Psssssssst 2022

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
I don't know. Why was Eovaldi pulled today after 98? Why didn't he pitch more than five innings? Why are there pitch counts and pitch limits at all? Let's go back to 1964 when pitchers blew their arms out for less than life-changing money.
I mean that’s a bit of a slippery slope. I think lifting kershaw is the right decision with the game in hand and no reason to extend him. But when it’s only 80 pitches during a perfect game, I think you can afford to give him a bit more. Eovaldi at 98 through 5 is obviously an entirely different situation. And 1964 salaries is completely unrelated
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
11,930
The Paris of the 80s
Kershaw being older and probably in his last year is exactly why the risk is so low for Dodgers to keep him in.
Presumably, the Dodgers would like Kershaw to remain as health as possible for as much of the season as possible. 80 pitches is a lot right now. It's not 1980.

This is also the sort of thing I think primarily older fans lose their shit over.
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
“The risk is so low for the Dodgers….” Well, what’s the risk for Kershaw and his career and his post career lifestyle?
Very darn close to zero

But this is damnfunny coming from a fan of boxing and MMA
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
Very darn close to zero
yea, exactly. Leaving kershaw in to throw more than 80 pitches is way less dangerous that leaving football players out there in the 4Q of a blowout, yet no one thinks twice about that. The injury risk, particularly the catastrophic injury risk that will fuck up his post career life, is being way overblown. It’s a perfect game, there’s only been 23 ever, and from what I can see online roughly 99% of people thinks it sucks he was taken out
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
Can't both sides of this argument be true? In the sense that it was 100% the right move to lift him...but also things like this are a reason why casual fans might be opting out?
I guess I don't really see them as opposite sides though. If casual fans are opting out because of pitch count limits, they're ungettable IMO because that's not going away no matter what history could be made by ignoring them. It's not even an exclusive concept to baseball. Load management is a normal thing in all sports these days. NBA players sit out entire games just to save on wear and tear. It doesn't seem to be affecting their popularity with younger fans. It sure rankles the old school guys though.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,957
There is a huge difference between a no hitter and a perfect game and Santanas perceived future and Kershaws and between 80 and 115.
If Kershaw was too fragile to pitch an 81st pitch why was he even out there?
Why not just put him in bubble wrap and start him later? Dodgers don’t exactly need him for a playoff push.
The Padres had no hitters going into the 7th and 8th inning last weekend, and pulled their starter both times. This has nothing to do with Kershaw, per se, and everything to do with protecting the health of the pitchers over the long grind of a season. Cumulative wear and tear adds up, and while it sucks that fans got robbed of a potential perfect game, it's a perfectly understandable position to have this early in the season after an abbreviated spring training.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
yea, exactly. Leaving kershaw in to throw more than 80 pitches is way less dangerous that leaving football players out there in the 4Q of a blowout, yet no one thinks twice about that. The injury risk, particularly the catastrophic injury risk that will fuck up his post career life, is being way overblown. It’s a perfect game, there’s only been 23 ever, and from what I can see online roughly 99% of people thinks it sucks he was taken out
Saying it was the right call doesn't mean it doesn't suck as a fan to see it happen, but it also isn't something that is going to affect my fandom of the game in any tangible way.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
52,558
Very darn close to zero

But this is damnfunny coming from a fan of boxing and MMA
yea, exactly. Leaving kershaw in to throw more than 80 pitches is way less dangerous that leaving football players out there in the 4Q of a blowout, yet no one thinks twice about that. The injury risk, particularly the catastrophic injury risk that will fuck up his post career life, is being way overblown. It’s a perfect game, there’s only been 23 ever, and from what I can see online roughly 99% of people thinks it sucks he was taken out
Y’all are orthopods or pitching coaches?
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,123
South Dartmouth, MA
I guess I don't really see them as opposite sides though. If casual fans are opting out because of pitch count limits, they're ungettable IMO because that's not going away no matter what history could be made by ignoring them. It's not even an exclusive concept to baseball. Load management is a normal thing in all sports these days. NBA players sit out entire games just to save on wear and tear. It doesn't seem to be affecting their popularity with younger fans. It sure rankles the old school guys though.
Yeah I'm in complete agreement...I was trying to simplify the argument. It's more nuanced though and I think you've nailed it.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
Saying it was the right call doesn't mean it doesn't suck as a fan to see it happen, but it also isn't something that is going to affect my fandom of the game in any tangible way.
Sure, from an objective point of view of a team just trying to maximize wins, I’m sure it was correct, and it won’t affect my fandom either. I just think it’s rather lame not to chase history, but I admittedly care infinitely more about cool statistical events than any team does. So it’s probably the right decision, just extremely lame
 

Gdiguy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,319
San Diego, CA
A few somewhat connected thoughts -

1) Especially with the weird offseason, I honestly can't disagree with the decision today or the Padres' decisions. It's one thing to push a bit in the middle of a season, it's a very different thing to do it week 1 (especially this year).

2) I know the Santana example here was qualified as 'arguable', but I think that's being generous - he was perfectly fine after that until he rolled his ankle.
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/04/johan-santana-comeback-new-york-mets-no-hitter-134-pitches-terry-collins-mlb

But there’s a needling little inconsistency in the commonly recited claim that the no-hitter ruined Santana: He actually pitched pretty well for a while thereafter. Santana got hit hard his next time out, but the five starts following the no-hitter saw the lefty go 3-2 with a 3.60 ERA, including eight shutout innings against the Dodgers in the fifth of those on June 30.

And Santana’s complete collapse that season did not come until he injured his ankle on a play at first base against the Cubs on July 6. He allowed two runs over the first four innings that day, then twisted his ankle when Reed Johnson stepped on it on an infield hit to leadoff the fifth. Santana faced six more batters that inning and allowed hits to five of them, including homers to Anthony Rizzo and John Baker.

Santana got torched in his next two outings, then hit the disabled list because of the ankle injury.
Again - I don't think it's really relevant because of (1), but people keep using that as the 'obviously it was a terrible idea' example, and the data I think is more strongly in the other direction

3)
Sure, from an objective point of view of a team just trying to maximize wins, I’m sure it was correct, and it won’t affect my fandom either. I just think it’s rather lame not to chase history, but I admittedly care infinitely more about cool statistical events than any team does. So it’s probably the right decision, just extremely lame
I guess I don't really see them as opposite sides though. If casual fans are opting out because of pitch count limits, they're ungettable IMO because that's not going away no matter what history could be made by ignoring them. It's not even an exclusive concept to baseball. Load management is a normal thing in all sports these days. NBA players sit out entire games just to save on wear and tear. It doesn't seem to be affecting their popularity with younger fans. It sure rankles the old school guys though.
I do think it (along with the DH, and the man on 2nd extra inning rule) get to a broader issue, which is - why should I care about (or watch, or pay $100 to attend) any individual game? I can't really argue with the perspective of 'it's a long season, it's more critical to pull him and save his arm than even take a minor risk' from the perspective of winning a championship; but baseball is unique in having a long regular season, and (at least for me) a big part of watching or attending a random game in May is simply the fact that you might see something crazy - whether it's the 6th inning and you realize there's a no-hit bid going, or it's a tie game that winds up going 15 innings, etc. One of my regrets is that a few years back I decided to only go to one of the Mets-Padres games that year, and picked the Syndergaard game - and of course the next day was the one that Bartolo hit his HR. Stuff like that to me is a big part of what makes individual baseball games so fun

So I can't disagree at all with the decision from a winning perspective; but I do think it's a shame that in that pursuit of winning, we're losing some part of what makes baseball fun to watch and attend (and since ultimately baseball is entertainment, I don't really know that the net benefit is worth it)
 

Hendu for Kutch

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 7, 2006
6,613
Nashua, NH
There was still two innings left. How high would you let him go? If he kept his pace up, he'd need 103 pitches to get through it. And those are high-stress pitches at the end given what he's going for. Would you let him go 100+ to get it, given that he was making his first start this late because of an arm injury? If you wouldn't let him go 100+, then why not pull him when he's at his original limit?

Also, it was 38 degrees in Minnesota. Not exactly loose arm weather.
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
@Gdiguy said my point better than I did. It sucks when what is good for a team long term makes the short term way less exciting
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
54,288
New York City
Pulling Kershaw makes sense for the Dodgers and for Kershaw.

But it also sucks for everyone because perfect games are the crown jewels of pitching. They are one of the rarest things in baseball. It was right and it sucks.
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
Other pitchers and Kershaw say it was the right move.

Ale says it wasn’t

not sure why this part of the conversation needs to continue.
Then why did you post? Ale stopped hours ago. Thanks for piling on.

In any case, Kershaw is a great teammate and Ale is thinking about the big picture not the Dodgers 2022 season.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Then why did you post? Ale stopped hours ago. Thanks for piling on.

In any case, Kershaw is a great teammate and Ale is thinking about the big picture not the Dodgers 2022 season.
Seems like Ale is thinking about the little picture, ie: today, and not about the Dodgers 2022 season, which Kershaw and Roberts are thinking of, which is the a big Picture.
 

YTF

Member
SoSH Member
Then why did you post? Ale stopped hours ago. Thanks for piling on.

In any case, Kershaw is a great teammate and Ale is thinking about the big picture not the Dodgers 2022 season.
But isn't that (or shouldn't it be) the big picture? Imagine this is Chris sale in his second or third game back this season. Same exact situation and Core leaves him in. Top of the eighth, first batter and Sale feels something pop in his rib cage and he doesn't contribute the rest of the season. Big deal or no? I mean screw him, he's gone after the season, right?
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
But isn't that (or shouldn't it be) the big picture? Imagine this is Chris sale in his second or third game back this season. Same exact situation and Core leaves him in. Top of the eighth, first batter and Sale feels something pop in his rib cage and he doesn't contribute the rest of the season. Big deal or no? I mean screw him, he's gone after the season, right?
I’d want Sale to start the 8th if he’s 80 pitches through 7 and is throwing a perfect game. 100%
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
I’d want Sale to start the 8th if he’s 80 pitches through 7 and is throwing a perfect game. 100%
And it'd be worth it if he on his 112th pitch, he gives up a hit with two outs in the ninth, then hits the IL with a shoulder strain a couple weeks later and is gone for the year?
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
Seems like Ale is thinking about the little picture, ie: today, and not about the Dodgers 2022 season, which Kershaw and Roberts are thinking of, which is the a big Picture.
Big picture is the game of baseball not one team’s one season. What’s the point of even having this thread if managers are taking out pitchers, especially ones in the last season for the clubs, after 80 pitches after 7 with a perfect game going. Pitchers can get injured on pitch 1 or pitch 41 just as easy as pitch 81.
if Kershaw is too fragile to pitch 81 pitches he’s shouldn’t frankly start, especially with that team’s depth.
This thread is pointless if you’re taking out pitchers when they’re throwing a perfecto.
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
And it'd be worth it if he on his 112th pitch, he gives up a hit with two outs in the ninth, then hits the IL with a shoulder strain a couple weeks later and is gone for the year?
Chris Sale would strain his shoulder buttoning a shirt or crossing the street.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
Big picture is the game of baseball not one team’s one season. What’s the point of even having this thread if managers are taking out pitchers, especially ones in the last season for the clubs, after 80 pitches after 7 with a perfect game going. Pitchers can get injured on pitch 1 or pitch 41 just as easy as pitch 81.
if Kershaw is too fragile to pitch 81 pitches he’s shouldn’t frankly start, especially with that team’s depth.
This thread is pointless if you’re taking out pitchers when they’re throwing a perfecto.
He's not too fragile to throw 81 pitches. He's not conditioned to throw more than 80 pitches right now. I know people keep saying "what if he got hurt" and sure, that's a risk every pitcher takes with every throw they make. That isn't the concern, at least to Roberts and the Dodgers. It's building him up so he can consistently throw 100 pitches every fifth day without the concern of straining or overworking his ligaments and muscles. He's not there yet.

If today was June 18 and it was Kershaw's 12th start of the year, there's no way he comes out after 80 pitches. But it's April 13 and it was his first start of the year. Different circumstances regardless of the potential history he could have made.
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
He's not too fragile to throw 81 pitches. He's not conditioned to throw more than 80 pitches right now. I know people keep saying "what if he got hurt" and sure, that's a risk every pitcher takes with every throw they make. That isn't the concern, at least to Roberts and the Dodgers. It's building him up so he can consistently throw 100 pitches every fifth day without the concern of straining or overworking his ligaments and muscles. He's not there yet.

If today was June 18 and it was Kershaw's 12th start of the year, there's no way he comes out after 80 pitches. But it's April 13 and it was his first start of the year. Different circumstances regardless of the potential history he could have made.
If he threw a simulated game for 75 pitches he could easily throw for 90 pitches. Now yeah, the odds of getting 6 outs in 10 pitches isn’t great but it is certainly possible and at least, with a 6-0 lead you can sort of “hope” he gives a single and he fails to get the perfecto organically and then you can remove him. But taking history out of fate’s hands is just wrong. At least give him the chance to get some (more) quick outs. And this is an experienced pitcher who’s probably done after this year who’s throwing 89 MPH fastballs not some rookie with a whole career ahead of him.
 

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
50,426
Since it was all of five posts before yours, I went back and did the research for you.

Same exact situation and Core leaves him in. Top of the eighth, first batter and Sale feels something pop in his rib cage and he doesn't contribute the rest of the season. Big deal or no?
That would happen if Sale buttoned his shirt or tried to cross the street. So no, not a big deal, not compared to a perfect game.
 

Pitt the Elder

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 7, 2013
3,631
There was still two innings left. How high would you let him go? If he kept his pace up, he'd need 103 pitches to get through it. And those are high-stress pitches at the end given what he's going for. Would you let him go 100+ to get it, given that he was making his first start this late because of an arm injury? If you wouldn't let him go 100+, then why not pull him when he's at his original limit?

Also, it was 38 degrees in Minnesota. Not exactly loose arm weather.
This. If people are howling taking him out with 2 innings to go in a perfect game, think about how much people would howl if he was pulled at 105 pitches with one out to go. It's a very slippery slope and it gets harder for the manager *and* the pitcher to walk away from a perfect game the closer you get to it. Could you imagine an alternate universe where Kershaw got to 26 outs in 105 pitches but likely on fumes and Roberts left him out there only to see him struggle through all 8 pitch at bat that ends with a double off the wall and 5 days later he's skipping a start due to elbow stiffness? That's on the short list of possible outcomes and Roberts would right be vilified for that move.

Taking Kershaw out after 80 pitches and 7ip is clearly the right move.

Edit: I see this point was made above more concisely
 
Last edited:

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
It’s the right move for the dodgers and for Kershaw this season. When @Ale Xander is saying big picture, he means baseball history picture. I would rather see a pitcher throw a perfect game then go on the DL than get pulled and not (assuming not a serious injury that would hurt his actual quality of life). Sports are, to fans, about way way more than simple wins and losses, or else they’d be no different than watch a simulation on The Show. So it sucks that they pulled Kershaw, and kept him from something more historically impressive than any World Series title, but yes, it was the right strategic move
 

azsoxpatsfan

Does not enjoy the go
SoSH Member
May 23, 2014
3,567
To me this is similar to the shift. It’s absolutely the correct strategic move. It’s also boring, which makes it less fun to watch as a fan. This line of thinking is why I’d make a shitty GM
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
That would happen if Sale buttoned his shirt or tried to cross the street. So no, not a big deal, not compared to a perfect game.
You do understand that winning A game and keeping your pitchers healthy is more important than a perfect game, right? Or is Phillip Humber or Matt Cain more important parts of baseball than Clayton Kershaw?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
You do understand that winning A game and keeping your pitchers healthy is more important than a perfect game, right? Or is Phillip Humber or Matt Cain more important parts of baseball than Clayton Kershaw?
I was gonna go with Len Barker and Charlie Robertson because who can forget those immortals, but yeah. A perfect-o is a great individual accomplishment and obviously rare in the history of the league, but it's not significant enough that people will remember it forever.
 

NoXInNixon

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
4,951
And it'd be worth it if he on his 112th pitch, he gives up a hit with two outs in the ninth, then hits the IL with a shoulder strain a couple weeks later and is gone for the year?
I'll take that chance. I watch sports because sometimes amazing things happen that I will remember fondly for the rest of my life. 2004. Clay's no-hitter. Lester's no-hitter. That 14-pitch grand slam by Mookie. A perfect game is one of those things. If you have a chance to make a forever memory like that, you take it 100% of the time, even if it slightly increases the chance of someone suffering an injury. What are we preserving someone's health for? Because we hope they will create an amazing moment in the future. Well, they have a chance to make an amazing moment right now!

There are more important things than maximizing championship probability. Perfect games are one of those things.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
22,551
Newton
A perfect-o is a great individual accomplishment and obviously rare in the history of the league, but it's not significant enough that people will remember it forever.
Or to derail a team for potentially multiple years. I mean, I’m sympathetic to the “Guys used to pitch hundreds of pitches per game, get struck by lightning and be revived mid-game before finishing it out” argument to some extent. But teams are always going to handle their most precious cargo with kid gloves. That’s why Andrew Friedman and Dave Roberts are paid to make these decisions instead of @Van Everyman and @NoXInNixon.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
There are more important things than maximizing championship probability. Perfect games are one of those things.
No. Never. 1000 times no way.

Do you remember the Red Sox 4 most recent No Hitters better than their 4 most recent Championships? Do you talk about them more often?

Do you know who threw the last 5 Perfect Games? Who won the last 5 World Series?
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,742
Southwestern CT
I have some sympathy for the argument that teams are too cautious with pitchers these days, but all you have to do is remember the 60s and 70s when previously dominant power pitchers would suffer mysterious, undiagnosable injuries that either ended their careers or resulted in them becoming junk ballers.

Overuse - especially early in the season - is a known (and significant) risk factor. Sure, I’d love to see a pitcher complete a perfect game. But a pitcher with known durability issues in his first start of the year? I can’t blame them at all for cutting him off.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
60,913
Joe Pos:

"Clayton Kershaw is 34 years old and has not made 30 starts in a season since 2015, which was “Cam Newton was the NFL MVP” years ago.
  • Kershaw finished last season with his elbow barely intact. It was so bad that after the season ended, he did not pick up a baseball for three months. Rumors circulated that he might retire and I suspect he seriously considered it.
  • He only began throwing again in January and did not feel confident that he could actually stay healthy enough to pitch until March.
  • In a shortened spring training, he threw a grand total of 101 pitches. The most pitches he threw on any given day was 75, and that was in a simulated game, not exactly the same thing.
  • Do you know when was the last time Clayton Kershaw threw a complete game? Go ahead, take a stab at it. It was July 9, 2017, against Kansas City. That’s almost five years, if you’re scoring at home.
  • Oh yeah, it was like 30 degrees with a howling wind at Target Field."

https://joeposnanski.substack.com/p/the-kershaw-redemption?s=w
 

NoXInNixon

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
4,951
No. Never. 1000 times no way.

Do you remember the Red Sox 4 most recent No Hitters better than their 4 most recent Championships? Do you talk about them more often?

Do you know who threw the last 5 Perfect Games? Who won the last 5 World Series?
It's not as if not letting Kershaw finish his perfect game guarantees they win the WS this year. Maybe it increases the probability by 0.01%. I'm pulling that number out of my ass, but I bet it's pretty close.

On the other hand, it reduces the probability that he throws a perfect game by 100%.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It's not as if not letting Kershaw finish his perfect game guarantees they win the WS this year. Maybe it increases the probability by 0.01%. I'm pulling that number out of my ass, but I bet it's pretty close.

On the other hand, it reduces the probability that he throws a perfect game by 100%.
It reduces the risk of him getting hurt by a whole lot more than 0.01%. Even more than 1%.

But please invite me to your parties celebrating the anniversary of Hideo Nomo's No Hitter. Breaking a 36 year string of no no-hit outings by Red Sox pitchers truly lifted a weight off of all us Sox fans shoulders. I am running now to find my "No Hit It For" book to remind myself of how much we needed that
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,867
Boston, MA
I was gonna go with Len Barker and Charlie Robertson because who can forget those immortals, but yeah. A perfect-o is a great individual accomplishment and obviously rare in the history of the league, but it's not significant enough that people will remember it forever.
And yet you and a few others in this thread just named a few of the more obscure ones off the top of your head. Throwing a perfect game is a big deal. It is historically significant in baseball. It does get your name remembered. You don't have to be dismissive of something that really is a big deal to make the point that managers and players have the goal to win ballgames and the historic stuff is a nice side effect. Our goals as fans are not necessarily the same as theirs.


I have some sympathy for the argument that teams are too cautious with pitchers these days, but all you have to do is remember the 60s and 70s when previously dominant power pitchers would suffer mysterious, undiagnosable injuries that either ended their careers or resulted in them becoming junk ballers.

Overuse - especially early in the season - is a known (and significant) risk factor. Sure, I’d love to see a pitcher complete a perfect game. But a pitcher with known durability issues in his first start of the year? I can’t blame them at all for cutting him off.
Pitches didn't come back from injury in the 60s and 70s because medical options were primitive back then. I don't know how anyone can look at the number of current pitchers who had Tommy John surgery and conclude that pitching is safer now than it was back when complete games were common. If TJS didn't exist, the Red Sox wouldn't have half their rotation or best reliever. Those guys are still pitching not because they're not allowed to throw more than 100 pitches in a start, it's because doctors can put them back together after they break themselves throwing at max effort on every pitch.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
52,558
I'll take that chance. I watch sports because sometimes amazing things happen that I will remember fondly for the rest of my life. 2004. Clay's no-hitter. Lester's no-hitter. That 14-pitch grand slam by Mookie. A perfect game is one of those things. If you have a chance to make a forever memory like that, you take it 100% of the time, even if it slightly increases the chance of someone suffering an injury. What are we preserving someone's health for? Because we hope they will create an amazing moment in the future. Well, they have a chance to make an amazing moment right now!

There are more important things than maximizing championship probability. Perfect games are one of those things.
Again, these are people, not video game characters.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
16,666
Maine
And yet you and a few others in this thread just named a few of the more obscure ones off the top of your head.
Not off the top of my head. I 100% looked up the list and intentionally picked two names that made me say "who?" Not a chance I could name more than 4-5 perfect games off the top of my head.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Not off the top of my head. I 100% looked up the list and intentionally picked two names that made me say "who?" Not a chance I could name more than 4-5 perfect games off the top of my head.
Same here. I skipped King Felix and picked the 2nd and 3rd most recent guys to throw perfectos. If someone had given me a list of those two names and a random other started from 10 years ago I wouldn't have guessed right.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
545
San Diego
If I were a Dodger's fan, I'd rather see Kershaw put together a healthy season with multiple dominant starts en route to a championship. Flags fly forever.