This isn't my idea and it's been brought to recent light by Brian Kenny.
Why fascination w/ no-hitter?Because in formative years of baseball, walks were considered a pitcher's responsibility, not a batter's skill
Yes, I'm saying it: No-hitters, hitting streaks - antiquated notions. From a time where we are baseball values were misguided.
No-hitters are...?cool?...I enjoy them. But what do they mean?
Lincecum pitched a no hitter yesterday, you may have heard.
9 innings, 0 hits, 0 runs, 4 walks, 1 hit batter, wild pitch, 13 K's, 148 pitches.
Though it'll be the game that goes down in history, I'm not sure it was the best game pitched yesterday.
Zack Greinke also pitched a pretty good game yesterday.
9 innings, 2 hits, 0 runs, 1 walk, 9 K's, 110 pitches.
Greinke allowed 2 less runners to reach base. He needed 38 less pitches to retire 27 hitters than Lincecum did. The two hits off Greinke were a loopy line drive to left-center and a bunt
Greinke allowed 20 balls in play. 14 of them were ground balls, 3 were classified as line drives, 1 was an infield fly ball.
Lincecum allowed 14 balls in play. 6 were ground balls, 6 were outfield fly balls, 2 were classified as line drives.
Lincecum pitched a great game. Greinke probably pitched a bit better.
Lincecum's game will go down in history because Hunter Pence made this catch.
Johnny Vander Meer allowed 12 base runners in his back-to-back no-hitters.
Francisco Liriano walked 6 in his no-hitter
Joe Cowley gave up 6 walks and an earned run in a no-hit game.
AJ Burnett walked 9, hit a batter, threw a wild pitch and allowed 3 steals in his no-hitter.
Edwin Jackson also allowed 9 base runners, but none by hit.
There have been plenty of better pitched games than those above, but they aren't considered historic.