manager A.J. Hinch was reckless, that he was putting Jackson's health at risk.

I'm not so sure about that. I'm not so sure that Hinch didn't help Jackson, by allowing him a night he'll never forget -- and, perhaps, a night that could help him understand how good he can be.

Jackson is talented enough that he made the American League All-Star team last year with the Tigers. But he's erratic enough that he has a 43-45 career record, inconsistent enough that the Rays basically wouldn't pitch him in the 2008 postseason, then traded him to the Tigers (who a year later traded him to Arizona).

Before Friday, he had completed two of 125 career starts. His lone shutout before this came in 2007, a season he began with eight straight losses and an 8.20 ERA.

Did I mention he's been inconsistent?

Anyway, Hinch has regularly allowed Jackson to throw more than 110 pitches, and twice before he's allowed him to go past the 120-pitch mark. Jackson is 26 years old, and he's already proven to be durable.

He has good enough stuff that it shouldn't be a total surprise that he could throw a no-hitter -- especially in this year where almost anyone can throw a no-hitter.

But a 149-pitch no-hitter, with eight walks, a hit batter and a wild pitch?

That is a surprise. A total surprise.

And I'm still too stunned to scream.
Comments

Since: Jan 1, 2007
Posted on: June 26, 2010 1:06 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

Bayarea, are you confused.

However, this is a perfect example of a manager making decision based on an individual over what is good for the team; today and tomorrow, and so on. Look, I don;t want to rain on this parade, it's a great feat to throw a no-hitter (with 8 walks, are you kidding me).
Last I checked, they were winning 1-0. I don't know how this basing a decision on an individual. If you are talking about the pitch count, quit trying to baby pitchers. He hadn't given up a run. You would look pretty damn stupid as a manager if you took out a guy pitching a no-hit shutout and the next guy gives up a home run on pitch 1. If he had given up runs from those walks, you might have an argument. Go back in your hole until Lincecum pitches his no hitter.



Since: Jun 26, 2010
Posted on: June 26, 2010 1:03 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

I beg to differ.  In 1971, Doc Ellis was surprised to be moved up a day when the scheduled starter got hurt in warm-ups.

Equally wild, he pitched a no-no on ACID!  A lifetime memory?  Years later when he owned up, he also said that he didn't remember a thing.

BTW, I own Edwin and also had A. J. in my fantasy league.  No problem here with the no-hitters, shame about the whip.



Since: Aug 18, 2006
Posted on: June 26, 2010 1:00 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

Matt that is outright stupid what you just said. You just described what we already have. It's called a PERFECT GAME of 27 up, 27 down. 

A no-hitter is exactly that NO HITS. 9 innings and no hits is a no hitter.



Since: Aug 18, 2006
Posted on: June 26, 2010 12:57 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

The A.J. Burnett no hitter against the Padres was sick. He threw 65 of 129 pitches for strikes, walked 9, had a bunch of wild pitches and hit batters.

The one Randy Johnson had I think with the Mariners was another crazy one.



Since: May 4, 2008
Posted on: June 26, 2010 12:45 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

You'd think that would be the case.  Regrettably, MattLee has a point.  Idiotically (to me anyway) MLB has decided that you can give up no hits and not pitch a "no-hitter."  Even if you pitch a complete game and give up no hits, it's not a no-hitter if it's a rain-shortened game (although it used to be).  And what's even stupider is if you lose -- since 1991 you get a no-hitter if you pitch for the home team (9 IP) but not the visitors (8 IP).  So if opposing pitchers lock up for a 9-inning 1-0 game with no hits by either team, one pitcher gets a no-no and one doesn't -- although both would get no-no's if the game went at least one more inning.  It's an insult to our intelligence, as if we can't decide on our own whether a nine-inning no-hitter is more impressive than a "no-hitter (6 inn.)" or "(8 inn,; L)".

From Wikipedia:
The current definition, since , of a no-hitter is "a game in which a pitcher, or pitchers, gives up no hits while pitching at least nine innings. A pitcher may give up a run or runs so long as he pitches nine innings or more and does not give up a hit." Prior to , defined a no-hitter as "an offical game in which a pitcher, or pitchers, gives up no hits."  After the definition changed 31 "no-hitters" were erased.

The best pitching performance ever wasn't a no-hitter by any definition (Haddix 12 perfect innings), so why does MLB think it has to make this kind of nonsensical distiction?  It's like deciding you only get a "home run" if it's an inside-the-park job, because you don't really "run" arounfd the bases when it goes over the fence.

The definition of a "win" is different because it's an arbitrary stat.

No-hitter means NO HITS.



Since: Jun 15, 2010
Posted on: June 26, 2010 12:36 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet


Hey Knobler, just like you to write an article on the complete mediocracy of Edwin  Jackson.. Leave it alone, show some class.. Write an article on WHY there is 4 no - hitters this year, before the break even .  ??  Trust me it aint coincedence..    Give this guy credit due!!  149 pitches?? he earned it..



Since: Jun 26, 2010
Posted on: June 26, 2010 12:34 pm
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

There is a rule in place for what it takes to qualify for a no-hitter -- give up no hits.



Since: Jun 30, 2009
Posted on: June 26, 2010 10:41 am
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

A no hitter with a 1.0 whip, there's pitchers that average better games than that....who cares about this



Since: Jun 25, 2010
Posted on: June 26, 2010 9:54 am
 

The nuttiest no-hitter yet

I agree that Jackson, and his teamates, will always remember this accomplishment.

However, this is a perfect example of a manager making decision based on an individual over what is good for the team; today and tomorrow, and so on. Look, I don;t want to rain on this parade, it's a great feat to throw a no-hitter (with 8 walks, are you kidding me).
And I definately understand the Diamonbacks major woes this year have come from their bullpen; one of the worst in baseball. Really, Chad Qualls, their "closer," has an ERA of 8.88. I'm sure that must have been going through A.J. Hinch's mind throughout the game. Now I'm rambling.

We won't understand what this does to Erwin Jackson for awhile. This is not like the old-school baseball game where pitchers constantly threw over 120 piches per outing. This is a guy who hit 100 and was cooked. Now he throws 149 pitches. Big change and strain on the arm; gotta be. Medically, is it better to throw him right back out there in 5 days for 4 innings? or skip a day? Does anyone really know.

I have a feeling that Erwin Jackson will be dealing with the "John Isner" hangover for awhile.

Go Giants!!



Since: Feb 11, 2008
Posted on: June 26, 2010 8:45 am
 

Gallaraga,Joyce,Burnett, and Jackson.

Understand your point Mr. Knobbler, not all no-hitters are equal, however if we can take as an example the great sportsmanship displayed by Armando Gallaraga, the earnest regrets by Jim Joyce, we should allow for the same, despite this no-hitter being on the other end of the spectrum.
 As others have mentioned history repeated itself, had the pleasure(sic) of watching A.J. Burnett allow 9 walks en route to his no hitter, let's face it , how often does a pitcher be allowed to continue pitching to even get to nine walks, alas only if he hasn't given up a hit.
 Jim Joyce depriving Gallaraga of a perfect game by perhaps his one brain freeze moment in his umpiring career.
 So the other side of the coin is true, in years people will only look at the fact Edwin Jackson pitched a no-hitter forgetting the details, and even fewer will remember the performance and circumstances of Armando Gallaraga's one hitter.
 That's the way the ball bounces !


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com