Master Index of Archived Threads
Hitting Streaks
| Nymr83 Apr 15 2007 08:08 PM |
|
should hitting streaks "count" if they are over multiple seasons?
|
| Yancy Street Gang Apr 15 2007 08:10 PM |
|
I think so.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 15 2007 08:14 PM |
|
I can't think of a single reason why not.
|
| iramets Apr 15 2007 08:42 PM |
|
Well, that settles that.
|
| Nymr83 Apr 15 2007 08:47 PM |
|
i'd count it too, but baseball has said in the past they wouldn't then said they would when Rollins was streaking to start last year. Whats the argument against?
|
| OlerudOwned Apr 15 2007 08:58 PM |
|
|
|
| iramets Apr 15 2007 08:59 PM |
|
The argument against is that hitting streaks represent daily pressure, and four months of lying in the sun, with sissy umbrella drinks and regular blowjobs, seems to violate that principle.
|
| cooby Apr 15 2007 09:13 PM |
|
Crudely put, but I kinda agree.
|
| Willets Point Apr 15 2007 10:17 PM |
|
|
What is a player is doing all those things during the season?
|
| Edgy DC Apr 15 2007 10:19 PM |
|
What is a player supposed to do? Is Cal Ripken's consecutive games played streak actually Frank Taveras', then?
|
| metirish Apr 15 2007 10:34 PM |
|
I have no argument against it but I didn't like the Rollins streak and I don't like Wrights streak being counted back to last season,maybe Ripkens could have been consecutive seasons played.
|
| Willets Point Apr 15 2007 10:45 PM |
|
Just make "single-season streaks" and "multi-season streaks" different entries in the record books and all problems are solved. Of course, a record for a single-season consecutive games played streak is pretty dull since lots of guys have managed 162, and those who have 163 or 164 is credit to their team playing extra tiebreakers more than any greater hardiness they have over a guy who played 162.
|
| Frayed Knot Apr 15 2007 11:01 PM |
|
I don't have a problem with multi-year streaks. And I don't but the "increased pressure" argument.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 15 2007 11:48 PM |
|
It's easy enough to argue that there's as much or more pressure in April for most players than there is in September. April also gives us some of the worst hitting conditons.
|
| Nymr83 Apr 15 2007 11:54 PM |
|
is the league BA consistently lower in April?
|
| Edgy DC Apr 16 2007 12:21 AM |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Well, that's a good question. Adverse hitting conditions don't necessarily mean lower batting averages, and that's the only number that matters in this context. MLB Batting Average by Month,
|
| Vic Sage Apr 16 2007 05:16 PM |
|
does the streak include post-season games? If not, why not? And Ripken's record is, by its nature, a multi-year record... a hitting streak is not.
|
| SteveJRogers Apr 16 2007 08:04 PM |
||
|
Or Anti-Yankee bias. Too many Yankee/DiMaggio haters probably wanted to ensure that Joe D be removed from the top of the hitting streak records!
|
| SteveJRogers Apr 16 2007 08:21 PM |
|
|
They actually did this for Orel Hersisher's continuing his streak of scoreless innings that was on-going when the 1988 season ended, and no they didn't count the fact that it ended in the 9th inning of Game 1 of the NLCS! Ironically the innings streak was snapped in the very first inning of Hershiser's first game of 1989! But MLB did declare that any additional innings would have been tacked onto Orel's streak, which 2/3rds actually were that day in 1989. Interesting questing arises from Retrosheet.org, why was Tim Belcher the opening day starter for the Dodgers in 1989 and NOT the CY Young winner Orel Hershiser? The only answer I can think of is that they wanted to do the rotation in such a way that Orel started on Opening Day in LA, but that doesn't hold because Belcher started Opening Day at Dodger Stadium! Strange.
|
| metirish Apr 16 2007 08:24 PM |
|
I forgot that everything really is about the fucking yankees....
|
| SteveJRogers Apr 16 2007 08:42 PM |
|
|
No, I think I do remeber a lot of consternation that if MLB kept the records seperate that was being considered trying to "protect" DiMaggio's record, the same way the seperation of 154 and 162 was seen as "protecting" Ruth's record.
|
| metirish Apr 16 2007 08:49 PM |
|
Sorry Steve,not a dig at you,just sick of the idea that everything yankees is sacred.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 16 2007 09:21 PM |
|
|
Except when it is. The nature of the Ripken "streak" is such that it can't be exceeded within a year, so of course those consecuctive games are counted beyond a year. But DiMaggio's streak is such that over one third of all attempts also could not exceed it within a season. One third of all comers eliminated through no fault of their own. There's no reason to carefully choose words to reflect poorly upon the player.
|