(maybe a mod should split this discussion into a separate thread, because I think it's an interesting discussion but probably detracting from the point of this thread to call people out to in-progress no-hitters)
You all are a bit spoiled though, because the Red Sox have actually been good for the past couple decades
Like I'll put it a different way - if you have a random Mets game in mid August and they're sub 500 and have no clear path to contention (not exactly a rare occurrence over the past 2 decades), why should I go watch? For me a huge fraction of that is simply that on any random night I might see something cool, whether it's a no-hitter, a great diving catch (also a huge injury risk), etc - I'm certainly not going with the expectation that they need to save bullets for the postseason
The Kershaw argument is a red herring here since between his history and the season timing I don't think anyone here is really arguing that he should've been left in. I think we're more saying that it's a shame that because of those very reasonable decisions, we're losing part of what makes baseball so enjoyable (to at least some of us)
I mean, the very existence and persistence of this thread kind of proves the point - no-hitters are interesting enough that basically every year we've had a thread that points out when they get to the 7th or 8th inning, so people who happen to be around can throw MLB.tv on and watch the end. If it's just '3 pitchers have combined to no-hit the Marlins through 7' every time, I dunno, to me it's lost something
Also, while flags fly forever, so do individual achievements - I mean nothing about Armando Galarraga's stats page says anything more than 'mid-rotation starter that lasted a few years in MLB', what percent of baseball fans would remember him today outside of his 'perfect game'?