Jonathan Sanchez tosses a no-hitter (and walks none)!

If not for an error in the eighth inning Jonathan Sanchez would have tossed the 18th no-hitter in MLB history. Instead he'll have to settle for a no-hitter the day after teammate Tim Lincecum took one into the 7th inning.

Also, this was the eighth time in major league history a pitcher tossed a non-perfect no-hit, no-walk, no HBP game and did not get a perfecto due solely to a fielding error. In one of those games the sole error was the pitcher's fault.

catbox_9 wrote:

If not for an error in the eighth inning Jonathan Sanchez would have tossed the 18th no-hitter in MLB history. Instead he'll have to settle for a no-hitter the day after teammate Tim Lincecum took one into the 7th inning.

Watch out for the Giants in the second half of the season

gs78 wrote:

catbox_9 wrote:

If not for an error in the eighth inning Jonathan Sanchez would have tossed the 18th no-hitter in MLB history. Instead he'll have to settle for a no-hitter the day after teammate Tim Lincecum took one into the 7th inning.

Watch out for the Giants in the second half of the season

They're going to win the pennant! If the season ended today, 2 Giants (Lincecum and Cain) would finish in the top-3 for the Cy Young.

They currently lead the NL Wild Card by 2 games.

Maybe next season Catbox


But the Dodgers are gonna win it this season

gs78 wrote:

Maybe next season Catbox


But the Dodgers are gonna win it this season

They'll choke. Giants have better pitching. Phillies have better hitting. Cards or more balanced.

catbox_9 wrote:

If not for an error in the eighth inning Jonathan Sanchez would have tossed the 18th no-hitter in MLB history. Instead he'll have to settle for a no-hitter the day after teammate Tim Lincecum took one into the 7th inning.

I'm thinking you meant the 18th Perfect Game.

gdennis59 wrote:

catbox_9 wrote:

If not for an error in the eighth inning Jonathan Sanchez would have tossed the 18th no-hitter in MLB history. Instead he'll have to settle for a no-hitter the day after teammate Tim Lincecum took one into the 7th inning.

I'm thinking you meant the 18th Perfect Game.

Yeah, thanks

catbox_9 wrote:

gs78 wrote:

Maybe next season Catbox


But the Dodgers are gonna win it this season

They'll choke. Giants have better pitching. Phillies have better hitting. Cards or more balanced.

If those teams are so great; how come they are all only 8-10 games over 500 after more than 81 games;




I want to see at least one team in MLB win 100 games and play in the World Series;

And the Dodgers are the most likely to do it


GO DODGERS!

Then again; thanks to parity; the wildcard and three divisions in each league; there is a good chance the Dodgers could win 100-105 games and then lose in the playoffs to either Cardinals, Phillies or Giants and those teams will more than likely win less than 90 games this season

Sadly; the same thing will probably happen in the AL Central as well

Bud Selig may like that parity and NHL like competitive balance

BUT I DON"T


I like to see teams like the 84 Tigers or the Big Red Machine teams of the mid 70's

Teams that dominate and win it all

Parity sucks - it defeats the purpose of the first 162 games of the season.


Even old-style stuff can suck, too though. Look back at Original 6 hockey - they played as many as 70 regular season games just so that they could eliminate 2 teams. Why bother?

catbox_9 wrote:

Parity sucks - it defeats the purpose of the first 162 games of the season.


Even old-style stuff can suck, too though. Look back at Original 6 hockey - they played as many as 70 regular season games just so that they could eliminate 2 teams. Why bother?

I liked it best when the NHL had 21 teams;


They overexpanded into so many cities [ Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta] where they had no business even putting a franchise together in the first place

gs78 wrote:

catbox_9 wrote:

Parity sucks - it defeats the purpose of the first 162 games of the season.


Even old-style stuff can suck, too though. Look back at Original 6 hockey - they played as many as 70 regular season games just so that they could eliminate 2 teams. Why bother?

I liked it best when the NHL had 21 teams;


They overexpanded into so many cities [ Phoenix, Nashville, Atlanta] where they had no business even putting a franchise together in the first place

Yeah, way too many teams now. I think 24 would be a good number - 6 divisions of 4. Eliminate the following franchises:

Central: Nashville
Pacific: Phoenix
Northwest, Atlantic, Northeast: None
Southeast: Tampa Bay, Florida, Carolina, Atlanta

That's 6! Rearranging the divisions would be a little bit of a chores (obviously the southeast can't have 1 team!) but it could be done. What's Washington doing in the SE anyways? D.C. is nowhere near the SE United States.

And if they won't get rid of those teams


At least relocate them to cities that deserve hockey and will support them better

That would also work. I'm not sure if there are 6 more cities that would work though. I guess Hartford, Quebec, Winnipeg, and Hamilton are all worth a shot.

catbox_9 wrote:

That would also work. I'm not sure if there are 6 more cities that would work though. I guess Hartford, Quebec, Winnipeg, and Hamilton are all worth a shot.

I miss the Winnipeg Jets and Quebec Nordiques