Originally posted by HaiGuise:
The question would have to be which is more likely rather than which is more difficult. Hitters try to hit a ball. They don't try to not hit a ball.
Agreed. So okay, I muffed the wording of the question, but I believe the intent is clear. Implied in "
major league hitter" is the notion that this is what hitters do, try to get hits. Anybody who has stood in against a pitcher, regardless of level, should understand this.
Originally posted by Niners99:
lol how is this a question?
The hitless streak of 0-46 hasn't been broken in 102 years.
The 56-game hitting streak, while impressive, has stood for 60 years. This latter record is dramatically shorter than the former.
Originally posted by Niners99:
going 0 for 46 is only hard because most players get released or sent to AAA before they get there. besides, anyone could do it if they tried to.
That is why the question was posed. The player would have to be a proven MLB player. If Ryan Rohlinger goes 0-12, he is going back to AAA-Fresno. If someone like Mark Texeira goes 0-12, he is still in the lineup, maybe he gets a day off, but he isn't going back to AAA.
Originally posted by crzy:
The hitting streak itself was still overrated.
This debate is like the "who was a better player, Mantle or Mays?" question. These types of discussions are based largely on subjective beliefs, part of what makes baseball such a storied and revered game.
People in baseball circles still argue over who should have won the AL MVP in '41, Ted Williams (who BTW hit .406, the last player in MLB to accomplish this feat) or Joe DiMaggio. Baseball writers had recently seen players hit .400, but they had never seen a streak like Joltin' Joe's.
But to go 0-46, man that would be tough. No manager is going to plug in a guy day in, day out who "just doesn't swing". Gtfoh with notions like that.
[ Edited by DertyDonahue on May 4, 2011 at 15:44:17 ]