Clay Buchholz of the Red Sox didn't give up any hits to the Orioles a few days ago.
Should this even be entered into the record books since the Orioles showed how bad of a team they have by giving up 30 runs a few weeks ago --- the first time any team has allowed 30 runs over 100 years???
Should this "no-hitter" carry any more weight than if the Red Sox had beaten a little league team?
2007-09-03 03:13:44 · 16 answers · asked by Duminos 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
I'm waiting for the O's to be no-hit AND give up 30 runs in the same game. For fullest irony, it should be at home.
2007-09-03 03:59:45 · answer #1 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it should count for something. Now, I'm a Yankees fan, so I wasn't happy about the no-hitter, but it should still mean something. Despite their record, the O's aren't that bad of a team. They've lost over 30 1run games. Now think if they had won all those, just imagine where they would be. Give credit where credit is due.
2007-09-03 10:24:26 · answer #2 · answered by starysky2004 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The orioles are 12th in the league in batting average, buddy. I know this may be a hard concept to grasp but there's a difference between getting hits and giving up runs (whether its 2 or 30).
2007-09-03 12:22:22 · answer #3 · answered by miamiman 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A no-hitter is a hard enough accomplishment, but when you no hit a team with names such as Tejada, Markakis, Roberts, Patterson, and Millar, well that's pretty good, and the hitting has nothing to do with the pitching giving up 30 runs.
2007-09-03 11:27:42 · answer #4 · answered by SoxfanWheels 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Last time I checked the Orioles are still a major league baseball team with players like Millar, Tejada, Roberts, and Markakis playing that night. Do you know how hard it is to throw a no-hitter to any team? Who cares that they gave up 30 runs to Texas? That is their pitching staff giving up 30 runs one time...and Texas gave up hits that night. By asking this question you show the extreme lack of baseball knowledge you possess. In conclusion...are you out of your mind? Of course it should count!
2007-09-03 10:40:32 · answer #5 · answered by JT-24 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
A no hitter is a no hitter no matter what team he throws it against.
Yes the Orioles are a bad team, I mean THIRTY RUNS?! But give the kid some credit, he threw a no hitter in olny his 2nd start.
But 30 runs sounds like a little league game.
2007-09-03 12:16:05 · answer #6 · answered by #1 New York Yankees Fan 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
of course the no hitter should mean something.
the orioles giving up 30 runs has nothing to do with their batters. the baltimore pitching staff isn't what gave bucholz the no hitter, the batters are.
2007-09-03 10:40:15 · answer #7 · answered by greg 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is kinda getting enjoyment out of kicking a dead dog, eh?
That said, you still gotta perform the task, and for a 2nd start rookie to throw a no-hitter, regardless of who it was against, is very impressive indeed.
Give credit where credit is due in this case.
2007-09-03 10:20:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It does, it is almost like throwing a no hitter against an expansion team or a minor league team.
2007-09-03 11:26:09 · answer #9 · answered by texasman75147 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If it's so easy, how come a Yankee starting pitcher hasn't been able to accomplish this feat?
Dumbest question I've seen in weeks.
2007-09-03 13:19:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋