Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmopar
We have been conditioned to want to see the cycle, rather than a less magical "odd" combination of multiple hits. At some point in history, someone decided it was newsworthy to hit for the cycle. We (people) generally like things that are neat and complete rather than messy and incomplete. The cycle is special, one of each type of hit recorded, COMPLETION.
The cycle is not a team award, nor may it necessarily help contribute to a teams overall performance. A no hitter could be looked at the same way. It is definitely an individual accomplishment. Although the team helps preserve the no hitter, the pitcher gets the credit. The team probably still wins with a 1 or 2 hit shutout, but we want that pitcher to have no hits, the clean image of the 0 0 0 line on the scoreboard looks much better than 0 1 0.
|
eh...guys have lost games and pitched a 9 inning 'no-hitter'...no hitter is more of a team accomplishment for hitting for the cycle...
to address the last 2 posts as well-
someone said a cycle is more impressive than a no hitter on this thread if I am not mistaken or at least said as so much..
someone made a point about hoops players getting cheap triple doubles and taking flack for it..and no one has stopped for a triple instead of a homerun...that maybe so but im sure there are guys that may of stopped at first instead of trying to leg out a double to get the precious 'cycle....
I think everyone gets my point now...its just statistical thing....which is why I don't make a big deal of it..
also as for no-hitters...more and more baseball people really see the importance of a no hitter going down as well...or do I have to make 'whats the big deal about a no hitter' thread