When Should You Start Paying Attention to a No-Hitter?
Between Sean Manaea, James Paxton, and the Dodgers’ collective effort, we’ve already seen more no-hitters in the first month-plus of this season than we saw in all of 2016 and 2017. Not only are we seeing more no-hitters, we are seeing a lot more games with pitchers taking no-hitters into the later innings. Ben Lindbergh discussed the phenomenon over at The Ringer.
This season, we’ve seen 28 no-hitters through five, 20 through six, and nine through seven, all record totals through this point in the year. As a percentage of games, no-hitters through five and six haven’t happened this frequently since 1968, and no-hitters through seven haven’t come this fast and furious since 1967. If it seems like you’ve heard about a new near no-hitter on a daily basis this season, you aren’t imagining things. Thus far, at least one team has been held hitless through five innings in 5.3 percent of games. At that rate, a no-hitter through five is more likely than not on any day with at least 20 teams in action.
With three no-hitters in tow, that means that so far, there’s been an 11% chance of seeing a no-hitter if the pitcher gets through five innings, a 15% shot if the pitcher gets through six, and a one-in-three chance through seven innings. These odds are considerably higher than historical norms for navigating a game without a hit. Near the end of Lindbergh’s piece, he mentions the notification process for MLB apps and the AP — that is, when MLB alerts followers to a no-hitter in progress.
Of course, one is under no obligation to abide by MLB’s preferences when it comes to following along. If that’s true, though, at what point in a contest should one start treating a no-hitter as a possibility? When’s the best time to tune in?
This is, ultimately, a subjective decision, of course. That said, there’s no harm to being as informed as possible about making that decision. First, let’s examine when pitchers lose no-hitters. Even with the increase in numbers this season, the removal of a starter who has a no-hitter in progress is still relatively rare, per Jay Jaffe’s article on the subject. We can take all starts and look at when starting pitchers lost their no-hitters over the last five-plus seasons.

Most no-hit bids fail to make it out of the first inning. Also note poor Rich Hill, who pitched nine hitless innings and lost his no-hitter in the 10th. There have only been 75 games in a little over five years to make it to the eighth inning. Only around 200 starters made it to the seventh inning with a no-hitter, which is around five or six per month. Add in the sixth inning, and we are talking around three no-hitters per week. Go down to the fifth inning, and we are talking about a game every night of the week. On a purely practical basis, paying extra attention five to six times per month once a no-hitter gets to the seventh seems reasonable for an average fan watching baseball on a regular basis. Three nights per week might be a bit too much.
The above analysis deals only with frequency, though. We also want to know how often our diligence will be rewarded with a no-hitter — or, at least, an exciting performance even reasonably close to a no-hitter. On a general level, pitchers who throw no-nos face around 29 batters. Let’s assume that batters will get a hit about 20% of the time, which is slightly lower than the current average right now. The chart below shows, on the batter level, the odds of a no-hitter at any point in the game for a pitcher who’s held his opponent hitless.

This examination deals with one’s tolerance for watching failed no-hitters. If a 5% chance of a no-hitter is good enough for you, then start paying attention right around the start of the sixth. If a 1-in-10 shot is good enough, then the middle of the seventh is where you want to be. If you want a 50/50 shot at history, then don’t tune in until the ninth inning.
But maybe 20% is too high. After all, a pitcher’s true talent could peak for the span of a single game. If that happens — particularly against a weak opponent — the odds of a hit might decrease. For comparison, here’s the same chart as above, except assuming hitters have just a 15% chance at a hit.

This approach would actually have you paying attention earlier in the game: with a pitcher working at the top of his abilities, a no-hitter is more likely to happen. We can take a similar approach using actual numbers over the past five years. The chart below shows two things: both (a) the odds of a pitcher getting through certain points of the game without any hits and (b) the odds of a pitcher finishing a no-hitter at any point in the game. One could argue that the intersection of those two points is when you should start paying attention because that is when the outing begins to become rare and a no-hitter is at least a plausible possibility.

The first out in the fifth inning represents an important moment. A pitcher has about a 1-in-40 chance of getting a no-hitter that far; he also, at that point, has a 1-in-40 chance of finishing the job.
That still feels really early, however. Let’s take another run through the numbers and determine which outs are the most important in getting a no-hitter. To do that, I looked at the percentage change in the likelihood of a no-hitter when the pitcher gets another out. Every out matters, but some outs are more difficult and more important than others in continuing a no-hitter.

So what does this tell us? The first out of the game is pretty important. The first really big out of importance in a no-hitter is first out of the fourth inning. The pitcher is typically facing either the first or second batter in a lineup at that point — which is to say, one of the top hitters on the other team. If the pitcher gets that first out, there’s a bit of a lull in importance over the next few innings before it ramps up again as the lineup turns over for a third pass. The last out of the sixth and the first out of the seventh are big. If you want to see the big outs, tune in as the pitcher finishes the sixth inning. If you miss that point, the single biggest out of the game is the final out of the seventh inning. The rest of the outs in the eighth and the first two outs of the ninth don’t do as much to increase the odds of a no-hitter with the final out of great importance.
Despite the numbers and graphs, this is still a subjective choice. If you want to tune in every time a pitcher reaches a no-hitter in the fifth inning, feel free. If you don’t want any of the buildup and be sure that a no-hitter is likely, wait until the ninth inning. If you wish to combine the importance of the out, the rarity of the performance up to that point, and the likelihood of a no-hitter reaching completion, the final out of the sixth inning is probably the best time to turn to that game.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
I would also want to know if the original SP has a chance to go the whole game, so I would look at pitch counts as well. Combined no-hitters aren’t really that exciting for me.
There ought to be a name for a start that lasts at least nine no-hit innings without ending in a no-hitter. How about “Rich Hill got a Haddix?”
Conversely, you could say Rich Hill just got Expoed.
I had a mighty chuckle when I saw Rich Hill with his own spot on that graph
It’s called the typical Dodgers game.
The crossover with equal risk of no hits and completing a no hitter appears to be the 13th out, which is the first out in the fifth, not the fourth.
So it is. Fixed. Thanks.
Announcer: “Over in [city], [So and So] hasn’t allowed a hit through five.”
Me: That’s nice.
Announcer: “[So and so] still has a no-no through six.”
Me: Good for him.
Announcer: “[So and so] still going strong… heading into the eighth without allowing a hit.
Me: All right [So and So]! [pulls up MLB gamecast]
Announcer: “[So and so]… three more outs from a no-hitter.”
Me: MLB.TV SHOULD GIVE ME FREE ACCESS TO THE GAME
A fair point, but consider also that the MLB Network (if you get it) will typically do live look-ins to “big” moments such as the closing innings of a no-hitter. Also I believe the At-Bat mobile app will show a free look-in as well.
At Bat usually does give live look-ins, but it did not for the Paxton no-hitter, for some reason.
What kind of baseball fan doesn’t have mlb prepaid?
Yeah, end 6 / early 7 is where the money’s at. A couple things are happening around out 18. First, if there’s been a baserunner via walk (or HBP, etc…) then out 18 is actually the top of the order again. Second, even if there hasn’t been there’s a terrific chance in an NL game that out 18 is a pinch hitter replacing the other starting pitcher.
The 7th inning is, of course, the 3rd time facing the best hitters in the opposing lineup. If there’s going to be pain here’s the best chance for it.
Out 27 is nasty. Not only because of the pressure of pulling it off, but because again in a non-perfect no-hitter bid this is the at or near the top of the order now for the 4th time.
Like the comment but 1 2 3 is not usually the best hitters. Generally you can exclude 1
This article is missing analysis of the pitcher. If Verlander has a no-hitter through 4, I’m probably already tuning in. If Mike Pelfrey has a no hitter through 7 I probably still dont care because I know its not happening.
Not every pitcher has the same chance of finishing the job. I always look at the pitcher’s name before switching the channel.
Not sure how true this is, lots of nobody SP have completed the job and many aces have never done it. I’m sure it does trend towards the better pitcher, but not as strongly as you suggest.
It trends towards good seasons from pitchers with better stuff. The only thing separating guys like Edwin Jackson from the top is crazy walk rates. James Paxton has a 12.6/9 K rate but a 3.5 BB/9 rate, for example.
Also, each time a “nobody” did it, it coincided with that pitcher having a great year (relative to themselves). 2015 was Zimmerman’s best season, and Mike Fiers’ second best season ever, for example. I can’t remember a pitcher ever throwing a no-hitter in a year where that pitcher sucked. Those pitchers might have been terrible in OTHER years, but never that one.
So I think individual good seasons and no-hitters correlate well.
I remember when Johan Santana pitched his 120+ pitch no-hitter and had a terrible season after that. Granted he was already at the end of his career, but since then, I’ve always followed no-hitter pitch counts from about the 7th inning on.
Philip Humber threw a Perfect Game
I still sometimes say ‘There goes the no-no’ in the first inning
At what point is it against the (IMO stupid) unwritten rules to bunt for a first hit?
Def depends on the game. A 1-0 game in the 9th inning it’s still ok. 5 run deficit or worse in the 6th inning or later and it’s beanball time.
The answer should be never. A player on offense should always be trying to get on base, and he should always be doing what he can to prevent his team from being no-hit. No gifts to the opposition. Isn’t the defense “cheating” when the 3B’man plays even further back than normal late in the game during a no-hitter because the unwritten rules suggests the batter won’t bunt? Bunt away.
I want to take issue with the graph stemming from the 20% hit chance assumption. If you require there to be 29 batters, that graph is of course correct. But then, on the 29th batter, there’s a 20% chance of a hit and an 80% chance of an out, which doesn’t make sense. If instead there’s a 20% chance of a hit and a 10% chance of a walk, the odds of a hit before an out go up to 22.2%. This is pedantic, but simulations with real values would’ve given you slightly less favorable estimates than the definite horizon assumption.
Yup, it’s pedantic. And in the SSS context of no-hitters, and given that the 20% figure was admittedly somewhat arbitrary, it makes no appreciable difference whatsoever.
Or, to put it another way, you are imagining a “definite horizon assumption” that was not, in fact, stated.
If the SP has 7 in the books, I’m interested, not before.
If its a Nationals game then I think Ill watch before the first pitch is thrown. Otherwise, I’ll wait till the seventh
I’ll start paying attention to no hitters when they start paying attention to me. That’s how relationships work, Craig.
No hitters are dumb. I’m not impressed by 9 no hit innings with four BBs, a HBP and an error. Wake me up when someone is perfect through seven or has 16 strikeouts with more than five outs remaining.
There’s a seemingly weird fact mentioned in this article that no one seems to notice is weird:
“As a percentage of games, no-hitters through five and six haven’t happened this frequently since 1968, and no-hitters through seven haven’t come this fast and furious since 1967.”
In the late 1960s, offense reached a nadir. One would expect that would increase the number of no-hitters or no-hit performances through 5, 6 or whatever innings. But in 2018 we’re in the middle of an offensive explosion; you would think no-hit performances would be rarer.
The answer, of course, is that no-hitter frequency is correlated not with offense per se, but with BA. In 1968, league average BA was .237, the lowest in history, and in 1967 it was .242, fourth lowest. In 2018, so far, despite all the HR, league average BA is just .246, thirteenth lowest in history. One could say an unexpected result of the true outcomes revolution is that two of the most exciting aspects of baseball are for maybe the first time coinciding: no-hitters and HR.
I start paying attention anytime after seven innings, although I have no issue when MLB sends alerts to my phone after six innings. It alerts me that I soon may need to be on alert!
I’m sure I’m in the minority here, but I don’t recognize a combined no-hitter as something worthy of special attention. Sure, the team didn’t get a hit, but a no-hitter has always been about the pitcher. One man against one team. A no-hitter to be recognized in the record books needs to be delivered by a single pitcher. You won’t,see a group of five pitchers being interviewed 50 years on about that time they held a team to no hits. You will see a single pitcher interviewed about his accomplishment, as it should be. Just as MLB eliminated 8-inning no-hitters from the record books, they should do the same with combined no-hitters.