My son doesn't even play baseball... So I am not trying to teach him anything - sheesh, don't worry...
Let's talk about this more because I am trying to get on board with the current definition, however it seems to want to reward just the pitcher and only the pitcher, when in reality, by the current definition, it requires that the rest of the team is playing good eniugh to field the balls that ARE hit to ensure they're guaranteed outs.
What if a pitcher is working towards a PG and is in the final inning, pitches a ball meant to be popped up and caught as an easy out, and the fielder drops it... And the PG is ruined... Seems unfair, no?
I guess what I am saying is that there are multiple ways to pitch for outs, including involving the rest of the team and hoping that they're ready to field the hit balls to make sure the batter doesn't get on base, and to me, the rest of the team deserves kudos too for performing their jobs if a PG is earned, yet they tend to be ignored and it's all the pitcher, when to me - it STILL required other people acting.
So, for a pitcher to be independently perfect - to not rely on anyone else on the team having to perform their job correctly... I say the 27Ks is perfect for just the pitcher and the pitcher alone - and yes, it might be super boring for everyone else on the field - but is this making any more sense ?
I guess I want to know if / when the day comes when an MLB pitcher will get 27Ks straight, would that still also be called a PG and not something different to show it really was the pitcher and the pitcher alone... But no, I guess the catcher can't be dropping the balls either...
Ugh.. This is seriously causing me to think too much