May 17th and no no hitter yet?

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

Well at least 9/10th of a no hitter cause its in the NL.....18 of the last 21 now in NL ballpark.... 1 hitter with no walks still better as well

First there was Tommy John surgery, a universally accepted eponym, and now there is a proposed rule change known as the "Jake NL No No Equivalency Option" which reads as follows:

"Whereas a National League pitcher benefits from facing up to three unqualified hitters, the opposing pitchers, during a nine inning no-hitter instead of three accomplished designated batsmen that an AL pitcher must face to achieve his no-hitter and no doubt the NL pitcher must feel inferior to his AL counterpart, He shall heretofore be granted the option of facing three additional batters. The result of these at bats shall not impact the outcome of the game, but merely serve to verify the equivalency of the "tainted" NL No No to its AL counterpart.

If any of the three additional batsmen should reach first base safely as the result of a hit, the game ends and the "tainted" NL No No shall remain tainted.

The hit that ends the game in this manner shall not be designated as a "walk off" single, but rather a "Jake off" single, the first Net54 eponym that will proudly take its place beside Tommy John's elbow."

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

First there was Tommy John surgery, a universally accepted eponym, and now there is a proposed rule change known as the "Jake NL No No Equivalency Option" which reads as follows:

"Whereas a National League pitcher benefits from facing up to three unqualified hitters, the opposing pitchers, during a nine inning no-hitter instead of three accomplished designated batsmen that an AL pitcher must face to achieve his no-hitter and no doubt the NL pitcher must feel inferior to his AL counterpart, He shall heretofore be granted the option of facing three additional batters. The result of these at bats shall not impact the outcome of the game, but merely serve to verify the equivalency of the "tainted" NL No No to its AL counterpart.

If any of the three additional batsmen should reach first base safely as the result of a hit, the game ends and the "tainted" NL No No shall remain tainted.

The hit that ends the game in this manner shall not be designated as a "walk off" single, but rather a "Jake off" single, the first Net54 eponym that will proudly take its place beside Tommy John's elbow."

What if it happens during interleague play? Or when the regular DH is injured? Or when the moon is full?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What if it happens during interleague play? Or when the regular DH is injured? Or when the moon is full?

Interleague play issue easy....it only applies if the game is in an NL parks...

[chaddurbin]

on 2nd thought, keep ignoring...

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

First there was Tommy John surgery, a universally accepted eponym, and now there is a proposed rule change known as the "Jake NL No No Equivalency Option" which reads as follows:

"Whereas a National League pitcher benefits from facing up to three unqualified hitters, the opposing pitchers, during a nine inning no-hitter instead of three accomplished designated batsmen that an AL pitcher must face to achieve his no-hitter and no doubt the NL pitcher must feel inferior to his AL counterpart, He shall heretofore be granted the option of facing three additional batters. The result of these at bats shall not impact the outcome of the game, but merely serve to verify the equivalency of the "tainted" NL No No to its AL counterpart.

If any of the three additional batsmen should reach first base safely as the result of a hit, the game ends and the "tainted" NL No No shall remain tainted.

The hit that ends the game in this manner shall not be designated as a "walk off" single, but rather a "Jake off" single, the first Net54 eponym that will proudly take its place beside Tommy John's elbow."

I agree.....that would be a good idea..

no way Volquez gets a no-no in the American League....its really not fair to count how many no-hitters people get in the NL versus AL counterparts when factoring who had a better career...... 18 of the last 21 no hitters in NL parks...plus the 'almost no-no' occurs much more frequently in the NL......lets see two AL no hitters go back to back and ill reconsider....it wont happen..

[1952boyntoncollector]

Mad Max on the Nationals yesterday got a famous almost no- hitter which would of been worth .9 of a AL no hitter..

[KCRfan1]

Correct me if I'm wrong, it seems pitching as a whole is not very good this season.

There's NO shortage of home runs being hit though. Looks like the wacky hr totals are back.

[stlcardsfan]

Juiced ball? I mean, since the players can't juice anymore..

[PowderedH2O]

What if the pitching was so poor on the opposing side that a pinch hitter was used each time the pitcher came to bat. Would the NL No-hitter qualify as an actual No-hitter?

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by PowderedH2O

What if the pitching was so poor on the opposing side that a pinch hitter was used each time the pitcher came to bat. Would the NL No-hitter qualify as an actual No-hitter?

Yes...once you see that happen let me know. Ill also let you know when the next guy gets a cycle because he stopped at 3rd after hitting a ball over the wall so he could get a 'triple' and the elusive cycle instead of just 2 homers and double and a single...

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

First there was Tommy John surgery, a universally accepted eponym, and now there is a proposed rule change known as the "Jake NL No No Equivalency Option" which reads as follows:

"Whereas a National League pitcher benefits from facing up to three unqualified hitters, the opposing pitchers, during a nine inning no-hitter instead of three accomplished designated batsmen that an AL pitcher must face to achieve his no-hitter and no doubt the NL pitcher must feel inferior to his AL counterpart, He shall heretofore be granted the option of facing three additional batters. The result of these at bats shall not impact the outcome of the game, but merely serve to verify the equivalency of the "tainted" NL No No to its AL counterpart.

If any of the three additional batsmen should reach first base safely as the result of a hit, the game ends and the "tainted" NL No No shall remain tainted.

The hit that ends the game in this manner shall not be designated as a "walk off" single, but rather a "Jake off" single, the first Net54 eponym that will proudly take its place beside Tommy John's elbow."

Did you realize that I am smarter than I look (that wouldn't be difficult) and that Edison Volquez is the first pitcher to toss a no-no after undergoing Tommy John surgery?

I also was a resident with Dr. Lewis Yocum, the Angels team physician for 36 years who passed away in 2013, a year before his boss Dr. Frank Jobe, both of whom are smiling in their graves after Edison's no-no.

Now you know the rest of the story.

[chaddurbin]

some good company there frank!