Red Mosquito

philpritchard wrote:

numbers wrote:Didn't Luis Castillo get into the high 30s some years back?

I vaguely remember that, too. 39? Speed guys like Castillo always seem more likely to do it, to me, because the chance they can keep it going with a cheap infield hit or a bunt single or something. I know they don't actually have a better chance, but I've always sort of perceived it that way in the back of my mind.

39 was Molitor which no one has topped since 1987
Castillo was 35

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/feats/f ... reak.shtml
DiMaggio actually had a 61 game hitting streak in the minors.

There are very few celebrated feats in sports that I personally think are more overrated than the hitting streak.

Lament wrote:There are very few celebrated feats in sports that I personally think are more overrated than the hitting streak.

It really doesn't mean shit.

Yeah, I pretty much agree.

For what it's worth, I think Cal Ripken's consecutive games streak is the most bullshit celebrated "achievement" in sports history.

Ah, I have a soft spot for that one.

I have a hard time appreciating an achievement that becomes meaningless with something as little as randomly taking a day off sometime in 1986. I mean, if you take away one of Pete Rose's 4,256 hits from some point in the middle of his career, or one of Nolan Ryan's 5,714 strike outs they're still jaw-dropping, amazing accomplishments. If Cal Ripken takes off a day around the 1,000 game mark, no one gives a shit about it anymore. It's the same way I feel about hitting streaks.

Now granted, there are some streaks that are impressive to me, but only ones that still remain impressive without the "streak nature." Orel Hershisher's scoreless innings streak is still amazing because even if he randomly had given up a run at some point in the middle of it, it would still be a stunning exhibition of dominance, just one without the "neat" nature it has.

When Ripken broke the record, I was pretty excited. But I think a lot of that was because it was the first time I got to witness a "record" being broken.

Lament wrote:When Ripken broke the record, I was pretty excited. But I think a lot of that was because it was the first time I got to witness a "record" being broken.

And that's why I have a soft spot for it. I don't really disagree with any of what you said there.

Fair enough. I definitely see where you're coming from.

I just get annoyed now when I see stuff like this...

http://www.mlb.com/mlb/events/memorable ... oments.jsp

That's just silly.

Lament wrote:Fair enough. I definitely see where you're coming from.

I just get annoyed now when I see stuff like this...

http://www.mlb.com/mlb/events/memorable ... oments.jsp

That's just silly.

All that's saying is it's a memorable moment, which it most certainly is.

If that really is what people consider the most "memorable" moment in baseball history, then that just speaks volumes about the people voting in these things. Just in my time as a fan I can't honestly put it in the same category as any of the great postseason moments like Gibson's home run in 1988, Puckett's home run in 1991, Joe Carter's in 1993, Edgar Renteria's single in 1997, Ventura's Grand Slam double in 1999, Jeter's flip in 2001, Luis Gonzalez's single in 2001, Boone's home run in 2003, or the Red Sox comeback in 2004. And that's not even taking into account moments like the earthquake in 1989, McGwire and Bonds' record breaking home runs. Someone ten or so years older would have seen the Fisk homer, the Bucky Dent homer, Reggie Jackson hitting three homers in one World Series game, the Buckner error...I dunno, it's just silly to me. People still talk about those moments down to the miniscule details. What is the actual "moment" anyways? When the game became "official" after the fourth inning or whatever and Ripken took his lap around the field? Do people even remember what time of year it was, or who the Orioles were playing, or anything like that?

You're right. I wasn't thinking of it as the most memorable, just a memorable moment. I should have looked at it for more than a second.

It was early September, the orioles were playin the angels, and I wanna say Shawn boskie was the pitcher. That game was a big deal for me I was a huge Ripken fan then.

cutuphalfdead wrote:

Lament wrote:There are very few celebrated feats in sports that I personally think are more overrated than the hitting streak.

It really doesn't mean shit.

If someone were to actually get into the 40's, would that change your perceptions?
I remember clearly watching Molitor get up into the 30's and clearly remember the home town fans booing Ric Manning for getting the game winning hit with Molitor ondeck when the streak ended at 39. Dan Uggla aside, you pretty much have to be a good pure hitter who makes a lot of contact, hits a lot of line drives, and has good speed and sprays the ball to all fields to have a chance at even getting into the 30s. AND you still need a whole lotta luck.

the impressive part with Ripkens streak, is that he never took a late September game off when the O's were already eliminated or clinched even for that matter. You gotta figure when hes sitting around 400, and its Sept 29th, the O's are out of it, hes banged up from a long season, hes not sitting there thinking "man i gotta play today, I MIGHT stay healthy another 10 years and catch Gehrig"

I would have loved to see Ichiro make a run at 56, if he couldnt do it, I just dont see it happening.

The reason it's not as impressive as it may seem is because you can go 1/5 for 40 straight games and you're still only hitting .200.

Congratulations on your hitting streak, now can you help us win instead?

MadTIGERmaN wrote:the impressive part with Ripkens streak, is that he never took a late September game off when the O's were already eliminated or clinched even for that matter.

Some of you older fans can maybe help with this...

When did his "streak" become a thing? I got into baseball in 1988, and unless I'm totally misremembering thing, he was already the "Iron Man" at that point.

I think Cal's refusal to sit probably worked to the detriment of the Os at times. There's a reason why managers sit great players 5-15 times a season. Wasn't Cal notriously bad during their August/September choke job in 1989? Perhaps a few days rest here and there keeps him playing at a higher level and they don't hand the division over to Toronto...

Just to stir the pot, here are DiMaggio's stats from 5/15/41-7/16/41 (the length of his streak) compared to Ted Williams' stats from the same stretch (T. Ballgame had 55 games compared to Joe's 56 during the stretch):

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS
DiMaggio: .408/.463/.717/1.181
Williams: .412/.540/.684/1.224

HR/RBI/BB
DiMaggio: 15/55/21
Williams: 12/50/50

So, I mean, I think I agree with chud: if a guy hits in 40 straight games but goes 1 for 5 in most of them...I think it's impressive, but not mind boggling. But the kind of numbers that both of these guys put up for a two-month stretch are out of this world; I don't think what DiMaggio did is any better than Williams just because he hit safely in every game; in fact, considering Williams had more than twice as many walks as DiMaggio (and scored twice as many runs--61 to 29), I dunno if you can really argue who had the better stretch.

cutuphalfdead wrote:The reason it's not as impressive as it may seem is because you can go 1/5 for 40 straight games and you're still only hitting .200.

Congratulations on your hitting streak, now can you help us win instead?

That's a really weak argument considering:

There have been 129 single-season streaks of 25 games or more. The lowest batting average ever recorded during a hitting streak of 25 games or more was .304 by Bruce Campbell in 1938. The highest was .486 during Chuck Klein's streak in 1930. Joe DiMaggio hit .408 during his record-holding 56 game streak.

Simple Torture wrote:Just to stir the pot, here are DiMaggio's stats from 5/15/41-7/16/41 (the length of his streak) compared to Ted Williams' stats from the same stretch (T. Ballgame had 55 games compared to Joe's 56 during the stretch):

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS
DiMaggio: .408/.463/.717/1.181
Williams: .412/.540/.684/1.224

HR/RBI/BB
DiMaggio: 15/55/21
Williams: 12/50/50

So, I mean, I think I agree with chud: if a guy hits in 40 straight games but goes 1 for 5 in most of them...I think it's impressive, but not mind boggling. But the kind of numbers that both of these guys put up for a two-month stretch are out of this world; I don't think what DiMaggio did is any better than Williams just because he hit safely in every game; in fact, considering Williams had more than twice as many walks as DiMaggio (and scored twice as many runs--61 to 29), I dunno if you can really argue who had the better stretch.

I agree with this. Hitting Streaks are fun to follow but really don't cover much more than a lot of luck. Obviously a good hitter is going to have a better chance, but the consecutive games is just fluky and fun- not proof of greatness.

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote:That's a really weak argument considering:

There have been 129 single-season streaks of 25 games or more. The lowest batting average ever recorded during a hitting streak of 25 games or more was .304 by Bruce Campbell in 1938. The highest was .486 during Chuck Klein's streak in 1930. Joe DiMaggio hit .408 during his record-holding 56 game streak.

That doesn't make the "consecutive games hit in" the remarkable part. Hitting over .400 for a thirty-plus game period is a great accomplishment regardless of whether or not there was a hit in every single game. An 0-4 in the middle of those thirty-plus games doesn't make the achievement any less fantastic.