The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Jimmy Rollins hitting streak as of now stands at 36. So my question for you guys is how long will it last

He got a hit in his final bat last night to bump it to 37. He actually went reaching for a high pitch that would have been ball four (streak over) and fought it off for the extra baser to the opposite field. An impressive bit of hitting, imo.

I see his streak lasting to 42 games...then Philly goes to Atlanta for a three game stretch, and I think it ends there.

His streak will last the entire season, which will put him at 198 going into next season.

Doesn't count unless he does it in one season.  Multiple season records do not count, as records. 

So he only need 55 more games to tie.

     Plain and simple, he's not passing Joltin Joe.  His streak will last three more games

No sir...his streak is valid, and if he goes another 20 games, DiMaggio's record is toast. Go to MLB.com and you can check it out yourself.

Personally, I think it would actually be tougher to do it over the course of two seasons than in one, but I've never had a 56 game hit streak, so what do I know?  ;)

Rollins would have the all time record, but not the special single season record.    This is no different than when NE broke Miami record for consecutive wins a couple of years ago.   Its nice, but Miami still has the record for a single season which is more special.


Tony Gwynn hit over .400 in 162 games over 2 seasons.  Yet, he is no where to be found on the list of .400 hitters.

While it may be a record,  it will be considered a multiple season record.

Gwynn didn't have a 162-game "streak" of hitting .400.  Your analogy is inapplicable.

Bottom line...if Rollins hits in 20 more straight games, DiMaggio's record of 56 games as the longest hit streak in baseball history...is toast.

Agreed there.  Statistics like batting averages, home runs, and RBI's are counted over the course of one season.  In this case we are talking about CONSECUTIVE games with at least one hit.  Nowhere in the record books does it say that that has to happen over the course of one season. 

In my mind, Tony Gwynn was always a .400 hitter...he just didn't want to show up the rest of the players and make 'em look bad.  ;D

One of the most feared hitters of all time.  Striking him out was difficult at best, impossible at worst. 

When Dan LeBatard would ask his 20 questions to an MLB pitcher, one of them would always be:

"The devil says your eternal soul rests on getting this next batter out.  Name three hitters you would rather not see."

Tony Gwynn would always be one of those three. 

Yes he did, back in the '90s.  I want to think it was the '93 to 94 season or '94 to '95 season.   I think it ran from June to June.

He played in 162 games & had an average of .401.

It may not count, but I think it's more impressive than DiMaggio's. When you have a hitting streak, you are in a groove. Rollins had a hitting streak, then took 6 months off and started again(if he breaks the record).

Of course, DiMaggio didn't just get singles with his streak, but it's still impressive nonetheless.

I just don't get the confusion... Rollins streak DOES COUNT!  :-*

I hate to throw back to back posts up here (I feel like such a whore when I do that<g>), but Rollins extended the streak to 38 in his first at bat against Mark Mulder. Like last game, it was a double to keep the streak alive.

38 down...18 to go.

I agree, but someone here said it didn't. I figured maybe MLB was gonna put an asterisk next to it or something.

An average is not a streak, any more than getting 100 hits in 100 games is a 100-game hitting streak.

If Gwynn averaged .400 for every individual game and did it 162 games in a row, that most definitely would be a record, regardless of whether or not it happened in a single season.  It would be a lot of records, actually.

Oooh...good point.

See hair?  Split it.

You're the one that brought up the .400 analogy to begin with.  I'm telling you exactly why it doesn't count.

You are spliting hairs & you know it.  The analogy was that multiple year records are not considered as sacred as single season records.

Its just the way it is.

No one really cares the NE won 20+ games in a row over two years. Its a nice record to have, but one nobody pays attention too it or remembers it, until it is challenge.  Ask anybody outside Boston which teams has won the most NFL games in a row & I'd say 95% of people could not tell you.   

Then ask them who won 17 games in a row & went unbeaten during one season & I'd say 95% of them could tell you.

Uhh, MIA's fame has nothing to do with their win streak; it has everything to do with their undefeated season.  Ask anybody outside Florida how many games in a row MIA won and I'd bet that 95% of them get it wrong (it's 18 games, BTW).

Furthermore, how many people could name the highest win streak in baseball?  Basketball?  Hockey?  Outside of college, win streaks aren't a highly celebrated statistic.  An undefeated season is.

A hit streak is a highly celebrated statistic.  If Rollins gets to 50 games, his next 6 games will lead most sportscasts.  There may be an asterisk attached to it (like *61) but if you think that people will just ignore or forget about it, you're crazy.

Excatly, no one cared Miami won another game the following season.  They only care that they won 17 games in a row in '72.  People remember what is done is a season, not multiple season.

Yes, I know that.  I was not referring to their muliple season wins.  Was referring to their '72 season only.


Right, because it was a season, not multiple season. 

  Don't think I am.   When you get a break in between then it lessens the accomplishment.   

Not saying it should, but its just the way it is.  People will remember JD streak simply because it was done in one season.  The fact Rollins breaks it will not matter because people like to see it done in one season.

Just to weigh in a bit on the debate between you two. Public opinion is Spider's side. Just look around baseball fans and everyone is taking notice of this streak. 4me may not give this streak any credit, but I would say you are in the minority.

"You" would like to see it in one season. Aside from up here, I am not hearing anyone talking about putting an asterisk next to it because it isn't done within the confines of a single season on any of the sports talk radio or in conversations offline with other baseball fans. Not a single person.

Just curious...is Joltin' Joe your distant uncle or something?

Here's what I see...If Rollins gets to 57, you won't hear anyone talk about Joe Dimaggio's streak any more. People will talk about Rollins' streak instead. No asterisks, no disclaimers, no mamby-pamby "doesn't count because it was over the course of two seasons" objections.

Nope the media is, because its a nice story, just as they did with the Pats a couple of years ago.  However, in the end.  Its not nearly a prestigious as doing it in one season.

According to Elias Sports Bureau, DiMaggio's mark will keep a place in the records book whether Rollins continues his streak or not. Should Rollins reach 57, his achievement would be listed as a multi-season record.

There it is in black & white.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/nl/phillies/2006-03-29-rollins_x.htm

Last post on this topic...smacking my head against a brick wall seems like good clean fun on the surface, but it gets old after not very long at all..

Elias Sports Bureau probably also keeps track of the record for the most times a batter adjusts his cup in a plate appearance...but it's not a record that will hold sway with the masses. If Rollins breaks Dimaggio's 56-game streak, when people talk about hitting streaks, they aren't gonna say "Dimaggio has the record for longest hitting streak at 56 games...except for Rollins, who hit in 61 straight, but it was over two seasons."

The only folks who will still talk about Dimaggio at that point will be Yankees fans and controversy-mongers.


NEXT!!

Feel the same way.   


Relevance?  Wouldn't that make them experts in baseball records then?

   Actually it will be Rollins broke Dimaggio's record, but did it over two season & did not have to face the day to day questions that wear on players during such streaks.  So he had time to step back & rest for 6 months.

Dimaggio will hold the single season record & Rollins will hold the multiple season record.  That will be just how it is & will be.  Sorry, if it does not sit well with you, but facts are facts.

Moot point...the Cardinals ended Rollins' streak at 38.

Thank ya, Jesus! ...I was imagining the next three weeks of this debate and it was making my temple throb.   ;)