Josh Bell’s home run only 4th to reach Allegheny River on the fly | TribLIVE.com
Pirates/MLB

Josh Bell’s home run only 4th to reach Allegheny River on the fly

Jerry DiPaola
1130868_web1_GTR-Bucs03-050919
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Pirates first baseman Josh Bell watches his two-run home run during the fourth inning against the Rangers Wednesday, May 8, 2019, at PNC Park.
1130868_web1_GTR-Bucs04-050919
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Pirates first baseman Josh Bell celebrates his two-run home run with Melky Cabrera during the fourth inning against the Rangers Wednesday, May 8, 2019, at PNC Park.

Josh Bell’s mammoth home run in the fourth inning Wednesday not only tied the Pittsburgh Pirates’ game with the Texas Rangers at 2-2, but it sent team officals leafing through the PNC Park record book.

The home run against Rangers starter Shelby Miller was only the fourth in PNC Park history to reach the Allegheny River on the fly — third by a Pirates player — and 50th overall. It was third time a Bell shot landed in the water; the previous two bounced.

The baseball left the bat at 114.9 mph and traveled 472 feet, according to baseballsavant.com. It was the fifth longest in PNC Park history. He now owns two of the five longest home runs there, having hit one to centerfield that traveled 474 feet April 7.

Jerry DiPaola is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jerry by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Pirates
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.