Talk:Hitting streak

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

hey Guys what about this: Mel Almada ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cambuston (talk • contribs) 18:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


the media is reporting that Rollins can add to his record next year. as far as i remember, hitting streaks are recorded only within one season, and do not extend into further years. however, there is nothing in the rulebook (see rule 10.24) that says a seaon's end also ends the streak.

with that said, our list here in wikipedia lists single season efforts. keeler had a hit in his last game of 1896, and then in his first 44 games of 1897. we list keeler at 44 and not at 45.

history dictates that the keeler's record was 44, not 45. when dimaggio had his streak, july 2, 1941 was the day he surpassed keeler's "all-time record." on july 31, 1978, rose tied "Keeler's 81-year-old National League record."

these sites support "44" for keeler and not "45" - ergo, these sites support that streaks are within seasons, not extended through multiple seasons:

I bring this up because the media might hype this for all its worth. i don't know if you remember, but in the winter of 1998, the media kept repeating the "fact" that the yankees had set a record with 125 wins that season. the team won 114 in the regular season, and 11 in post season. 125? what a joke.

i contend that we keep Rollins streak at 36. Kingturtle 00:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Baseball actually keeps two separate records, for single-season streaks and multi-season streaks. I have edited the article to reflect this, listing Keeler's streak as 45 games and Rollins's as 38 (the multi-season streaks) and including an explanatory note in the text. Vidor 05:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edited out the sentence about many people having come close to DiMaggio's streak, because it isn't true. No one's come within 12 games of DiMaggio. Only one person has come within 17 games of DiMaggio. Vidor 06:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible really to keep a "top ten"[edit]

There are too many people tied for 33 in the National League to keep the list a "top 10;" if you include everyone with hitting streaks more than 33, it causes an imbalance (10 AL, 12 NL). I'd suggest making the list "everyone who has hit 30+ in a row," but it would add 20 more people to the list. And it seems kinda arbitrary to just make it "everyone who has hit 33+ in a row."

Any suggestions? Andy 07:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What if we don't explicitly state that it's a "top 10" list and just use wording such as "The longest streaks in the history of the American League are:". As an alternative, I'd also support setting a cutoff of 30 games. It's true we'd be expanding the list, but we have the space and players would rarely be added. Aren't I Obscure? 11:49, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Kind of a non-issue now that Utley has made it to 34. We do, in point of fact, have the ten longest streaks in the history of the National League listed in the article. Vidor 05:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly what I was gonna say, heh. Andy 05:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

T?[edit]

is the T needed for Ties? We aren't stupid, and the # Letter combo looks silly

Agreed. Removed the "T". Also--I didn't change it, but does anybody else think the little boxes that the lists are in now are really ugly? Vidor 06:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, why the boxes? who made that decision?
I agree the boxes look silly/ugly, but it makes it a lot easier for editing. The columns won't stay the way they are without the boxes, they will be all over the place, plus you have to put html tags in to have a page break. Example:

With boxes: 

 1.   56 - Joe DiMaggio (1941)
 2.   41 - George Sisler (1922)
 3.   40 - Ty Cobb (1911)
 4.   39 - Paul Molitor (1987)
 5.   35 - Ty Cobb (1917)
 6.   34 - George Sisler (1925)
      34 - George McQuinn (1938)
      34 - Dom DiMaggio (1949)
 9.   33 - Hal Chase (1907)
      33 - Heinie Manush (1933)

Without boxes:

1. 56 - Joe DiMaggio (1941) 2. 41 - George Sisler (1922) 3. 40 - Ty Cobb (1911) 4. 39 - Paul Molitor (1987) 5. 35 - Ty Cobb (1917) 6. 34 - George Sisler (1925) 34 - George McQuinn (1938) 34 - Dom DiMaggio (1949) 9. 33 - Hal Chase (1907) 33 - Heinie Manush (1933)

As you can see, without the boxes, all sorts of html tags would need to be added, and that will get all screwed up in no time --Stillhere 13:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There were no such tags before the edits that put them there, and the page looked just fine--in fact, much better--so I don't know why you say that. Boxes=ugly. Vidor 13:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get me wrong, I agree the boxes are ugly. If you have better way to format, I will supoort getting rid of the boxes

First paragraph confusion[edit]

Higlighting added:

Games in which the player does not have any official at bats are ignored (neither break the streak nor add to the streak). If a player has a sacrifice fly, but no hits, even if the player had no official at bats, the streak is over. Joe DiMaggio holds the major league record for the longest hitting streak with 56 straight games with a hit in 1941. [1]

This seems to be very confusing. Is this supposed to say that if a player doesn't come up to bat, the streak is still going, but if he makes a plate appearance, then the streak can end? Cjosefy 14:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The rule is kind of confusing. There are several ways a batter can come to the plate but not be charged with an official at-bat. He can walk, he can be hit by a pitch, he can make a sacrifice bunt, or he can make a sacrifice fly. If a batter with a hitting streak has a game where all of his plate appearances are walks, hit by pitch, and/or bunts, then the game is ignored for streak purposes. However, if a player has a sacrifice FLY, the game is NOT ignored--he must also get a hit, or the streak is snapped. It's a strange little rule dating back to the questionable convention of not charging an at-bat for a sacrifice fly. The no at-bat on a sac fly rule, BTW, has not always been in place, and was not in place in 1941 when DiMaggio had his streak. I will try and clarify the verbiage. Vidor 20:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The idea was certainly that a streak should not be terminated unless the player had at least one chance to extend it. A team couldn't stop an opponent's hitting streak by intentionally walking him four times. They might have said "A streak shall only be terminated in a game where a batter makes at least one out at bat" and added "a sacrifice fly shall be considered an out for this purpose." Then again, they'd have to note that safe-on-error was also an out, so this construction would be nearly as bad. WHPratt (talk) 14:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This came in to play a day or so ago when Derek Jeter's streak was kept alive despite making 4 plate appearances (3 walks and a HBP). I know this adds nothing to the discussion but it was an interesting quirk to the whole streak

I too was confused by the first paragraph. Vidor, I think you explanation was very good. Do you think you could revise it to add your clarification on what an "official at-bat" is?

If what happened to Jeter had happened to Dimaggio, Dimaggio's streak would have been over under the old rules. So I added that to the introduction.
Do you have a copy of the rules from 1941? I'm almost certain that there was no official rule about hitting streaks in the 1941 rulebook. Maybe some people would've considered it to be broken if DiMaggio went 0-for-0 with 4 walks, I don't think it necessarily would have ended the streak. In those cases, we tend to apply the modern rule to the years where no rule existed (thus, DiMaggio would get the current rule applied to him). So unless it was in the 1941 rule book, DiMaggio's streak wouldn't have ended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.213.73 (talk) 00:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The rule book did not contain anything about hitting streaks until the 1970s, so there is no way to say that DiMaggio's streak certainly would have ended if he had gone 0-for-0 with 4 walks. The first rules in the 1970s likely just followed the standard convention of the time before rules (ie, 0-for-0 with walks would not end a streak). Whatever source was so sure that the streak would end is likely incorrect. Either way, it's by no way certain enough to list it at the top of the page.--Trent McCotter, SABR Records Committee (V. Chairman) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.211.250.95 (talk) 12:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The exception may indeed have been defined as late as the 1970s, probably because nobody had given it any thought. (If some team had intentionally walked DiMaggio every time in a game, I suspect that the issue would have been dealt with back then.) I seem to remember that somewhere in that time frame, Ron Santo of the Cubs had a hitting streak of about 25 games, but someone pointed out that said streak began after a game in which he went hitless but had no official at-bats, and if that game didn't count, his streak would be a couple of games longer. As I recall, the league office ruled that the zero at-bat game did not count and Ron's streak was lengthened, but the very same day he had a genuine oh-fer, so the final number was of minor interest after all. If you're curious enough, look for Santo's longest hitting streak and the discussion surrounding it. WHPratt (talk) 15:15, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
User:kingturtle insists on removing the fact that Dimaggiio's streak was under stricter rules, saying it is not relevant. I wonder why it is not relevant in an article on hitting streak, and where it would be relevant. This article is where people who are interested in the details of the statistics and rule changes regarding hitting streaks would come to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.120.178.36 (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1941 All Star Game[edit]

Why wasn't DiMaggio's hits in the All Star game in '41 counted in the streak? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrl101 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

only regular season games (ie, NOT all-star games nor postseason games nor spring training games) count towards streaks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.213.73 (talk) 00:50, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ASG, Post Season and Pre Season are not included on official stats, that said, games that are called before the 3rd out of the 5th inning and not re-started would not count, either. --Ryanjcole (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major League Baseball records by Franchise[edit]

I can't figure out what order this is in. Can someone clarify and maybe add a comment in the text? If it's not in any order at all, what order should it be put into?

  • Team city (which changes)
  • Team nickname (which changes, though less frequently)
  • Team record streak
  • Other?

Matchups 03:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous definition[edit]

It's a shame that "hitting streak" has come to mean "consecutive games in which a player in the lineup records at least one hit". Does anyone know what the MLB record is for actually consecutive hits recorded in at-bats? For example, Miguel Cabrera just concluded a streak of 9 consecutive at-bats where he recorded a hit (which is considerable for him, because he is not the type to be running out any infield singles). - 73.0.202.166 (talk) 13:50, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

———
The article …
List of Major League Baseball individual streaks

… has items such as …

Consecutive plate appearances with a hit
•12 (2 tied)
o Johnny Kling, Chicago Cubs – August 24 through 28, 1902
o Walt Dropo, Detroit Tigers – July 14 and 15, 1952

There's a link to it as Individual streaks under Other in the last item on the page. I'll grant you that this article could benefit from a more prominent referral. Having no clue as to where to look, I searched Wikipedia for "Walt Dropo" as I knew he'd be there!

WHPratt (talk) 16:44, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hitting_streak&oldid=1202737129"