PDA

View Full Version : Buehrle's Perfect vs. Wood's 20K game


sanclementefan
03-24-2010, 04:45 PM
There's an article about which game was more impressive. It's an interesting question. I think the first comment is about right - Wood's game was better for the pitcher, the perfect game was a better team performance because of some of the defensive gems behind Buehrle.

Nellie_Fox
03-24-2010, 04:49 PM
Already discussed at great length:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=113929&highlight=buehrle+wood

oeo
03-24-2010, 04:51 PM
There's an article about which game was more impressive. It's an interesting question. I think the first comment is about right - Wood's game was better for the pitcher, the perfect game was a better team performance because of some of the defensive gems behind Buehrle.

Gem, not gems.

Buehrle was lights out against one of the best offenses in baseball. IIRC, the Astros were pretty dreadful. Although, there's a YouTube video somewhere of a couple of Kerry Wood's strikeouts, and his slider was disgusting.

jabrch
03-24-2010, 04:52 PM
Both were awesome outings. Do you want a Porterhouse from the Chop House or do you want Lobster from Bob Chinns?

I'd be happy to have either.

ewokpelts
03-24-2010, 04:58 PM
wood's 20k game heralded the begining of the modern cubs/wrigley field experience. look at the crowd and surrounding area for proof. after that game(and that season) it's been a madhouse on addison.

buehrle's perfect game was better becuase it was a perfect game.

Patrick134
03-24-2010, 05:22 PM
It's all about statistics, and what happens fewer. There are fewer 20k games, but a perfecto is better. It's like the cycle..if a guy has a homer, double, and triple already, why is it better in his 4th at bat to get a single rather than another home run????

WhiteSox5187
03-24-2010, 05:22 PM
Both were fantastic pitching performances. Wood was unhittable that day (the one hit he gave up should have been an error) and so was Buerhle. Really anyone who was able to witness both should be glad.

GoGoCrede
03-24-2010, 05:48 PM
I loved how certain members of the media wouldn't let Buehrle have his moment; they immediately had to compare him to Wood. :rolleyes:

jabrch
03-24-2010, 06:07 PM
I loved how certain members of the media wouldn't let Buehrle have his moment; they immediately had to compare him to Wood. :rolleyes:

Come on...he was garnished with praise by the media here and across the country. It was compared to Wood because it was one of the most dominant outing in the last 50 years. It just so happens that in Chicago we compare the two teams we have. There's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't marginalize either accomplishment.

I think the tinfoil hat should grace this thread with its presence.

WhiteSox5187
03-24-2010, 06:10 PM
Come on...he was garnished with praise by the media here and across the country. It was compared to Wood because it was one of the most dominant outing in the last 50 years. It just so happens that in Chicago we compare the two teams we have. There's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't marginalize either accomplishment.

I think the tinfoil hat should grace this thread with its presence.

I think she was refering to Dave Kaplan who within hours of Buerhle's perfect game said something akin to "I wonder how this compares to Wood's 20k game, I don't think it was as dominant," but Kaplan is biased. WSI is not however.

soltrain21
03-24-2010, 06:11 PM
There's an article which game was more impressive. It's an interesting question. I think the first comment is about right - Wood's game was better for the pitcher, the perfect game was a better team performance because of some of the defensive gems behind Buehrle.

You totally wrote that article, didn't you? DIDN'T YOU?!

GoGoCrede
03-24-2010, 06:14 PM
Come on...he was garnished with praise by the media here and across the country. It was compared to Wood because it was one of the most dominant outing in the last 50 years. It just so happens that in Chicago we compare the two teams we have. There's nothing wrong with that. It doesn't marginalize either accomplishment.

I think the tinfoil hat should grace this thread with its presence.

I guess it came off to me as marginalizing his accomplishment, especially when there was a poll on the Trib site (or Sun-Times, I forgot) asking which accomplishment was more impressive, and Cub fans in the comments belittled Buehrle's game.

Yes, Wood's game was impressive, no doubt. But it was also over ten years ago. Why do we need to hear about it again when Buehrle's accomplished a perfect game? Why does there need to be a debate as to which game was more impressive?

And I'm not a tinfoil hat type of poster, nor am I Cubsessed.

jabrch
03-24-2010, 06:14 PM
I think she was refering to Dave Kaplan who within hours of Buerhle's perfect game said something akin to "I wonder how this compares to Wood's 20k game, I don't think it was as dominant," but Kaplan is biased. WSI is not however.


That's not an unreasonable point, even for Kaplan. It wasn't said to be negative to the perfecto, just Kaplan comparing it to what he knows best of dominant outings. Same as comparing MB's No-No to Zambrano's No-No. I know - the perfecto is soooo rare - but the 20Ks....that's rare also...

I'd love to see a 20K outing. I'd love to see a no-no or a perfecto. Heck, give me 95 wins and I don't care about the rest of that stuff much either.

GoGoCrede
03-24-2010, 06:14 PM
I think she was refering to Dave Kaplan who within hours of Buerhle's perfect game said something akin to "I wonder how this compares to Wood's 20k game, I don't think it was as dominant," but Kaplan is biased. WSI is not however.

This is exactly what I was talking about, thank you. :smile:

jabrch
03-24-2010, 06:17 PM
Cub fans in the comments belittled Buehrle's game.

That doesn't make them right - nor does it make the few who did it representative of the majority, or of those Cubs fans who are good baseball fans (and there are many)

Yes, Wood's game was impressive, no doubt. But it was also over ten years ago. Why do we need to hear about it again when Buehrle's accomplished a perfect game? Why does there need to be a debate as to which game was more impressive?

Because baseball fans love comparing...that's a big part of what we do. If the Cubs were to win a WS, there would be lots of comparison of that Cubs team to the 05 Sox team.

And I'm not a tinfoil hat type of poster, nor am I Cubsessed.

I know - but this thread has that flavor to it. It's missing the over the topness of Hangar, but it is in the neighborhood.

TheVulture
03-24-2010, 07:37 PM
By definition, the term "perfect" kind of indicates that it is "better" than anything less than perfection, doesn't it?

TommyJohn
03-24-2010, 08:43 PM
Sorry, but the whole Buehrle vs. Wood thing was Dave Kaplan being a jackass. Sox fans get **** about "living in the past" about 2005, but it was perfectly OK to compare a game from 1998 with a perfect game from 2009. No, there's no "conspiracy" but that doesn't mean media dopes like Kaplan can't belittle White Sox accomplishments by constantly bringing up the Cubs. Who's obsessed?

cws05champ
03-24-2010, 09:10 PM
It's all about statistics, and what happens fewer. There are fewer 20k games, but a perfecto is better. It's like the cycle..if a guy has a homer, double, and triple already, why is it better in his 4th at bat to get a single rather than another home run????

A perfect game is special because you retired EVERY batter. People say that 20K games are rarer, but why is 20K's the magic # anyway? Why not 18K's? There have been 22 instances where pitchers have K'd 18 or more batters...making it less rare than a perfect game.

Brian26
03-24-2010, 10:30 PM
You totally wrote that article, didn't you? DIDN'T YOU?!

That was my thought as well, which is why the link has now been removed.

Marqhead
03-24-2010, 10:46 PM
I really have no problems with the comparison. Seems one guy needs some help from the defense and the other needs some help from the batters. Both are amazing accomplishments, and the 20K game is a bit rarer. I don't think that necessarily makes it better, I'm not going to get upset when the two are compared.

areilly
03-24-2010, 11:28 PM
Gem, not gems.

Buehrle was lights out against one of the best offenses in baseball. IIRC, the Astros were pretty dreadful. Although, there's a YouTube video somewhere of a couple of Kerry Wood's strikeouts, and his slider was disgusting.

It's been discussed at length in the other thread, but it bears repeating that this assumption is false.

BadBobbyJenks
03-24-2010, 11:39 PM
By definition, the term "perfect" kind of indicates that it is "better" than anything less than perfection, doesn't it?

Thats where I would stand in this debate.

Wood's outing was one of the most electrifying games I have ever seen pitched though. His breaking stuff had some of the nastiest movement I ever witnessed.

But Perfect > Not perfect

sanclementefan
03-25-2010, 11:35 AM
You totally wrote that article, didn't you? DIDN'T YOU?!
No, I didn't write the article.

Demafrost
03-25-2010, 11:37 AM
It's been discussed at length in the other thread, but it bears repeating that this assumption is false.

I just looked it up. The Astros won 102 games that year and led the NL in runs by a sizable margin.

EndemicSox
03-25-2010, 12:58 PM
By definition, the term "perfect" kind of indicates that it is "better" than anything less than perfection, doesn't it?

Yeah, but one could say using the word perfect is a stretch, as the man didn't throw 100% strikes or strike out every batter, and so on. :tongue:

I think Woody's game was a tad bit more impressive, but both were special. 20K's + 1 ridiculously cheap hit allowed > 0 hits allowed and a few K's, in terms of difficulty from the pitcher's perspective, just my opinion as a former collegiate pitcher, as if that means anything at all..lol. I just think Wood was harder to hit that day compared to MB on his PG day, and I believe batted ball stats would back that up. Anyway...it's a fun argument, don't take it too personally Sox fans!

Bob Roarman
03-25-2010, 05:53 PM
Yeah I don't see how someone could watch both those games and say Buehrle was harder to hit. He would be the last pitcher on the Sox I'd think would ever get a no hitter, let alone a perfect game, let alone one of each. Is it more impressive because of the unlikelihood of it? I don't know, how do you measure something like that? As far as dominance goes in each performance, it's easily Woods, but Buehrle got some great defense which led to his perfect game. Overall I guess I'd take a game like Woods over Buehrle's. The less the ball is put in play, the better chance to win.

ewokpelts
03-26-2010, 10:47 AM
perfection.

jabrch
03-26-2010, 11:05 AM
Yeah, but one could say using the word perfect is a stretch, as the man didn't throw 100% strikes or strike out every batter, and so on. :tongue:

I think Woody's game was a tad bit more impressive, but both were special. 20K's + 1 ridiculously cheap hit allowed > 0 hits allowed and a few K's, in terms of difficulty from the pitcher's perspective, just my opinion as a former collegiate pitcher, as if that means anything at all..lol. I just think Wood was harder to hit that day compared to MB on his PG day, and I believe batted ball stats would back that up. Anyway...it's a fun argument, don't take it too personally Sox fans!

perfection.

A "perfect" game doesn't mean the game was mathematically perfect. It just means no baserunners were allowed. It was awesome. It was beautiful to watch. But so was Wood's 20K outing. Which was more impressive? Who ****ing cares? Both were amongst the few most dominating outings of their decades, and both amogst the best outings ever. I'd take either one if we were offered it.


Here are the definitions of "perfect" from Dictionary.com. I bolded a few that apply to both games in my eyes. You can easily describe Wood's game as "perfect" using those descriptions, if baseball didn't have it's own vernacular - "perfect game" which has a specific definition.

1. conforming absolutely to the description or definition of an ideal type: a perfect sphere; a perfect gentleman.
2. excellent or complete beyond practical or theoretical improvement: There is no perfect legal code. The proportions of this temple are almost perfect.
3. exactly fitting the need in a certain situation or for a certain purpose: a perfect actor to play Mr. Micawber; a perfect saw for cutting out keyholes.
4. entirely without any flaws, defects, or shortcomings: a perfect apple; the perfect crime.
5. accurate, exact, or correct in every detail: a perfect copy.
6. thorough; complete; utter: perfect strangers.
7. pure or unmixed: perfect yellow.
8. unqualified; absolute: He has perfect control over his followers.
9. expert; accomplished; proficient.
10.unmitigated; out-and-out; of an extreme degree: He made a perfect fool of himself.
11.Botany. a. having all parts or members present.
b. monoclinous. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/monoclinous)
12.Grammar. a. noting an action or state brought to a close prior to some temporal point of reference, in contrast to imperfect or incomplete action.
b. designating a tense or other verb formation or construction with such meaning.
13. Music. a. applied to the consonances of unison, octave, and fifth, as distinguished from those of the third and sixth, which are called imperfect.
b. applied to the intervals, harmonic or melodic, of an octave, fifth, and fourth in their normal form, as opposed to augmented and diminished.
14. Mathematics. (of a set) equal to its set of accumulation points.
15. Obsolete. assured or certain.

If Buehrle threw a 20K, 1H, I'd be just as impressed as with his PG or Wood's 20K game. Heck, even MB's No-No in 07 was awesome. That was a "perfect" game too in many was, allowing only a walk to Sosa who he immediately picked off. The Perfecto gets all the credit, but the No-No was quite awesome itself - in many ways - it was perfect.

Craig Grebeck
03-26-2010, 11:06 AM
I'm struggling to understand how comparing a perfect game to a 20k game somehow belittles the former.

SephClone89
03-26-2010, 11:11 AM
Yeah, but one could say using the word perfect is a stretch, as the man didn't throw 100% strikes or strike out every batter, and so on. :tongue:

I think Woody's game was a tad bit more impressive, but both were special. 20K's + 1 ridiculously cheap hit allowed > 0 hits allowed and a few K's, in terms of difficulty from the pitcher's perspective, just my opinion as a former collegiate pitcher, as if that means anything at all..lol. I just think Wood was harder to hit that day compared to MB on his PG day, and I believe batted ball stats would back that up. Anyway...it's a fun argument, don't take it too personally Sox fans!

I have to agree.

TomBradley72
03-26-2010, 11:26 AM
I'd choose the perfect game over 20 strike outs...there's really no pressure in the strike out game...the pitcher is just "going for it".

The pressure to perform and finish a perfect game is incredible....and a greater achievement in my opinion.

Iwritecode
03-26-2010, 02:49 PM
It's been discussed at length in the other thread, but it bears repeating that this assumption is false.

I didn't see it discussed at all in the other thread but looking strictly at the batting averages of the players in each game, the Astros did have some pretty bad ones in that game. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN199805060.shtml)

The 4 lowest were .111 (pitcher), .125, .156 and .211.

The lowest averages on the Rays were .222, .229, .238 and .247. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA200907230.shtml)

DumpJerry
03-26-2010, 02:53 PM
I didn't see it discussed at all in the other thread but looking strictly at the batting averages of the players in each game, the Astros did have some pretty bad ones in that game. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN199805060.shtml)

The 4 lowest were .111 (pitcher), .125, .156 and .211.

The lowest averages on the Rays were .222, .229, .238 and .247. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA200907230.shtml)
You do recall that the Astros won 102 games that year?

Iwritecode
03-26-2010, 03:04 PM
You do recall that the Astros won 102 games that year?

Well obviously they didn't hit that bad all year long.

areilly
03-26-2010, 04:43 PM
I didn't see it discussed at all in the other thread but looking strictly at the batting averages of the players in each game, the Astros did have some pretty bad ones in that game. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHN/CHN199805060.shtml)

The 4 lowest were .111 (pitcher), .125, .156 and .211.

The lowest averages on the Rays were .222, .229, .238 and .247. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA200907230.shtml)

It was May 6th, Houston was in first place, and you're cherrypicking your numbers: the Astros also had players hitting .307, .391, .296 and .351.

The highest averages on the Rays were .338, .310, .300 and .273. I'm not really sure where you were going with this, but both Buehrle and Wood shut down good teams in spectacular fashion.

TDog
03-26-2010, 05:00 PM
What is more impressive, Joe DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak or Ted Williams hitting .406? The fact that they happened in the same season in the same league makes that question much more relevant than comparing Mark Buehrle's greatest game and second no hitter to Kerry Wood's greatest game and only one-hitter, in another decade (century, actually) in another league.

The discussion is pointless.

By the way, I'm more impressed with Williams' accomplishment, especially considering that Williams had a higher batting average (and yes, yes, a higher on-base percentage) during DiMaggio's hitting streak than DiMaggio did. But that is irrelevant to the disscussion.

TommyJohn
03-27-2010, 03:07 AM
I'm struggling to understand how comparing a perfect game to a 20k game somehow belittles the former.I'm struggling to figure out why it is even necessary to compare the two. And in my opinion, it would belittle it because it was goofs like Mr. Cub Kaplan who made the comparison-because he just couldn't let a great moment in baseball history happen with the White Sox without some mention of the Cubs. And before you scoff at that-consider that it would NOT happen the other way around. It was just Kaplan and others (Ofman, Bernstein) trying to put down and yes, belittle the perfect game.

jabrch
03-27-2010, 08:29 AM
I'm struggling to figure out why it is even necessary to compare the two. And in my opinion, it would belittle it because it was goofs like Mr. Cub Kaplan who made the comparison-because he just couldn't let a great moment in baseball history happen with the White Sox without some mention of the Cubs. And before you scoff at that-consider that it would NOT happen the other way around. It was just Kaplan and others (Ofman, Bernstein) trying to put down and yes, belittle the perfect game.

I don't believe people who know sports as well as those three would even consider belittling a perfect game.

Craig Grebeck
03-27-2010, 08:34 AM
TJ, they happened in the same city. Wood's 20k game was easily the most dominant performance Chicago had seen in a long time, and Buehrle's game was also incredible. It's natural to compare the two.

Dick Allen
03-27-2010, 01:13 PM
To me, the only important comparison is that your team WINS a perfect game, but not necessarily a 20-strikeout performance. I believe Harvey Haddix' 12 perfect innings was just an asterisk since the Pirates lost in 13.