Page 1 of 1
I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Wed Nov 27, 2013 2:09 am
by Michael Grammes
The wrong end of a rare 8 IP no hitter.
This is in one of Andy's era leagues.
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/ga ... 347572/659
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:38 pm
by kunkel40
here is another no hitter but team loses. 4 walks in same inning.
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/game/347567/961
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:11 pm
by uvm87
Wow, rough outing for Worthington. He gives up the walk, gets charged with the ER that lost the game and goes down with a 10 game injury.
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:14 pm
by Treyomo
Quick hook for Schilling after just 89 pitches. There should be a logic similar to what real ML managers do, stretching the pitchcount for a guy on a no-no - and then have that guy pitch from F6 fatigue for his next two outings.
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Wed Dec 11, 2013 12:46 pm
by Musial6
My question would be - why walk Bud Harrelson (BUD HARRELSON!) to get to Eddie Stanky who practically walks half the time he bats? With two outs and runners on second and third - is it just to get the force out at second? Does HAL ever consider the next batter? I don't think it's worth it. Those intentional walk sequences just drive me nuts! In a game the other day - same situation - second and third, two outs, Eddie Mathews up! Holy Crap! HAL issues an intentional walk - don't want to let Eddie Mathews get a hit. Let's see who's up next........DOH! Mickey Mantle! Bingo bango bongo.......GRAND SLAM!
WTF?!
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Wed Dec 11, 2013 3:41 pm
by Valen
You have a point about whether Hal should consider who is up next. But most real life managers issue the intentional walk in situations where it sets up a double play regardless of who is up next. So I will cut Hal some slack on this one.
Re: I haven't seen one of these in a while...
Posted:
Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:50 pm
by Musial6
Possible double play wasn't in order in either of these situations. Second and third, TWO (2) outs.