19th perfect game in history

[Eggerhaus]

Dallas Braden of the A's just pitched the 19th perfect game in MLB history.

Gotta love baseball...the only game where the defense controls the ball and the only game where a perfect game is when nothing happens.:D

[Chessic Sense]

Unlike casual fans, a real baseball fan knows that home runs aren't nearly as exciting as a beautiful diving catch or sharp double play. The most exciting things in baseball don't show up on the scoreboard.

[Peremensoe]

...a perfect game is when nothing happens.:D

I take it this was a joke. Of course, all kinds of things can (and usually do) happen in perfect games--with the exception of walks and hits.

But every perfect game (indeed, every no-hitter) I've watched or heard about has involved a couple tremendous defensive plays.

[KennerTheGreat]

As mentioned in the MLB: May thread, that's the second perfecto against the Rays in about half a season.

[ElvisL1ves]

Gotta love baseball...the only game where the defense controls the ball and the only game where a perfect game is when nothing happens.:D The cricket supporters on this board might wish to discuss that with you, if they even open this thread.

[Wargamer]

Take THAT A Rod.

[Peremensoe]

the exception of walks and hits.

Well, or baserunners by means of HBP or fielding error.

We really should talk about perfectos by the whole defensive team, rather than just as pitching accomplishments.

[Thudlow Boink]

Unlike casual fans, a real baseball fan knows that home runs aren't nearly as exciting as a beautiful diving catch or sharp double play. The most exciting things in baseball don't show up on the scoreboard.I wish the video highlights (on mlb.com, eg) would show more of these sorts of things.

[Maserschmidt]

But every perfect game (indeed, every no-hitter) I've watched or heard about has involved a couple tremendous defensive plays.

True, that. I was lucky enough to be at Kenny Rogers' perfect game, and it required a crazy great diving catch by Rusty Greer (IIRC it was in the 9th, but the whole thing's something of a blur now).

[mhendo]

Unlike casual fans, a real baseball fan knows that home runs aren't nearly as exciting as a beautiful diving catch or sharp double play. I really don't think this is true. I'm a huge baseball fan; my wife is lukewarm, at best, about the game, although she does like an occasional trip to the park. If i'm watching the highlights on TV and she happens to be there, or if we're at a game together, she's usually considerably more impressed by a great catch or a double play than she is by a home run.

Anyway, great effort by Braden. Of course, any pitcher who manages to pitch a complete game and restrict the opposing hitters to fewer than 3 or 4 base runners has done an amazing job. Beyond that, i think most no-hitters and perfect games are as much the result of luck and fielding as they are about pitching. Buehrle's perfect game against the Rays last year was saved in the ninth by Dwayne Wise's amazing grab; had Wise not made that play, Buehrle would have lost the Perfect Game, the No-Nitter, and the Shutout all in one go, because that ball was over the top of the fence when Wise grabbed it.

[Crawlspace]

Oh, jeez. :rolleyes: Does this mean we're gonna have to hear this career 17-23 nit wit talk about never before heard of "unwritten rules of baseball" for another few weeks.

[Chessic Sense]

Oh, jeez. :rolleyes: Does this mean we're gonna have to hear this career 17-23 nit wit talk about never before heard of "unwritten rules of baseball" for another few weeks.

I don't understand the reference...:confused:

[ElvisL1ves]

There are two "unwritten rules" about no-hitters in progress: The pitcher's teammates don't talk to him or even look at him if possible, and nobody, fans and announcers included, says the word "no hitter" (or "perfect game" if that's what it is).

Did one of them get violated and Braden survived it anyway?

[mhendo]

No, nothing to do with that.

It has to do with an incident involving Braden and Alex Rodriguez a few weeks ago, when Rodriguez apparently jogged across the pitcher's mound during the game, returning to first base after a foul ball. Braden took umbrage, declaring that this was a violation of the game's unwritten rules.

[Peremensoe]

nobody, fans and announcers included, says the word "no hitter"

ESPN has killed many no-hitters. Seriously, I've seen at least half a dozen occasions where they cut to a game in progvress, described as a "no-hitter through [whatever inning]," and the very next batter broke it up.

[Crawlspace]

I don't understand the reference...:confused:Early in the season he threw a hissy fit because A-Rod crossed the mound on the way back to the dugout after being retired at 3rd (i.e. A-Rod took the shortest path from 3rd base to the dugout). He started yelling at A-Rod, "That's my mound. Don't go near my mound."* After the game he claimed that that was one of the "unwritten rules of Baseball", you don't go near the opposing pitchers mound. I didn't hear of many people in baseball who agreed with him. Link (http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/sports/Alex-Rodriguez-Runs-Afoul-of-Baseballs-Unwritten-Rules-91907084.html)
Based on the reaction of Rodriguez, the game's announcers and just about everyone else in the world, Braden is in the minority when it comes to familiarity with that particular rule.
Last week he tried to get more press by saying, (http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5170739) There are things that are going to have to happen. Out of respect to my teammates, out of respect to the game. I think he's probably garnered a new respect for the unwritten rules and the people who hold them close to their game. But I think you're right, we don't do much talking in the 209.He's an insecure, posturing, white trash punk with mediocre talent trying to make a name for himself and this will only add fuel to his inflated ego.

*I find it funny that this hardened boy out of Stockton who might have to "go to knuckles" to settle things with A-Rod was walking away and had his back turned when he stood up for the game.

[mhendo]

ESPN has killed many no-hitters. No, they haven't. That sort of superstition is just silly.

He's an insecure, posturing, white trash punk with mediocre talent trying to make a name for himself and this will only add fuel to his inflated ego.Lighten up, Francis.

I'm betting you're a Yankee fan.

[Crawlspace]

Lighten up, Francis.

I'm betting you're a Yankee fan.I am, it's the only reasonable choice for someone from NY;). But I'm not a fan of the media fueled male posturing BS in the game. If you're upset about something, hit the guy the next time you see him. Don't go on the radio saying things will have to go to knuckles the next time you meet up because that's how things are handled in The 207.

[Chicagojeff]

did you feel this way when Roger threw the bat at Piazza??

Pitchers have historically felt that way about their mounds.. trust me.. AROD wouldn't have done that with Bob gibson..

[Crawlspace]

did you feel this way when Roger threw the bat at Piazza??

Pitchers have historically felt that way about their mounds.. trust me.. AROD wouldn't have done that with Bob gibson..Roger is an asshole. Never felt otherwise.

I have never heard anyone in baseball state that not crossing the pitchers mound is an unwritten rule. Other pitchers, like Bob Gibson, may feel that way and would drill an opposing player who crossed "their" mound and that would be the end of it. They wouldn't be on talk radio almost a month after the incident (and a month before the next meeting) talking about going to knuckles.

Players, leave it in the clubhouse and on the field. Media, stop trying to stir shit just to sell a few papers. That's all I'm asking, which was why my first post was a lamentation that we're going to have to hear stories about this nit wit for another 15 minutes.

And perfect game or no, Dallas Braden is no Bob Gibson.

[Crawlspace]

And with that, I'll close debate on the issue. Sorry for bringing it up. This should be about Braden and the hell of a game he threw, not something that might happen a month from now.

[LawMonkey]

Funny--casual fan that I am, I've been wondering to myself for the last few days whether the much tighter restrictions on pitch count and such these days spelled the end of the perfect game, by making it essentially impossible for a starting pitcher to finish a game. Even thought about posting a thread here. Guess not. :)

[mhendo]

Funny--casual fan that I am, I've been wondering to myself for the last few days whether the much tighter restrictions on pitch count and such these days spelled the end of the perfect game, by making it essentially impossible for a starting pitcher to finish a game. Even thought about posting a thread here. Guess not. :)The closer attention to pitch counts, and the greater use of bullpen pitchers, have dramatically reduced the number of complete games over the years.

But they will never reduce the number of No-Hitters or Perfect Games, because as long as a starting pitcher has not conceded a hit in the game, there's no way in hell that a manager is going to take him out. Furthermore, in those types of games, the very fact that no-one (in a perfect game) or almost no-one (in the case of a no-hitter) is getting on base means that the pitch count doesn't climb as quickly as it does in games where batters are getting hits.

All other things being equal, a pitcher will throw fewer pitches in facing 27 hitters, as Braden did today, than he will facing 30 or 33 or 36 hitters. Braden threw 109 pitches for his PG today; that's basically 12 pitches per inning, which is a very good rate.

[penultima thule]

Originally Posted by Eggerhaus]
Gotta love baseball...the only game where the defense controls the ball and the only game where a perfect game is when nothing happens.

The cricket supporters on this board might wish to discuss that with you, if they even open this thread.

Those hignorunt furriners amongst this mesageboard of enlightenment are long reconciled that the phrase "the only game" really means "the only professional US domestic sport". That's the only reason there is the Olympic games, to remind Americans every four years that other countries do play sport, and that sport can be played against other countries.

I would have thought softball would used the same nomenclature.

There are other games where the team in possession of the ball is the attacker e.g. soccer, hockey, lacrosse, polo and a nil all score is relatively common (or rarities in the rugby codes) but that's a draw not a perfect game. My son once played in an AFL match where there was no score.

In cricket the bowlers are usually referred to as "the bowling attack", however in the second innings, the fielding side are also "defending their total". The bowling side is definitely in control of the ball. But the ball actually belongs to the batting side.

[Peremensoe]

That sort of superstition is just silly.

:rolleyes:

[Jeff Lichtman]

I was at this game, scoring it the way I always do. One of the best things about a game like this is how the tension gradually increases. No one goes to the ballpark expecting to see a perfect game. I went to the game hoping that the A's would take the series from a really tough team. There is no instant at which I realized that I was watching a perfect game in progress - every game starts as a perfect game for both teams, yet how many of them end this way? As the game went on it became clear that I was witnessing something special. By the end of the fifth inning I guess everyone in the ballpark was thinking about the possibility. I believe it was just before the start of the seventh inning when the woman in front of me turned around and asked me whether Braden had given up any walks. In the ninth inning everyone was on edge, and when Kapler grounded to short to end the game the place just exploded.

Braden pitched well, and he also got some breaks. At the start of the first inning he was helped a lot by Kevin Kouzmanoff's nice play on a hard line drive down the third base line. None of the Rays gave Braden much trouble again until, with two out in the sixth, Kapler had a twelve-pitch at-bat, fouling off pitch after pitch until he finally popped up to Kouzmanoff in foul territory. Kouzmanoff made another nice play with one out in the eighth on a foul pop-up that he caught at the lip of the A's dugout. With one out in the ninth Navarro hit a line drive to left field that would have been a hit except for the fact that he hit it right at Eric Patterson.

Since today was Mothers' Day a lot of the A's had brought their mothers with them to the game. Braden had lost his mother to cancer in his senior year of high school, so he brought his grandmother instead. When the game ended the team brought her onto the field, and she and Dallas embraced for a long time. Quite a scene.

When I got home I put my ticket in an envelope for safe keeping. I've never asked anyone for an autograph, but I'm considering asking Braden to sign it.

[ElvisL1ves]

"I don't believe in superstitions. They're bad luck." - Bobby Valentine

[mhendo]

I was at this game, scoring it the way I always do. Lucky bastard! It would be awesome to be at a perfect game.

Last July, i was in San Francisco and went to a Thursday night Giants-Padres game. The following day, i thought about going to the Friday night game, but decided against it because it was our last night in SF, and i wanted to hang out with family. Of course, that was the night that Sanchez threw a no-hitter. That night, Sanchez was one Juan Uribe error from a perfect game.
Braden pitched well, and he also got some breaks. At the start of the first inning he was helped a lot by Kevin Kouzmanoff's nice play on a hard line drive down the third base line. Yeah, i saw that play on Baseball Tonight; it was a sharp catch. Kouzmanoff had a busy day, making 6 of Braden's 27 outs.

[villa]

The bowling side is definitely in control of the ball. But the ball actually belongs to the batting side.

If the ball belongs to the batting side, why do the bowling side decide when to change it?

[JohnT]

Unlike casual fans, a real baseball fan knows that home runs aren't nearly as exciting as a beautiful diving catch or sharp double play. The most exciting things in baseball don't show up on the scoreboard.

But... but... chicks still dig the long ball, right? ;)

[fiddlesticks]

I was at this game, scoring it the way I always do.

One of 12,000 or so. How long 'til the A's get out of that dump? Anyhow, lucky ducky! :) I'll take credit for preserving the perfecto since I didn't hear about it until it was over.

[Ol'Gaffer]

More players have 500+ career homers and more players have hit 50+ homers in a season then have thrown a perfect game. Almost as rare as the unassisted triple play (15 in the modern era).

Cheers to Braden. Unbelievable performance.

As a lifelong A's fan I'm fully cognizant of their past success, and I realize that I don't share the heartache or pain of the followers of many other teams (although Game 3 of the 2001 Divisional playoffs against the hated Yankees was a particularly bitter pill regardless of past success). Still, the A's are a small market team playing in an ancient stadium in an area that skews heavily towards the other local team and were 60-1 longshots to win the World Series at the beginning of the season. That said, this was just....just...unbelievable.

[JohnT]

Funny--casual fan that I am, I've been wondering to myself for the last few days whether the much tighter restrictions on pitch count and such these days spelled the end of the perfect game, by making it essentially impossible for a starting pitcher to finish a game. Even thought about posting a thread here. Guess not. :)

It seems to me that the incidences of perfect games (PG's) has actually increased over the past 20 years, with 7 of 19 PG's coming since 1991 (1/3rd of all PG's, or one every 2.7 seasons). Previous to that there were 12 PG's in an 111 year span, or about 1 per decade.

More steroids at work?

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/history/rare_feats/index.jsp?feature=perfect_game

[mhendo]

More players have 500+ career homers and more players have hit 50+ homers in a season then have thrown a perfect game. Almost as rare as the unassisted triple play (15 in the modern era).
15 is also the number of players who have hit 4 homers in a single game.

You want a really rare feat? Try "Hit by Pitch twice in the same inning"! It's happened 4 times. Link (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hbp2.shtml) (scroll to bottom)

[StusBlues]

The closer attention to pitch counts, and the greater use of bullpen pitchers, have dramatically reduced the number of complete games over the years.

But they will never reduce the number of No-Hitters or Perfect Games, because as long as a starting pitcher has not conceded a hit in the game, there's no way in hell that a manager is going to take him out.

No? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hitter#Combined_no-hitters)

Good point about pitch counts, though. In a true "divine" game like this, there's probably no reason for the manager to go for the hook.

[Jeff Lichtman]

One of 12,000 or so. How long 'til the A's get out of that dump?

I don't have much respect for Lew Wolff, the current owner of the A's. He seems clueless about how to encourage people to come to the games. He's done things like close the upper deck (where the cheap seats used to be), close half the parking lots (the ones that have exits leading to the freeway, which makes it slow to get out when the game ends), close many of the concessions when a small crowd is expected, and get rid of ticket vendors inside the ballpark (there are now automated kiosks where the vendors used to be, and there is a service fee where there used to be none).

Wolff had a plan to move the team to Fremont, where he was going to build a 34,000 seat ballpark. The location was two miles from the nearest public transit, and the parking lot was going to hold only 9,000 cars. I was at a meeting of the Oakland A's Booster Club once where Wolff spoke about the plans for the new park - he said, "I know some of you here are going to sue me" - a really nice thing to say to the team's most dedicated fans. The ballpark deal fell through when the economy tanked, which was probably a good thing since there wouldn't have been a good way for people to get there.

For years the A's were on a powerful radio station, KNEW, but when that station converted to a religious format and dumped the A's, the team spent a couple of years on a several low-power stations at a time. Each station was receivable in only a small area - you had to know which station to tune in depending on where you were. This was terrible for PR - part of the purpose of broadcasting is to publicize the team. The team is now on a single station, but there are places in the Bay Area where that station doesn't come in well.

TV is almost as bad. The A's were on broadcast channel 36 until this season. Hardly anyone but A's fans know about this channel - there's little chance of stirring interest among those who aren't already fans if the team is carried on a channel that no one ever looks at. This season the A's aren't on broadcast TV at all - they're on cable only (I guess this is the wave of the future).

All of this behavior is typical of a team that's getting ready to move - they don't see much point in trying to keep the current fan base. But Wolff doesn't want to move far - he tried to go to Fremont, and San Jose is trying to lure the team. At least some of the current fan base would continue to follow the team if the A's go to either of those cities, so it seems pretty stupid to me to give up on promoting the A's where they are now.

[mhendo]

It seems to me that the incidences of perfect games (PG's) has actually increased over the past 20 years, with 7 of 19 PG's coming since 1991 (1/3rd of all PG's, or one every 2.7 seasons). Previous to that there were 12 PG's in an 111 year span, or about 1 per decade.

More steroids at work?

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/history/rare_feats/index.jsp?feature=perfect_gameThere could be something structural in the game that makes a perfect game more likely now than it was, say 50 years ago. One thing that comes to mind is the quality of the fielding, a result of increasingly rigorous training regimens and increasingly consistent ground qualilty.

Fielding in the early days of baseball was a complete crapshoot. Small, almost useless gloves combined with poorly maintained fields meant that the sort of plays we take for granted today were almost impossible. While gloves improved quite quickly, along with the grounds themselves, fielding has continued to improve due to larger and more mobile players spending hours and hours practicing their craft.

I really doubt that any increase in the number of PGs would be due to steroids. First, you would need to make a case that steroids are likely to lead to the sort of single-game performance required by a perfect game. I'm no expert on steroid, but it seems to me that, of all the claims i've read about what they can do, there is nothing that stands out as making a perfect game more likely.

Steroid might improve your recovery time from injury, but that is hardly likely to improve your chances of throwing a single perfect game. Steroid can make you bigger and stronger, but it's far from clear that steroid-induced power is the key to a perfect game. Hell, neither of the last two PG pitchers, Braden or Mark Buehrle, are overpowering fastball pitchers. Braden's fastball topped out yesterday in the low 90s, and he got quite a few outs with his slower sliders and change-ups. Buehrle also isn't a Roger Clemens or Nolan Ryan style power pitcher.

While you are right that over one-third of all perfect games have come over the last two decades, that's still only 7 out of a total of almost 50,000 games (or almost 100,000 starting pitchers; two per game). I'm no statistician, but i'd be surprised if we can draw any significant conclusions about the likelihood of perfect games based on such a small percentage.

[mhendo]

No? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hitter#Combined_no-hitters)I was aware of those games, but you'll notice that most of the combined no-hitters resulted from unusual circumstances that essentially forced the manger's hand. In one case, the starter was ejected; in another the starter pitched 9 complete innings and the manager clearly didn't want to risk injury by letting him pitch extra innings; and in another the starter left due to injury.

While it's not unheard-of for a manager to simply remove a guy who is carrying a no-hitter (like the Langston/Witt game), it almost never happens. And i'd be very surprised if any manager has ever pulled a starter who was working on a perfect game. I still believe that the increasing use of relievers hasn't contributed, and never will contribute in any meaningful way, to a reduction in the number of no-hitters and perfect games.

[StusBlues]

There could be something structural in the game that makes a perfect game more likely now than it was, say 50 years ago. One thing that comes to mind is the quality of the fielding, a result of increasingly rigorous training regimens and increasingly consistent ground qualilty.

Fielding in the early days of baseball was a complete crapshoot. Small, almost useless gloves combined with poorly maintained fields meant that the sort of plays we take for granted today were almost impossible. While gloves improved quite quickly, along with the grounds themselves, fielding has continued to improve due to larger and more mobile players spending hours and hours practicing their craft.

I really doubt that any increase in the number of PGs would be due to steroids. First, you would need to make a case that steroids are likely to lead to the sort of single-game performance required by a perfect game. I'm no expert on steroid, but it seems to me that, of all the claims i've read about what they can do, there is nothing that stands out as making a perfect game more likely.

Steroid might improve your recovery time from injury, but that is hardly likely to improve your chances of throwing a single perfect game. Steroid can make you bigger and stronger, but it's far from clear that steroid-induced power is the key to a perfect game. Hell, neither of the last two PG pitchers, Braden or Mark Buehrle, are overpowering fastball pitchers. Braden's fastball topped out yesterday in the low 90s, and he got quite a few outs with his slower sliders and change-ups. Buehrle also isn't a Roger Clemens or Nolan Ryan style power pitcher.

While you are right that over one-third of all perfect games have come over the last two decades, that's still only 7 out of a total of almost 50,000 games (or almost 100,000 starting pitchers; two per game). I'm no statistician, but i'd be surprised if we can draw any significant conclusions about the likelihood of perfect games based on such a small percentage.

To John T's point, I can think of two things.

One is expansion--there are simply more games played in recent seasons because there are more teams, and thus a greater likelihood of perfect games happening.

The other is the emphasis on "power" vs. "punch" hitting. Increasingly, every hitter in the lineup is swinging for the fences. You don't see much of the Nellie Fox/Phil Rizzuto just-get-on-base mentality anymore; most everyone is looking for some offense in one at bat. I'm not complaining, mind you, and this type of mindset may well be more effective overall, but if everyone is begging off of marginal pitches looking for the home run (or at least well-driven) ball, you're more likely to see strings of 27 outs as well as 15-run games.

[penultima thule]

If the ball belongs to the batting side, why do the bowling side decide when to change it?

But they don't.

Any decision to change the ball is taken by the umpires and the batting side.

If the ball is out of shape, the captain of the fielding side can ask that the ball be changed. The flaw needs to be due to the ball itself, not a consequence of the play. For example if the field is wet and the ball becomes sodden, it's play on. If the ball is out of shape because it was scuffed up after being hit into the grandstand, the umpire will trim any loose bits of leather and it's play on.

If the ball is out of shape they tell the batsman a replacement ball is required. The replacement ball must be in shape and in the same condition as the old ball. The replacement is first shown to the batsmen who agree with the replacement. Then it is given to the bowling side to use. They have no say in replacement.

If the batsmen consider that the ball has been tampered with by the fielding side they can ask the ball to be changed. The same procedure applies.

A new ball is allowed after 80 overs (min 480 deliveries) but again the umpires give the bowling team a new ball that the batting side has approved at the start of the game.

[mhendo]

To John T's point, I can think of two things.

One is expansion--there are simply more games played in recent seasons because there are more teams, and thus a greater likelihood of perfect games happening.The increase in games might explain an increase in the absolute number of perfect games, but it does not, by itself, explain the increasing percentage of perfect games.

According to Baseball Reference, there has been a total of 391,362 games played in the Major Leagues since 1876. We know that there has been a total of 19 perfect games, giving us, over the history of the Major Leagues, one PG for every 20,598 games.

But, in the period since the start of 1991, we have 7 PGs. According to my calculations, there have been 44,845 games played since the start of the 1991 season (including post-season games). So, over these last two decades, the rate for PGs is one every 6406 games.

Therefore, in the period 1876-1990, there were 12 PGs in 346,517 games, giving a rate of one every 28,876 games.

Based on all this, we can see that, in the period 1991-2010, the rate of PGs (on a total games per PG basis) is more than 4 times the rate for the period 1876-1990.

So, there's little doubt that John T's observation about the rate of PGs increasing is true. The question, though, is whether we can offer any meaningful explanation for this shift. John T suggests steroids, but not only does that fail to take into account the arguments i offered in my previous post, it also neglects the fact that batters have also been taking steroids, and the last 20 years has seen some of the biggest offensive seasons in baseball history.
The other is the emphasis on "power" vs. "punch" hitting. Increasingly, every hitter in the lineup is swinging for the fences. You don't see much of the Nellie Fox/Phil Rizzuto just-get-on-base mentality anymore; most everyone is looking for some offense in one at bat. I'm not complaining, mind you, and this type of mindset may well be more effective overall, but if everyone is begging off of marginal pitches looking for the home run (or at least well-driven) ball, you're more likely to see strings of 27 outs as well as 15-run games.I'm not really convinced by this argument either.

I guess you could make a case for or against it by looking closely at figures like overall OBP, strikeout rates, BABIP rates, park factors, etc., etc.,, and seeing how they have changed over the years, but i don't have the time or the technical skill to factor in all these variables.

While the increase in the number of PGs over the past two decades is noticeable, i'm still not convinced that 7 Perfect Games out of 45,000 (actually, out of 90,000 if we remember that there are two starting pitchers per game) is enough to be statistically significant.

[JohnT]

Just FYI, I'm a casual baseball observer/fan. I threw out "steroids" as it is the typical response as to why any records were broken since then. ;)

[RickJay]

It seems to me that the incidences of perfect games (PG's) has actually increased over the past 20 years, with 7 of 19 PG's coming since 1991 (1/3rd of all PG's, or one every 2.7 seasons). Previous to that there were 12 PG's in an 111 year span, or about 1 per decade.

More steroids at work?
There are more teams than there used to be, for one thing, so you would expect unusual things to happen more often now. There are twice as many games every year now as there were from 1901 to 1968.

Beyond that it's likely just a fluke that there have been more recently.

[HoboStew]

Speaking of unwritten rules (and what a comeback to ARod's moronic comment about being called out by someone with a handful of wins), what about Longoria trying to bunt for a hit in the 5th? I'm not all that opposed to the tactic as a general rule, but Longoria is one of the best hitters in the game. I can see a #8 or 9 hitter pulling that crap, but do you think Albert Pujols would try that in a million years? I lost a bit of respect for the guy, personally.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

Wasn't there another unusual event in this game, where the ump and the pitcher were exchanging balls and they hit each other in mid-air during said exchange?

That's as likely as a pitcher exploding a bird!

[TheBoltEater]

Speaking of unwritten rules (and what a comeback to ARod's moronic comment about being called out by someone with a handful of wins), what about Longoria trying to bunt for a hit in the 5th? I'm not all that opposed to the tactic as a general rule, but Longoria is one of the best hitters in the game. I can see a #8 or 9 hitter pulling that crap, but do you think Albert Pujols would try that in a million years? I lost a bit of respect for the guy, personally.

As a Padres fan, I remember quite clearly the furor caused by Ben Davis bunting for a single against Curt Schilling and the Diamondbacks when he had a perfect game going. The D-Backs manager went nuts in the press about it, but the Padres pointed out that it was a 2-0 game and they were, you know, still trying to win. As for Longoria, it was 4-0 when he bunted, but it was still only the 5th inning. I don't claim to be an expert on the subject, but the 5th (it seems to me) is still too early for anyone to be worrying about a perfect game/no-hitter. If ESPN hasn't even mentioned it yet, much less cut into regularly scheduled programming to show it, I don't think it's a big deal.

And as for A-Rod, I have yet to hear anyone answer this question. While I, for one, never heard of the "Don't run across the mound" rule, I can also truthfully say that in my entire life I have never seen anyone do it in a MLB game. Has anyone here ever actually seen a player run across the mound? If not, then it probably is an unwritten rule.

[HoboStew]

I read an ESPN article with several hall of fame (or close to) pitchers, iirc it was Steve Palmer, Burt Blyleven, and a couple others. They all said that they never heard of the "dont run on the mound" thing, so I am willing to concede that Braden may have overstated things (full disclosure - A's fan speaking here), even though I can't remember anyone ever doing that either. But Arod could have just said "sorry" and ended everything, instead he acted like a total jackass, as usual. Notice how nobody on the yankees ever stands up for him? He is the new Bonds.

As for Longoria, sure it was the 5th inning and it was too early to be worrying about perfect games and whatnot, but he is their cleanup hitter, as well as a top hitter in baseball, and that just isn't something that an elite talent should be doing, IMO.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

As for Longoria, sure it was the 5th inning and it was too early to be worrying about perfect games and whatnot, but he is their cleanup hitter, as well as a top hitter in baseball, and that just isn't something that an elite talent should be doing, IMO.

Why not? A surprise bunt from just such a hitter is a wonderful tactic, especially against an infield shift. You have to get runners on base to score, no?

I hate the fact that small ball gets overshadowed sometimes or in this instance, is considered tantamount to cheating. It isn't. The object is to win. Bunting is useful.

[Yllaria]

The local take on it, (http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100510/A_NEWS/5100315) if you're interested.

"I've got eight guys behind me making plays, and this definitely is not mine. It's ours," Braden said. "The defensive play has been nothing short of spectacular during my time here, and to have them once again show up and go above and beyond is more than a guy like me can ask for."

Sounds like he's got perspective on it. And dedicating a perfect game to his Mom and Grandma . . . on Mother's Day . . . that's just cool.

[HoboStew]

You have to get runners on base to score, no?With someone like Longoria, no. Again, I don't think its a bad move for everyone. I think its a bad move for an elite hitter, which he clearly is.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

With someone like Longoria, no. Again, I don't think its a bad move for everyone. I think its a bad move for an elite hitter, which he clearly is.

But why? Again, a surprise bunt from just such a hitter is an unexpected and effective move to get himself on base if used appropriately and sparingly.

[HoboStew]

Unexpected, yes. Effective, :dubious:. I'm sure the stat-heads can break down the expected return on a bunt attempt versus an elite hitter taking his hacks leading off an inning. Its possible that they were better off, but personally I doubt it. Especially considering that these types of hitters don't bunt much and arent especially good at it, as evidenced by Longoria fouling his off and thus giving up a strike in the process, which resulted in a strikeout.

[garygnu]

To me, you can't really say a guy "broke up a no-hitter with a bunt" if it's in the fifth inning.

[mhendo]

To me, you can't really say a guy "broke up a no-hitter with a bunt" if it's in the fifth inning.Yeah, this is pretty much my take on it.

I'm on record in previous threads arguing that there's nothing wrong with a bunt to break up a no-hitter anyway. The batter's main job, as a professional baseball player, is not to make an out. If he thinks the best way to do that is to bunt, then that's what he should do.

But, even if you disagree with that, and believe that there's something wrong with breaking up a no-hitter with a bunt, it's still pretty silly, in my opinion, to make such an evaluation as early as the 5th inning. In the 8th or 9th, maybe; but not the 5th.

[Ol'Gaffer]

To me, you can't really say a guy "broke up a no-hitter with a bunt" if it's in the fifth inning.

Yeah, I'm the biggest A's homer there is and this would be my take on it as well. I wouldn't even begrudge Crawford or Bartlett trying this later in the game since it's part of their regular repetoire.

I thought it was nice, though, that Kapler swung at a 3-1 pitch with two outs in the 9th. In any other situation, he's probably taking the pitch trying to work the walk but, at that point, he's swinging away. Shows some respect for the game.

[Crawlspace]

But Arod could have just said "sorry" and ended everything, instead he acted like a total jackass, as usual.He had nothing to apologize for. He thought it was funny that a near rookie had the balls to school a veteran on the unwritten rules and respect for the game over an issue no one ever makes an issue of.
Notice how nobody on the yankees ever stands up for him? He is the new Bonds.From the article titled Yank's Back A-Rod in Dispute With A's (http://www.northjersey.com/sports/91993019_Mound_out_of_a_molehill_.html)
A-Rod wasn’t alone, since it was a source of humor among the Yankees, who entered Friday with an 11-4 record. Once Braden’s comments circulated, "We had fun with it," Teixeira said. "We’ve been laughing about it since."

But was there a code violation by A-Rod?

"If Alex had charged the mound and started pummeling the guy, yes, he would’ve crossed the line," said Teixeira, who guessed that a runner’s incidental mound cross happens hundreds of times during a season. "Trying to hurt somebody is totally different than stepping across some imaginary line."

As a pitcher, Joba Chamberlain doesn’t feel that a quick, head-down jog across the mound is any sort of offense. It would only become an issue "if a guy starts kicking at the [mound] dirt," or otherwise making "a big deal about it," Chamberlain said.

"I don’t think Alex was trying to do anything malicious, or trying to send a message. … The shortest distance between two points is a straight line," said manager Joe Girardi, who chalked up the entire matter to the players’ "competitive spirit."Bolding mine.

[Crawlspace]

To me, you can't really say a guy "broke up a no-hitter with a bunt" if it's in the fifth inning.Pretty much. I don't consider a pitcher to have a no-hitter in progress until they've faced the line up twice.

[TheBoltEater]

He had nothing to apologize for. He thought it was funny that a near rookie had the balls to school a veteran on the unwritten rules and respect for the game over an issue no one ever makes an issue of.

No one?

David Wells thinks he's full of it (http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/yankeesblog/but_wells_says_rod_is_full_of_it_YSZXqZ4sGaWEbzTBMmryPI)

"A-Rod is full of (bleep), that he never heard of that,’’ Wells told The Post from San Diego. “He has been around the game long enough to know that."

"I hated it when runners did that. I yelled at plenty of them,’’ Wells said. “It’s one thing to cross in the front of the mound before it goes up, but on top of it, that’s wrong. The cleats (mess) up the mound. Pitchers don’t go in front of fielders and put their spikes in the dirt.

“I totally agree (with Braden) ‘Get off my mound.’ I would have done the same thing with A-Rod, or anybody else. (Bleep) it."

Wells said he would even call out Jeter but explained there is a difference between what somebody like Jeter or Bernie Williams would hear than what would pierce Rodriguez’s ears.

“I would yell at Jeter. There are certain guys you would mother (bleep) and certain guys you would give a little more courtesy to, guys like Jeter and Bernie," Wells said. "A-Rod is not a well-liked guy."

I can't seem to find a video of A-Fraud's postgame interview that day, but here's a glowing review of his act...

From MLBToday.net (http://www.mlbtoday.net/2010/04/its-official-alex-rodriguez-has-no-poker-face/)

Some people just aren’t good liars. Some people you can tell are lying. Some people can’t help but lie. Some people love lying for whatever reason.

Alex Rodriguez covers all of the above.

...I don’t care whether or not that’s etiquette. It’s the post game joke of an interview that A-Rod gave that I’m focused on. When approached by reporters after the game, A-Rod played it dumb

A-Rod, you are a pathological liar. Admit it.

………..Oh wait, you never would.

Rodriguez didn't "think it was funny." He just played stupid to the press.

[Crawlspace]

No one?

David Wells thinks he's full of it (http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/yankeesblog/but_wells_says_rod_is_full_of_it_YSZXqZ4sGaWEbzTBMmryPI)Cite an instance when Wells, as a player, made an issue of someone crossing his mound and you'll have a point. Wells is a drunken loudmouth. His explanation doesn't even make sense -- it's much more dangerous for damage to be done at the front of the mound, where a pitcher is liable to role an ankle or knee, than the back where the pitcher ambles to get rosin.

I can't seem to find a video of A-Fraud's postgame interview that day, but here's a glowing review of his act...That's a nice link to a blog entry, but if you want to post opinion it should be your own.

[Munch]

His explanation doesn't even make sense -- it's much more dangerous for damage to be done at the front of the mound, where a pitcher is liable to role an ankle or knee, than the back where the pitcher ambles to get rosin.

He never mentioned the back. He mentioned the front and the top (the top being the part where the pitcher spends a fair amount of time adjusting the dirt to suit his footing).

[fachverwirrt]

15 is also the number of players who have hit 4 homers in a single game.

You want a really rare feat? Try "Hit by Pitch twice in the same inning"! It's happened 4 times. Link (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/recbooks/rb_hbp2.shtml) (scroll to bottom)

Rare would be "hit two grand slams in one inning", which has happened once.

[HoboStew]

Yeah, I'm the biggest A's homer there is and this would be my take on it as well. I wouldn't even begrudge Crawford or Bartlett trying this later in the game since it's part of their regular repetoire.I feel like some people aren't paying attention. I wouldn't begrudge Crawford or Bartlett for attempting it either, because that is part of their game. They are speed guys, and bunting for a hit is part of what they do. Longoria is a power hitter with a high average. Bunting for a hit is not what he does. The only argument for it is the surprise thing, which frankly doesn't impress me. It would have been surprising for Bonds to try to bunt for a hit in his prime, too. But he would never have done that, and as his manager I would never expect or want him to do it.

He had nothing to apologize for. He thought it was funny that a near rookie had the balls to school a veteran on the unwritten rules and respect for the game over an issue no one ever makes an issue of.While it may not be an "official" unwritten rule (I have yet to be totally swung either way), the fact is that nobody ever does it and its a jerky thing to do. Typical classless move by Arod who has been pulling this kind of crap for years now.
From the article titled Yank's Back A-Rod in Dispute With A's (http://www.northjersey.com/sports/91993019_Mound_out_of_a_molehill_.html)
Bolding mine.Hm, guess the North Jersey sports section doesn't get picked up by the AP, because I didn't see this and I followed the story pretty closely. Fair enough, some yankees came to his defence, although Teixeira & Joba aren't exactly the faces of the franchise.

[Ol'Gaffer]

I feel like some people aren't paying attention. I wouldn't begrudge Crawford or Bartlett for attempting it either, because that is part of their game. They are speed guys, and bunting for a hit is part of what they do. Longoria is a power hitter with a high average. Bunting for a hit is not what he does. The only argument for it is the surprise thing, which frankly doesn't impress me. It would have been surprising for Bonds to try to bunt for a hit in his prime, too. But he would never have done that, and as his manager I would never expect or want him to do it.

<snip>



My agreement with garygnu had to do with the fact that I didn't think that Longoria broke any unwritten rules by attempting a bunt in the 5th inning. In the 8th or 9th - absolutely. It would be a classless move (although not necessarily if Crawford or Bartlett tried it...but I would, obviously, prefer if they were swinging away). We can continue to debate where the cut-off for "no-hitter in progress" is. I'll open with the 7th.

Oh, and can we all just concede that the Yankees are the greatest franchise in modern history and that anyone who has ever played for them (except for, apparently, Wells and Clemens) are the epitome of class, humility, grace, and sportsmanship? If we do that, can the rest of us go back to talking about the 19th perfect game in the history of MLB?

[ElvisL1ves]

David Wells thinks he's full of it (http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/yankeesblog/but_wells_says_rod_is_full_of_it_YSZXqZ4sGaWEbzTBMmryPI).
I am willing to give a pass to anyone who defends his weight with "I never heard of a player going on the disabled list with pulled fat."

[Munch]

I'll open with the 7th.
I don't think it'd be unreasonable to say the 6th - it's after the pitcher has qualified to pick up the win. If it's 0-0, I think you can stretch it to the 7th.

[Incensed]

<snip>
According to Baseball Reference, there has been a total of 391,362 games played in the Major Leagues since 1876. We know that there has been a total of 19 perfect games, giving us, over the history of the Major Leagues, one PG for every 20,598 games.

But, in the period since the start of 1991, we have 7 PGs. According to my calculations, there have been 44,845 games played since the start of the 1991 season (including post-season games). So, over these last two decades, the rate for PGs is one every 6406 games.

Therefore, in the period 1876-1990, there were 12 PGs in 346,517 games, giving a rate of one every 28,876 games.

Based on all this, we can see that, in the period 1991-2010, the rate of PGs (on a total games per PG basis) is more than 4 times the rate for the period 1876-1990.
Interesting trend; I think the lion's share of it can be attributed to K rates.

Think about it, the number of outs is the exponent in the probability formula, and since k's are 100% (or nearly so) outs, whereas a ball in play is only about an out about 70% of the time, it is much easier for a pitcher (and his team) to be perfect in a high K environment.

Notice how the preponderance of perfect games (http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Perfect_game) occurred in high strikeout eras.

Anyway, congrats to Braden, A-Rod is a known douchebag and the 7th inning is the cutoff for bunting in a no-no, except for 1 run games, in which anything goes.

[mhendo]

Interesting trend; I think the lion's share of it can be attributed to K rates.Absolutely.

There's a graph showing MLB strikeout rates here (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/strikeout-rates-through-the-years/), and the highest strikeout eras have been the two decades since 1990, as well as a period in the 1960s. Those 25 years or so account for 10 of the 19 perfect games.

Furthermore, you're right about the general principle that more strikeouts will increase your chances of a PG, because once the ball's in play there's a whole bunch of luck involved. Even if every single ball is hit straight to a fielder, a PG does not even allow for errors, leaving the pitcher at the mercy of his defense. I'd be interested to see an analysis of strikeout rates compared to both perfect games (where errors fuck up the pitcher) and to no-hitters (where errors don't fuck up the pitcher).

Of the PGs in the high strikeout eras, most of them have had a higher than average number of strikeouts.

Bunning 10
Koufax 14
Hunter 11
Martinez 5
Rogers 8
Wells 11
Cone 10
Johnson 13
Buehrle 6
Braden 6
As you can see, 6 of the 10 got double-digit strikeouts, which certainly reduces the luck factor, and reduces the pressure of the defense.

[Peremensoe]

Speaking of unwritten rules (and what a comeback to ARod's moronic comment about being called out by someone with a handful of wins), what about Longoria trying to bunt for a hit in the 5th? I'm not all that opposed to the tactic as a general rule, but Longoria is one of the best hitters in the game. I can see a #8 or 9 hitter pulling that crap, but do you think Albert Pujols would try that in a million years? I lost a bit of respect for the guy, personally.

The best hitter in a given context is the one that does what's most likely to get him on base and contribute to his team winning the game.

I don't know if Pujols is ever in a situation where attempting to bunt for a hit is his best move--but if he is, and he doesn't, that would be the move to criticize.

It may be true that bunting was a bad move even for Longoria, in context--but not because it was a small-ball tactic to break up a perfecto.

[Peremensoe]

I thought it was nice, though, that Kapler swung at a 3-1 pitch with two outs in the 9th. In any other situation, he's probably taking the pitch trying to work the walk but, at that point, he's swinging away. Shows some respect for the game.

Respect for the game? You mean the game of baseball or the perfecto?

Either way, the most respectful move for the opposing team is to do everything they can to win, until the last out is made. Anything less degrades the achievement.

[TheBoltEater]

That's a nice link to a blog entry, but if you want to post opinion it should be your own.

Well I'd love for someone to post a link to the actual postgame interview Rodriguez gave - my Google skills have failed me here and I can't seem to find it - but if you want my opinion it's pretty simple. A-Rod could have been a man and said, "Yeah, I did it, so what?"; but instead he played stupid to the press corps, pretending he didn't even remember the incident, all the while putting on one of the worst poker faces I've ever seen.

When he knocked the ball out of Arroyo's hand it was classless, but at least it was an attempt to help his team win an ALCS game. When he yelled at that Toronto third baseman it was just plain bush league; but again, at least it was designed to help his team win a divisional game. Jogging across the mound was the least egregious act of the three, and Braden probably overreacted to it pretty badly; but when A-Rod put on that stupid act in the locker room, he came off looking like a jerk again.

Simply put, he's waaaaay too good a player to keeping doing the childish stuff he does.

[friedo]

Number 20! (http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/29/halladay-throws-perfect-game-for-phillies-against-marlins/?hpt=T2)

[Airman Doors, USAF]

Fun fact: this is only the second time there have been two perfect games in a season. The first time was in 1880, and those happened in the same week.

[The Other Waldo Pepper]

Especially considering that these types of hitters don't bunt much and arent especially good at it, as evidenced by Longoria fouling his off and thus giving up a strike in the process, which resulted in a strikeout.

I'm not sure I follow you; he tried it because regular swings also weren't especially likely to work, as evidenced by the fact that regular swings hadn't worked yet, sure as those regular swings kept on not working for the rest of the game. How much can we extrapolate from a failed bunt if everything else failed too?

[Frank]

Last night's game was absolutely appropriate to have a speedy pinch-hitter attempt a bunt in the bottom of the ninth. I'm surprised it didn't happen.

[whitetho]

Over the weekend I was in Princeton, New Jersey, with an AM-only radio, and because of the electrical interference in the place I was staying at the only station I could pick up was the local station WHWH, which carries the Phillies games. I happened to turn on the radio during the sixth inning, and by chance got to hear a piece of history.

[Jeff Lichtman]

What do people think about the fact that the Marlins are going to sell the previously unsold tickets for Halladay's perfect game (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gh9eFIpEtXLFPP2MuDPpkQEB9CawD9G2QM5G0)?

As I noted before in this thread, I attended Braden's perfect game. A lot of people who went to that game saved their tickets as proof that they were there. It would be pretty annoying if the A's were to put the unsold tickets for that game on sale now, as it would eliminate the "I was there" factor. It would also reduce the market value of the "real" tickets (I don't plan to sell mine, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the idea).

I have season tickets, which look different from regular tickets, so I would have some protection if the A's were to try the same thing that the Marlins are doing. Still, it would bug me in principle.

[mhendo]

What do people think about the fact that the Marlins are going to sell the previously unsold tickets for Halladay's perfect game (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gh9eFIpEtXLFPP2MuDPpkQEB9CawD9G2QM5G0)?Blatant opportunism.

Still, if some douchebag wants to buy the ticket and pretend he was at the game, i don't really care. If i had been at the game, it would not detract from my own experience if someone wanted to falsely claim that they were also there.

[Clothahump]

Unlike casual fans, a real baseball fan knows that home runs aren't nearly as exciting as a beautiful diving catch or sharp double play. The most exciting things in baseball don't show up on the scoreboard.

Agreed. To me, the most top-notch play in the game is the long throw from right field to nail a runner at third base, especially if it's a close call. I frankly don't care which team makes it when I see it.

Here's a good example.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nTujNsRRQg) Sorry about the absolute suck music on the clip.