OT: Baseball Trivia
- Thread starter Colbert17!
- Start date
Bob Miller. A LHP and a RHP. Casey once called for one w/o saying which. When asked which Miller he said "Surprise me"
I’ll say another thing about it. They’re sticking with us. We got ‘em from the baby’s up. As soon as the kid can talk, he’s talkin’. He’s sayin‘, “Metsy. Metsy.” Not Papa. Not Momma. “Metsy, Metsy, Metsy.”
Last edited:
History does repeat itself. The 2000 Mets also had two players with the same first and last names. And just like the Bob Millers, one was a RHP and one a LHP. Who were they?
Casey looked at Amos Otis as a twenty year old and said In 10 years he’s got a chance to be a hell of a player.
Casey looked at Greg Goosen as a 20 year old and said in 10 years he’s got a chance to be 30
Casey looked at Greg Goosen as a 20 year old and said in 10 years he’s got a chance to be 30
Cheated and looked it up, so I won’t post answer. Other interesting thing I noted was they had two other pairs of guys who shared same last name but not first name - ie two Smiths and two Jones for example.
As far as I can tell, he's the only major leaguer ever to have that distinction.
I share it with him. The date, not being a major leaguer.
Last edited:
Correct. The duo were reunited with the Padres in 2002.
The lefty Bobby Jones (the less renowned of the two) is a Jersey guy from Rutherford, and is currently the manager of the Sussex County Miners of the Can-Am League.
One of my favorite audio clips of Casey and Mickey testifying in front of Congress. The last 30 seconds is priceless.
And now a very simple question for you all: What baseball record is LEAST likely to ever be broken?
I know this would appear to be totally subjective. Yet I believe that there is objectively one correct answer. One record for which the chance of its ever being broken under current baseball rules is essentially zero.
This is not one of those "the record won't be broken because the game has changed" records, like Jack Chesbro's 41 wins in one season. (Maybe someday the game will change back?) The record that I am thinking of is of the modern era.
All thoughts welcomed!
I know this would appear to be totally subjective. Yet I believe that there is objectively one correct answer. One record for which the chance of its ever being broken under current baseball rules is essentially zero.
This is not one of those "the record won't be broken because the game has changed" records, like Jack Chesbro's 41 wins in one season. (Maybe someday the game will change back?) The record that I am thinking of is of the modern era.
All thoughts welcomed!
Jamie Moyer going 22 years between hitting sacrifice flies,from 1987 to 2009.When I saw him hit the one in 2009,I looked it up.
I was at the 2018 game at CBP in which the Mets won by 20 runs,24 to 4,but were out homered 4 to 3.I didn't complete the research on this,but it's unlikely that it ever happened in the past.
An excellent answer, and you are on the right track. But there is an answer that is demonstrably better.
Both excellent answers but they could conceivably be broken. The one that I am thinking of cannot.
Well yeah I guess. But by that logic you could define "fewest hits allowed in a game" as a record that will never be broken. The best you can do is tie it, with zero.
Your answer seems kinda trick question-ish. Mine is not.
Not a trivia question, but I was reminded of this amazing connection between players while re-watching Ken Burns’ documentary.
Stan Musial’s last at bat was a single to right field against the Reds. Of course at that time Stan finished second behind Ty Cobb for most hits in a career. The cool thing about that game is Musial’s single went right past a young infielder for the Reds, named Pete Rose.
Stan Musial’s last at bat was a single to right field against the Reds. Of course at that time Stan finished second behind Ty Cobb for most hits in a career. The cool thing about that game is Musial’s single went right past a young infielder for the Reds, named Pete Rose.
At an Oriole's game I went to years ago with my brother, leading off in the bottom of the first, Brady Anderson got hit by a pitch. The Orioles batted around. Anderson comes up and gets hit again. I turned to my brother and said we just saw at least a tie for a record because I really doubt that anyone has ever been hit three times in an inning, let alone the first.
I never checked it out, so I'd welcome it if anyone can confirm or refute my supposition. Thanks.
I never checked it out, so I'd welcome it if anyone can confirm or refute my supposition. Thanks.
You are very close to the answer to my trivia question, so I will provide it now.
IHMO, the record that is least likely to ever be broken is most grand slams in an inning. That record is held by Fernando Tatis (Sr.) with two.
To break that record would require the convergence of two incredibly unlikely events:
- The player would have to have the opportunity to hit three grand slams in an inning. This would require a minimum of 23 players coming to bat in the inning. In baseball history that has happened only once.
- Then given that opportunity, the player would have to actually do it, i.e., hit three grand slams in a row. That has never been done.
I'm sure someone can get some stats together and run some sort of psuedo analysis. But I think that three no hitters in a row is less likely.
OK let me try it this way. Let's start by assuming that two consecutive no-hitters, and two grand slams in one inning, are equally unlikely. What else are we to assume? Each has happened only once in baseball history,
Let's further assume that you are an average MLB pitcher and I am an average MLB hitter. Somehow we both defy the odds and tie the records. You pitch two consecutive no hitters, and I hit two grand slams in an inning.
Which of us is more likely to get the third?
Barring injury, you will certainly get the chance to do so. The odds of your getting the third are whatever the odds are of an average pitcher pitching a no hitter on any given day. You've already got two in the bank, you only need one more. A longshot to be sure, but not inconceivable.
My chances to get the third slam are MUCH worse. In all likelihood I won't even get the chance. For me to get that third at-bat, my team needs to send 23 batters to the plate in that inning. That has only happened once - ever!
Last edited:
Well, that they are not equally unlikely, which is almost certainly the case.
Not a question per se, but IMHO a cool bit of trivia: in 1984 Tippy Martinez of the Orioles picked off the side. Three pickoffs in one inning.
True, but that just highlights that they are each incredibly rare events. It doesn't make them equally likely (or unlikely, as you put it). That said, if you believe that they are equally unlikely, you've pretty much countered your own estimation.
Plus, Vander Meer was from NJ.
Last edited:
Everett "Deacon" Scott set the record of 1,307 consecutive games played starting with the Boston Red Sox in 1914. After the 1921 season, he was part of a seven player swap with the New York Yankees. Manager Miller Huggins benched Scott on May 6, 1925 that ended his streak.
Just 25 days later, on June 1, his teammate, Lou Gehrig began his Iron Man streak of 2,130 game to break Scott's record.
Everett Scott was released shortly after and was picked up by the Washington Senators who went on to play in the 1925 World Series.
Just 25 days later, on June 1, his teammate, Lou Gehrig began his Iron Man streak of 2,130 game to break Scott's record.
Everett Scott was released shortly after and was picked up by the Washington Senators who went on to play in the 1925 World Series.
As mentioned before someday, someone may have a chance to do it.
The odds of someone coming up 3 times in one inning with the bases loaded and homering are incalculable (I hope that's a word).
Someone may have a chance? Every starting pitcher has had a chance. No one has done it.