Skip to content

Why not another no-hitter for Jered Weaver?

May 7, 2012, 5:40 PM EDT

Jered Weaver Getty Images

So, yeah, it’s probably still a thousand-to-one shot, but in his rematch with the Twins tonight, Jered Weaver would seem to be better set up for back-to-back no-hitters than any pitcher in memory.

Here’s how tonight’s Twins lineup has hit right-handers this season:

CF Denard Span – .321
SS Brian Dozier – MLB debut (.316 in Triple-A)
C Joe Mauer – .214
DH Ryan Doumit – .269
3B Danny Valencia – .210
1B Chris Parmelee – .189
LF Trevor Plouffe – .056 (1-for-18)
RF Erik Komatsu –  .125 (3-for-24)
2B Jamey Carroll – .186

That’s certainly a no-hittable lineup.  Josh Willingham, who is hitting .300 against righties, isn’t playing, which can’t hurt Weaver’s chances.

For what it’s worth, the players above are a combined 18-for-91 against Weaver, good for a .198 average. Mauer, with a .280 average, and Valencia, who has two homers and a single in 12 at-bats, have hit him best.

  1. El Bravo - May 7, 2012 at 5:48 PM

    Holy shit the Twins suck. I can totally see why Aaron didn’t write this post.

  2. b7p19 - May 7, 2012 at 5:50 PM

    Mark it down. On May 7th at 5:40 pm Matthew Poulliot guaranteed (as good a word as any right?) a Jared Weaver no-hitter.

    • Matthew Pouliot - May 7, 2012 at 5:54 PM

      Ha!

  3. Matthew Pouliot - May 7, 2012 at 5:55 PM

    So, what odds would everyone need to get in order to bet on a no-hitter tonight? 100:1? 200:1?

    • bigleagues - May 7, 2012 at 6:02 PM

      I’d bet $100 at 100-1 . . . but I think some of the better action would be on the over/under’s

      I’ll set these:

      IP: 7
      H: 3
      R: 1
      BB: 1
      K: 8

      Get your bets posted!

      • bigleagues - May 8, 2012 at 12:50 AM

        And his final numbers:

        IP: 6 – under
        H: 3 – even
        R: 1 – even
        BB: 2 – over
        K: 2 – under

    • proudlycanadian - May 7, 2012 at 6:03 PM

      Looks like an even money bet given the quality of the Twins lineup.

    • natstowngreg - May 7, 2012 at 6:05 PM

      A thousand to one is far too low. Weaver would accomplish something that was last done more than 70 years ago, and has been done only once in the modern era (1900-present). All it would take is for someone to bloop one over the infield or bunt for a base hit.

      • bigleagues - May 7, 2012 at 6:52 PM

        Well yeah, but there is also the law of probability which would lend itself to the likelihood of Mathew’s speculation coming true.

        Specifically, the further away (in time) you get from an unlikely random occurrence, the more likely it becomes that it will happen again.

        Add to that the fact that the one guy who did accomplish back-to-back no-no’s (Vander Meer) was very good, but probably not quite as good when he turned the double-trick as Weaver is now and we are staring at a possible, though not probable outcome.

        BTW, The Boston Bees (Braves) were offensively inept (54 HR, 561 R, 250 AVG, .642 OPS) – but somehow managed to finish 2 games above .500.

        http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BSN/1938.shtml

        Vander Meer’s second victim, the Brooklyn Dodgers, weren’t much better with the wood (61HR, 704 R, .257 AVG, .701 OPS), finishing 11 Games under .500.

        http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BRO/1938.shtml

        The 2012 Twins have been to this point, arguably WORSE than Vander Meers two victims: .237 AVG, .658 OPS while on pace to hit 96 HR yet score just 552 Runs.

        So again, MP’s speculation is not unwarranted, though still improbable.

        Incidentally, Vander Meer 3-Hit the Giants in the game just prior to the first no-hitter and threw a 4-hitter against Boston in the game after his second no hitter against Brooklyn.

        The No-Hitters came during a streak of 6 Consecutive Complete Games in which Vander Meer issued a total of 4 Earned Runs on 17 Hits, 35 K’s and 24 BB’s in 55 Innings!

        The knock on Vander Meer? He walked A LOT of batters. And in that Brooklyn no-no, he issued 8 free passes against 7 K’s.

        It’s hard to envision Weaver being so generous with Walks to the Twins.

      • natstowngreg - May 7, 2012 at 9:49 PM

        Good stuff. But I guess the next guy will have a slightly higher chance of pitching back-to-back no-hitters, since Weaver didn’t do it.

  4. wlschneider09 - May 7, 2012 at 6:15 PM

    Sigh.

    Just wanted to get that out there in advance.

  5. sdelmonte - May 7, 2012 at 6:30 PM

    Every time a pitcher doesn’t toss back to back no hitters, the ghost of Johnny Vander Meer opens a bottle of champagne.

  6. mplsjoe - May 7, 2012 at 6:46 PM

    Why the hell is Willingham not playing?? Plouffe AND Koramatsu (sp)? It’s like they’re trying to get no-hit.

    • wlschneider09 - May 7, 2012 at 8:11 PM

      Willingham is sick. Not the really good hitter type of sick, the puking in a garbage can kind.

    • natstowngreg - May 7, 2012 at 9:42 PM

      Erik Komatsu. The guy who broke up the no-hitter. With his 4th organization in less than a year (Brewers, Nats, Cards, Twins).

      http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/k/komater01.shtml

  7. Jeremy Fox - May 7, 2012 at 7:15 PM

    Ok, very back of the envelope calculation:

    Say that the average guy in the lineup expects to hit .200 against Weaver. Ignore variation around this average (it won’t make a huge difference). Say that Weaver faces 30 batters (enough to complete a no-hitter while allowing for 3 baserunners due to walks and errors). Assume that every batter is an independent event (meaning that what happens with any one batter has no effect on any of the others). Then the odds of Weaver throwing a no-hitter are (1-0.2)^30 = 0.0012, or 1.2 in 1000.

    So 1000:1 isn’t actually too low, as another commenter suggested; it’s close to spot on. The reason back-to-back no hitters haven’t been thrown in 70 years is basically that you have to throw one no hitter before you can throw a second consecutive one, which multiplies the odds. If the odds of throwing one no hitter are x to 1, then the odds of throwing two consecutive ones are x-squared to 1, assuming they’re independent equiprobable events. Which is probably worse than a million to one in most cases. But Weaver’s already thrown one no hitter; he’s halfway home.

    And tonight is probably about as good as odds of a second consecutive no-hitter ever get: a difficult-to-hit pitcher with good control (reducing the number of hitters he’ll likely have to face), who’s already thrown one no-hitter, facing a weak lineup. If he was facing a lineup expected to hit, say, .250 off him, his odds would be more like 1 in 10,000 tonight.

  8. js20011041 - May 7, 2012 at 7:45 PM

    Million to one shot, Doc. Million to one.

  9. proudlycanadian - May 7, 2012 at 8:26 PM

    Hitless after 1 inning.

  10. illogic87 - May 7, 2012 at 9:24 PM

    Those are not there actual batting averages

  11. proudlycanadian - May 7, 2012 at 9:48 PM

    Matthew jinxed him.

  12. roseann894 - May 7, 2012 at 9:59 PM

    As I type, the TV shows it to be the bottom of the 6th inning. Yet both MSNBCsports.com and cnnsi show it to be the bottom of the 4th. Maybe when Weaver gave up a hit we entered a time warp or something.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Patience finally paying off for Royals fans
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. R. Castillo (3159)
  2. G. Stanton (2302)
  3. C. Kershaw (2224)
  4. D. Ortiz (2201)
  5. N. Arenado (2184)
  1. J. Hamilton (2160)
  2. A. Rizzo (2139)
  3. M. Trout (2048)
  4. A. Pujols (1847)
  5. H. Ryu (1766)