Keith Cordero Jr.: Gotta give it to Jimenez
I am going to have to say that the first no-hitter in Rockies history, and the first no-hitter of the young 2010 season, by Ubaldo Jimenez trumps a 20-inning, 2-1 Mets victory over the Cards.
Despite the six walks, Jimenez throws very fast, and, even as he recorded the final out, his last pitch hit a ridiculous 97 miles per hour to retire Braves catcher Brian McCann on a groundout. Jimenez threw 128 pitches, chipped in with a RBI and was helped by a spectacular defensive play by center fielder Dexter Fowler. No-hitters are very impressive and don’t happen everyday.
The 20-inning game was spectacular and provided fans with some weird position moves, including the Cardinals using second baseman Felipe Lopez and outfielder Joe Mather for pitching relief, and pitcher Kyle Lohse playing some left field.
It was a great day in baseball, but poor Jason Bay and Jeff Francouer went 0-for-7, which really drops their batting average.
Joachim Clarke : What he said
As much as I love disagreeing with everyone, I think Keith hit the nail on the head. The no-hitter was much more of an enjoyable game to watch.
I am not the biggest fan of baseball, but both games caught my attention. The 20-inning game between the Cards and the Mets, where the first runs were scored in the 19th inning, is not exactly my idea of a great game. It was an impressive victory for the Mets, but I think the game probably meant a lot more to the players than the fans.
All in all, I think a game that keeps everyone on the edge of their seats during the initial nine innings is a better game than a 20-inning marathon that probably only 10 percent of the fans will watch until the end. Also, the Mets-Cards game did not set any records. On the other hand, the Rockies made history Saturday. Congrats to Ubaldo Jimenez for throwing the first no-hitter in Rockies history, and kudos to Dexter Fowler for making the diving catch in the seventh inning to keep the no-hitter alive.
Patricia Estrada: Whaa, Whaa, Whaa
First of all … judges, what is up with this question? Epic fail on your part. You need to ask questions that will stir up a debate; remember, this is Fighting Words.
The answer to this question is simple. The no-hitter is far more exciting than a 20-inning game. Although it has to be noted that I hate to agree with Keith on any and everything, this time I have no other choice.
Note to Keith: I will give you props; this is the first time your Fighting Words argument did not put me to sleep, but by no means was it exciting. You are slowly getting it. Better late than never, I guess.
A no-hitter keeps the fans and the players on the edge of their seats for nine straight innings. Everyone is gasping for air as batters come up to the plate to see if the no-hitter is going to last. Extra inning games, on the other hand, although still exciting, by definition drag on and on.
Besides, as both Keith and Joey mentioned, the Rockies made history with this weekend’s game. And Ubaldo Jimenez, without a doubt, had a gem of a game. It was a great game to watch, particularly because he silenced the Braves lineup.
Judge Higgs: Not so fast
Guys and girls, before you start whining about the question, make sure you read it first. The question was not which game was more exciting to watch, it was which feat was more impressive, the no-hitter or the 20-inning game.
Even that may seem like a question with an obvious answer, but it’s not so clear once you look a little closer. No-hitters are always impressive, and it does take some amount of help from a pitcher’s teammates for him to get one, as witnessed by Fowler’s great diving catch in the seventh, but it’s still, ultimately, an individual achievement.
There are some teams sports where individual achievement is and should be most highly regarded — see the month-long LeBron and Kobe commercial that is the NBA playoffs if you want an example — but baseball is not one of them. And when teams play as poorly as the Mets and Cards did Saturday, it is truly an impressive feat. To play nearly seven hours worth of inept offense shows a level of determination in your crapitude that you can only say is impressive.
So the answer is not really that one is more impressive than the other; here, we’re just talking about two different kinds of impressiveness.
