Regardless of the nit-picks, it's an amazing feat

You are correct they didn't lose 26 in a row, they WON 26 in a row.

The tie is not recognized as a completed game by MLB. It does not show in the standings and the game was replayed in it's entirety the following day with the Giants winning.

The record streak is 26 games by the 1916 New York Giants. That is a fact.

Well after a great comeback Thursday night that would have kept the streak at 21, the Royals defeated the Indians last night to stop their incredible streak at 22 games. Four games short of tying the MLB record but setting a new AL record that likely wont be broken for years to come.

Congrats to the Indians for an incredible, historical streak!

What are the baseball rules about the pitcher's mound and the pitcher's "pitching action" ? Is there a minimum/maximum height for the pitcher's mound ? There's rules about a bowlers arm action in Cricket.. To stop "chucking" or "throwing". The bowlers arm cannot be bent and then straighten more than a defined amount during the delivery action. But there's some freedom with finger grip, where the ball sits in the hand.
There has to be, I would imagine, a fair range of types of pitches, variations in speed, trajectory. Every so often in Cricket there is a bowler who comes along who can just dominate..whether it's with sheer awesome pace, or cunning and guile.
Surely you get pitchers..once in a generation type of thing, who are wizards with the ball. Or are the demands of pitching so tough on the pitcher's wrist, arm, shoulder that pitchers have a short " run at the top " before the cumulative effects of pitching cause career shortening injuries ?
In Cricket there are several bowlers in a team, and bowlers alternate, six balls in an over, then a different bowler bowls an over. So for example a bowler might bowl, in a lengthy spell for a lace bowler, ten overs, about sixty odd deliveries, but with breaks between overs. A slower, spin bowler can often bowl longer spells.
How many consecutive pitches does a pitcher usually deliver ? How do baseball teams rotate their pitchers ?

The mounds in baseball have a set height that they need to be. They were last adjusted following the 1968 season and lowered.

As for arm action, I don't think there any limitations. When runners are on base the pitcher cannot start and stop his motion to deceive the runners, but other than that there are no restrictions I am aware of.

There are a ton of variety in pitch types. Two seam and four seam fastballs, split finger fastballs, cutters, sinkers, sliders, curve balls, change ups, screwballs, knuckleballs and probably a couple more I am missing out on. Velocity can vary greatly between the pitches anywhere from upper 60's/low 70's to just over 100 mph.

You usually have a anywhere from 6-12 pitchers in the game at a time who are what I would call a true "ace" pitcher. They can usually dominate the game most times they take the mound. Right now guys like Clayton Kershaw, Max Scherzer, Cory Kluber, Stephen Strasburg and Chris Sale are the top pitchers in the game.

Pitchers generally see a decline in performance starting in the early 30's as they generally start to lose velocity on the pitchers and have to try and get hitters out with deception and control.

Baseball teams generally carry 12-13 pitchers on a 25 roster at a time. 5 of those pitchers are called starting pitchers and start every fifth game. Their job is to pitch as long as they can before the relief pitchers are brought in.

Starters generally throw about 90-110 pitches if they are pitching well and usually about 6-8 innings. Relief pitchers come in to finish the game and generally don't pitch more than an inning.

Pitches per inning vary greatly. You can pitch a complete inning in just 3 pitches and I've also seen innings that top 40-50 pitches to get the three outs. Average wise is about 12-20 pitches per inning and then the pitcher gets a break while his teams bat.

Hope this helps.

MLB is likely to set a new record tonight for most HR's in a season, and there is still about 12 days left in the season past tonight.

There will also likely be another record for most players with 20 or more HR's in a season.

But of course it is steroids and only steroids that led to the increase of HR's according to some.

LOL!!!!!

I havent heard steroids. It's the balls.

Seriously, they changed the stitching on the balls so that more HRs are hit. That's why more pitchers are getting blisters and such on their hands now than they were before. The stitching is tighter and harder.

I think steroids have little effect on baseball. If you want to hit a ball you need exact timing and if you hit it right you'll get a HR no matter what.

Pitching maybe a little bit more but a good pitcher can make a 77mph changeuo fool everyone like Chris Sale. The best pitchers have 96-99mph fastballs, not over a 100.

Baserunning and outfielding its just sprinting, ypu need good acceleration, steroids don't really help that.

I agree with you guys that steroids had little, if any, effect on the game.

Some have claimed it had a huge impact and the records are tainted.

Which is why I pointed out that this year will have the most HR's ever in a season as well as the most players with 20 or more HR's in a season with the most testing MLB has ever done.

Steroids had a HUGE impact on the game. Maybe not now, but to argue that they didn't is willful ignorance.

How did it have a HUGE impact on the game?

The offensive surge in the '90s and early '00s very clearly attributable to steroids. I don't think they should be wiped from the Hall of Fame or the record books, but you can look at guys like Bonds, Clemens, McGuire, Ortiz, Bret Boone and see obvious evidence of drugs changing them as players. PEDs defined the game for a while.

ghug, there will be more home runs this year than any year in history. Last year will be the third highest total in history.

Last year and this year will have the most 20+ HR hitters in a season.

So if it was only steroids that caused the offensive surge of the late 90's and no possibility of anything else.

What is the cause now?

Kansas, as I said, it's the balls. They changed around 2015

Oh I agree it is the balls the last two years.

I also think the balls could have been altered back in 2000 as well, which is the point I am probably doing a bad job of explaining.

I think it is funny how people just latch on to steroids and refuse any other possibility of changes.

Heck pitchers back in 2000 were saying they thought the balls were different then.

Steroids however made for a bigger, better, sexier headline grabbing agenda than the baseballs being different.

The Steroid story made millions more for newspapers, magazines and TV's stations than a story about the baseball being changed slightly.

In 2014 there was the lowest amount of home runs in 40 years. And then two years later the number of players hitting 20+ HRs doubles. This isn't PEDs (in which case we'd see a lot more Stantons) or better players/techniques (can't change that much in two years) or worse pitching (same). It's the balls. Commissioner was afraid baseball was getting too boring with the low number of runs scored. How to boost ratings and attendance? More HRs

Oh. Yeah, you were doing a poor job of explaining your point :p

Read up KB:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BALCO_scandal

As for the number of home runs, those using PEDs are outliers from the norm, but there are only few people abusing the drugs so only a handful of player stats change.

Differently constructed baseballs ("better" technology) represents a systematic change in which the entire system moves in the same direction. That's why we're approaching seasonal records across the entire league.

Yawn. I know all about BALCO, Jeff. I have been a hard core baseball fan since the early 70's.

You are still refusing to be open to any other change in the game.

Goldfinger, yeah I was doing a poor job. Stupid me for trying to lead people to trying to be open to other possibilities than the narrow viewpoint they hold.

Baseball was at it's lowest point popularity wise in the mid 90's after the '94 strike which cost the World Series and the lock out to start the '95 season.

What is the best way to boost ratings and attendance after perhaps the worst event in the history of the game?

More HR's

I'm talking about the present, in the past setroids had a major effect but now in pitching dominant baseball steroids have little effect, an offensive surge is coming again but we can blame that on new pitching rules, new players, and more batter friendly ball parks being built.

But Jeff, 2000 was the season with the most HR's prior to this year.

So that seasonal record across the entire league would also represent a systematic change in which the entire system moves in the same direction wouldn't it?

At the end of this season, there will be 4 seasons with 100 or more players hitting 20 or more HR's. 1999, 2000, 2016 and 2017.

So wouldn't 1999 and 2000 being the first two seasons with 100 or more players hitting 20 or more HR's also point towards a systemic change more so than just outliers?

Giancarlo Stanton right now is at 55 HR's. That is the most HR's by a single player in a season since 2010. His 55 are 11 more than second place in all of baseball.

Wouldn't that seem to be the same kind of outlier from the norm as you point to in the late 90's?

Despite Stanton's impressive size, he has never hit more than 37 HR's in a season.

Wouldn't a jump of probably around 20 HR's over his previous career best also look like an outlier from the norm?

HR's per game by a team rose between 1997 and 2000 each season. 1.02 in 97, 1.04 in 1998, 1.14 in 1999 and finally 1.17 in 2000.

Wouldn't that also be a systematic change in which the entire system moves in the same direction?

What is the late 90s/early 2000s systematic change?

If you think it was MLB turning a blind eye to PEDs because the NFL had eclipsed it in popularity, then I would agree with you. What else changed?

Outliers affect totals and averages, but not so much medians.

Right now, we're also in the midst of a huge generational surge. Millennial men are at peak athletic age so the competition is even more fierce in professional sports. Maybe that's also contributing now. The 90s and 00s were Gen X time and we didn't have the sheer numbers so the talent pool was less deep.

Changes to the baseball like it appears they have done again.

I disagree the talent pool was less deep in the late 90's and early 00's.

The great HR race of 1998 also coincided with two new teams being added in 1998 and the talent pool more shallow as there were 50 more MLB jobs than the season before.

More American kids are playing other sports than growing up in the late 80's. More kids are playing basketball now than in Gen X. WAY more kids are playing soccer than in Gen X. More kids are playing the "Extreme Sports" like skateboarding, snowboarding etc than in Gen X. I would say that even more Millennial's played football than Gen X although that will likely change moving forward. There might be more numbers but those numbers are also being spread amongst more sports.

That's an interesting observation KB, that the best way for Major League Baseball to improve game attendances and TV ratings is by having more home runs per game. I see that as a reflection of the curious, to me, values of the audience / potential audience. Call me ignorant and old fashioned, but I would find it absolutely fascinating to watch a pitcher, or series of pitchers "strike out", or in combination with his fielders and catcher, get out every batsman who stepped up to the plate without conceding a single home run. That would be a " Herculean task" given the advantages the batsmen appear to have.
The variety of types of pitches thrown, the guile, deception, the incredible standard of performance required would, for me, be most entertaining to witness.
But it's sensationalism that the mob demands it seems. ( as perhaps also demonstrated by the election of Trump )

Oops, plus the teamwork required by the pitching and fielding side, that'd have to be exceptional.

MM, for the casual fan, HR's and scoring make the game more enjoyable and quite honestly as a hard core baseball fan myself I do love to see HR's.

But I also love a great pitching duel and appreciate a pitcher who totally dominates a game.

My home town team won the World Series two seasons ago hitting the fewest HR's in baseball and playing outstanding defense. It was a joy to watch.

But for the casual fan, HR's is where it is at.

There was even a great Nike commercial from the late 90's early 2000's about it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjkuJPvMrI8

Also interesting when talking about HR vs pitching in terms of what people want, is to consider the higher percentage of revenue that comes from ticket sales for baseball compared to other sports leauges.

And while its fun to watch a pitcher dominant on tv, its much more difficult to appreciate if you are in the upper bowl of the stadium. A home run though, is much more amazing to see live than on tv. So if they want to create a bigger draw for ticket sales, home runs seems to be the way to go.

I could beat a pitcher any day.