A game that happened in one of my leagues:

http://whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/Boxscore.aspx?gid=63498543

The starter had a no-hitter going in the eighth, but he walked a couple and reached his pitch cout, so the Sim yanked him. The reliever threw a wild pitch and let a runner score. It was a no-hit loss.

What do you think would happen if a real manager did this? Would he be killed? Or just run out of town?

This isn't the first time I've seen this. A couple months ago (last season) one of my young pitchers was taken out with two outs in the ninth and a no-hitter going. Fortunately, in that case the reliever managed to get the final out. Unfortunately, my starter missed out on the chance to have his picture appear in the World home page as a game highlight.

I've seen pitchers with no-hitters pulled before because of pitch limits.

I certainly don't want my starter going over his pitch limit, regardless of the situation.  I want him available for his next start.

The maximum pitch count setting is not "maximum unless something cool happens".

Your fake crowd at your fake game are running YOU out of town for making that setting.

Posted by deathinahole on 6/5/2014 12:51:00 PM (view original):
The maximum pitch count setting is not "maximum unless something cool happens".

Your fake crowd at your fake game are running YOU out of town for making that setting.

They can't get me. I'm safe in my luxury box with a trained security staff guarding the door.

It's really not realistic to set pitch counts higher just because here's a tiny chance a pitche could throw a no-hitter. But I wouldn't mind if my starter went 10-20 pitches over in this very rare occasion. How difficult would it be for the programmers to make an allowance for this? They could even put a little check box in the management settings to allow pitchers to stay in when they have a no-hitter going.

But my post wasn't meant as a complaint really. It was just meant to highlight an amusing occurrence that would probably never happen in real baseball.

2 years ago, Johan Santana threw the first no-hitter in Mets history.  

From the ESPN article: "Mets manager Terry Collins said before the game that he wanted to limit Santana to a maximum of 110-115 pitches. Santana finished with a career-high 134."

It's been 2 years and poor Johan has not pitched a useful game since.

I'd rather lose the no hitter than lose my ace for 2 years.

That post is kinda unfair - his injury wasn't necessarily a direct result of pitching the no-hitter.

But it certainly was a likely factor.
Nearly a 20% increase over his typical PC.

Not to mention Johan was already a known injury risk.

This brings up something another thread made me think of: In HBD we manage our pitchers KNOWING, more or less, exactly how far we can take them and how many innings they can give us.

Posted by keithjs on 6/5/2014 2:02:00 PM (view original):
2 years ago, Johan Santana threw the first no-hitter in Mets history.  

From the ESPN article: "Mets manager Terry Collins said before the game that he wanted to limit Santana to a maximum of 110-115 pitches. Santana finished with a career-high 134."

It's been 2 years and poor Johan has not pitched a useful game since.

I'd rather lose the no hitter than lose my ace for 2 years.

Actually, that's not entirely true.

Johan got knocked around in his next two starts, then had three very effective starts (20 IP, 12 hits, 2 runs). 

He hasn't pitched a useful game since the last of those three starts.

Still, it's not very smart to push a pitcher, already known to be somewhat fragile, well beyond his normal limits for the sole purpose of achieving a statistical anomaly. 

I'm a Twins fan, so I love Santana, but he's been a lost cause for four years. He missed an entire season before the no-hitter, so it's hard to blame that one game for his recent injuries. Also, 135 pitches is at least 30-40 more than a pitcher in his condition should've thrown. If the Mets were my HBD team, I would've set Santana's Target PC at like 80 and his max at like 90. I'd be okay with the Sim going 15-20 over the max for a no-hitter, but not by that much.

But a better example would be Matt Cain, who threw a perfect game in 2012. Cain is usually good for 110 pitches, but the Giants quite reasonably let him throw 125 in that one.

Will anyone care about your HBD no-hitter other than you?   Just award your pitcher the no-no because you know he'd have gotten if left in the game.  Put it in the player notes so, if he leaves your team, the next owner will understand just what he's accomplished.

Problem solved.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/5/2014 3:18:00 PM (view original):
Will anyone care about your HBD no-hitter other than you?   Just award your pitcher the no-no because you know he'd have gotten if left in the game.  Put it in the player notes so, if he leaves your team, the next owner will understand just what he's accomplished.

Problem solved.

Well, no. Nobody will care. Of course, you could probably use that argument about any of the thousands of questions anyone asks on these forums. Aside from me, nobody will care what any of my HBD players ever does.

Kinda sad, really.

I really wasn't being a dick although, reading what I typed, it certainly comes off that way.

Nonetheless, this has probably been discussed dozens of times.   As HBD goes, getting a no-hitter is kinda cool.   But virtually no one wants their pitcher throwing an extra 20 pitches to get it.    Simply put, most of us run our staff with a PC that allows each SP to be at 100% by the time his next scheduled start comes around.   Doing that, we avoid the dreaded spot start. 

While a pain in the ***, we could adjust PC to account for off days(allowing pitchers to go deeper leading up to an off day).   This would increase the chances of getting that extended pitch no-hitter several times a season.   But no one wants to do that.   However, the option is there.

Spot starts are "dreaded"?

Why shouldn't they be?   If he was one of your top 5 SP, wouldn't he be in the rotation?