travis Posted May 9, 2012 Author Share Posted May 9, 2012 It really is hard to square up a ball for a home run even once a game. Pujols knows all about this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Oh no doubt, it is an incredible feat to pull off and I am happy for Hamilton, but I just dont think it is on par with a perfect game. Mike Cameron did it, and he got a total of 4 RBIs that game. Also went hitless in his last at bat, far from a perfect game on the batting side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 It really is hard to square up a ball for a home run even once a game. Pujols knows all about this Pujols needs to worry less about homeruns and more about getting on base in any way possible. His stats have been declining three years in a row, but he also was hitting .257 last may 25th, so there is hope he will get to .300 again this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adaytoforget Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 I think it's more impressive than a perfect game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis Posted May 9, 2012 Author Share Posted May 9, 2012 Pujols knows all about this Pujols needs to worry less about homeruns and more about getting on base in any way possible. His stats have been declining three years in a row, but he also was hitting .257 last may 25th, so there is hope he will get to .300 again this year. Dude, tell me about it! He's been one of the worst players on the team this year. Its kinda crazy how bad he's been. Not drawing walks and he's turning over a ton of ground balls to the left side. In the past he either took that pitch or drove it to right center. He's trying to pull everything and is getting off balance on nearly every AB. Very un-Pujols-like. I think think he will turn it around this year but its time to start that already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Ok, so I thought about this and I was wrong. Hitting four home runs in one game is considerably harder. Looking at success for starter, we see that a perfect game has already happened 5 more times. Now, we look at opportunity to accomplish each fete. Each game there are only 2 pitchers with the opportunity to throw a perfect game. There are however 16-18 hitters with the opportunity to hit four home runs. Despite there being nearly 10 times the opportunity there are still fewer players who have hit four home runs. Based on opportunity vs historical success a perfect game is nearly ten times more likely to occur than a hitter hitting four homers. This doesn't diminish how hard a perfect game is to pitch and while it is indeed rare, it is in reality considerably more common. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Oh no doubt, it is an incredible feat to pull off and I am happy for Hamilton, but I just dont think it is on par with a perfect game. Mike Cameron did it, and he got a total of 4 RBIs that game. Also went hitless in his last at bat, far from a perfect game on the batting side. So what? Philip Humber did it and he has an ERA of almost 7 this year (even counting the 9 / 27 perfect innings). Galaraga basically did it. Mike Cameron's 4 HR game might the equivalent of an Edwin Jackson or AJ Burnett no-hitter. Yeah, it meets the criterion, but there are better games that don't (ie, there are offensive games with 2 homers that are better than his 4 and there are 2 hit shutouts that are way more impressive than a 7-walk no hitter). 4HR game for a hitter = Perfect Game for a pitcher = Unassisted triple play for a defender. A 5 HR game would be the equivalent of a perfect game with (or close to) 20 strikeouts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Or Mike Cameron's 4 HR game is like a perfect game where there were a lot of hard hit balls that just found defenders gloves. I think that is the right comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 They have a poll on espn where out of 75K people 71% think Hamiltons game was more impressive than Humbers perfect game. I cant believe that. Hamilton was perfect for 4 at bats in a game, Humber was perfect for 27! How much has it not happened before because a player ended up walking instead of getting pitched to when they were at 3 homeruns? Hitting four in a game relies on the pitchers just as much as it does the hitter. Throwing a perfect game relies solely on your ability to make perfect pitches the entire game. And not to beat a dead horse, but a hitter is successful 3/10 times (much fewer is a success is only defined as a home run, but I don't really know that number). A pitcher is successful 7/10. That is why it is not fair to compare the numbers like that. Just basic probability: P(4 consecutive successes | p(success) = .3) = .3^4 = .0081. P(4 consecutive successes | p(success) = .7) = .7^4 = .24 It's about 30 times harder to go 4/4 at the plate that to go 4/4 as a pitcher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Comparing Humber to Cameron doesnt work because those are seasonal statistics compared to a one game. I would put Camerons game on the same level as Lirano's no hitter, yeah no one got a hit, but he walked 8 guys. As for being more rare, look at plate appearances. A pitcher has 27 batters to face and roughly 100 pitches that need to be perfect. A batter might see 12 pitches over the course of 4 at bats to hit for homeruns. There is far more many chances for a pitcher to make a mistake than for the hitter to make a mistake and not square perfectly on the ball. Hitters would be hitting many more homeruns if given more chances to bat. Also factor in walks and IBB to hitters such as Bonds, Pujols, Aaron who wouldnt actually be pitched to in a situation where the game was close. The pitcher would take the bat out of their hands so it couldnt be done. Surely if Sosa, Mcquire, Gonzalez were pitched to every at bat of a game it would be more frequently done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 why is anyone bashing cameron here? because he had no base runners in 4 at bats? dude came within feet of hitting a 5th in his last at bat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Cause he went 4-5 in a game and people are saying it is more incredible than throwing a perfect game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Comparing Humber to Cameron doesnt work because those are seasonal statistics compared to a one game. I would put Camerons game on the same level as Lirano's no hitter, yeah no one got a hit, but he walked 8 guys. As for being more rare, look at plate appearances. A pitcher has 27 batters to face and roughly 100 pitches that need to be perfect. A batter might see 12 pitches over the course of 4 at bats to hit for homeruns. There is far more many chances for a pitcher to make a mistake than for the hitter to make a mistake and not square perfectly on the ball. Hitters would be hitting many more homeruns if given more chances to bat. Also factor in walks and IBB to hitters such as Bonds, Pujols, Aaron who wouldnt actually be pitched to in a situation where the game was close. The pitcher would take the bat out of their hands so it couldnt be done. Surely if Sosa, Mcquire, Gonzalez were pitched to every at bat of a game it would be more frequently done. This only works if the odds are even between a pitcher and a hitter. They are swung 2 to 1 in way of the pitcher to even get a hit, and the pitcher is at least 10 times more likely to get an out than the hitter hit a home run. The way you make it sound, it's like hitting 4 home runs in a game happens frequently. What, 100 years of baseball (actually a little more) X 30 teams (at times there were less) X 9 hitters (ok, really 8 and a pitcher) X 162 games (I know, there used to be less) is over 4.3 million at bats. My numbers are high, maybe it's in the 3 million at bat range. And it has been done 16 times? Add 10 more times for intentional walks in the steroid era and it is still an incredible (and incredibly rare) feat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Plus, if you want to bring steroid-era baseball into the conversation, who is to say there weren't perfect games lost because of roids? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Factoring opportunity vs accomplishment - four home runs is undoubtedly rarer. No other factor matters if we are simply calling it four home runs. No one is saying you have to be perfect in the game to accomplish the fete. The greatest however is Reggie Jackson in 1977 hitting four consecutive home runs (3 in one game) on four pitches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elgato48 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Hardest thing about the 4 home runs is that usually after the second they usually dont bother pitching to the batter. Luckily the game was out of hand so it didn't make sense to walk hamilton. Also it could have easily have been 5. He just did get all of the double he hit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 JerseyDave: Ernest Scared Stupid is the best Ernest movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 JerseyDave: Ernest Scared Stupid is the best Ernest movie. An excellent film. The search for miak sequence is truly hilarious but Scared Stupid is only #4 on my Ernest power rankings. I consider myself a true Ernest aficianado, glad to see others who know the movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flood Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 its comparing apples and oranges. its like whats better a threesome with two supermodels, or finding 50k in the street. Both are awesome.. but its hard to quantify which is actually better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Flood - my statements are less about which is better as opposed to which is more difficult to accomplish. I think the question of which is harder is pretty clear by the numbers. Which is better? Well, for the team, the Perfect Game is. You can't pitch a Perfect Game and have the team lose. A player can however hit four home runs and have the team lose the game. So, as far as a value to the game, the Perfect Game holds more worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 Trout>Harper Just sayin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebiglebowski Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 JerseyDave: Ernest Scared Stupid is the best Ernest movie. An excellent film. The search for miak sequence is truly hilarious but Scared Stupid is only #4 on my Ernest power rankings. I consider myself a true Ernest aficianado, glad to see others who know the movies. The line about "There ain't no lumberjacks in Botswana. I know. I am a Botswanian lumberjack and I have never had a job" is one of my favorites in any movie ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 +1 for pulling an Ernest quote - and a great one at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I am in no way saying it isnt a big deal to get 4 in a game, as it is an incredible feat, I just personally think it isnt as tough as a perfect game, but I see your points for sure. Trout has been in the majors before while Harper hasnt, and Trout wasnt doing that great on his first call up as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis Posted May 10, 2012 Author Share Posted May 10, 2012 They will both be great players. Id take either guy on my team. I just think its funny that there's such a east coast bias in the sports media. Trout has outplayed Harper this year so far in the small sample we've seen and they mention him for a second when they cover an Angels game but they do a whole 5 minute story on Harper on Sportscenter just about every night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.