HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: b706zbh@utarlg.uta.edu
Subject: Rangers Protected list
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:28:00 GMT

   The Rangers protected list is as follows
pitchers:

   Terry Burrows
   Kevin (why was he sixth in the Cy Young voting???) Brown
   Nolan Ryan
   Kenny Rogers
   Matt Whiteside
   Roger Pavlik
   Dan Smith

outfielders:

   Jose Canseco
   Juan Gonzalez

infielders:

   Ivan Rodriquez
   Rafael Palmeiro
   Julio Franco (don't ask me why)
   Dean Palmer
   Jose Oliva


The last spot has been reported as Hector Fajardo, a pitcher, and David Hulse,
a young center fielder.   I bet they protect Hulse since Fajardo had surgery.
Some guys who weren't protected were Kevin Reimer, Huson, Frye, Champiarino 
and Bohanon.  Champiarino and Bohanon had off season surgery.  If anyone wants
additional information on the Rangers franchise just let me know.

                                    Darin Brown
From: ST402747@brownvm.brown.edu (blomberg cepeda)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: John Valentin
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:40:27 EST
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

In article <1992Nov7.190924.26702@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu
(Edward [Ted] Fischer) said:

>(Theodore J Kury) writes:
>>A question for all you BoSox fans out there, was John Valentin's hitting this
>>year a fluke ?
>
>My answer?  Yes and no...  Yes, he can hit.  But I sincerely doubt he
>can hit *that* well.  The MLEs for his 1991 season come to
>.231/.319/.356.  Which, you will note, is far better than anything
>Rivera has ever done.  This year in AAA, he hit .260/.353/.401, which
>may or may not indicate better MLEs.  (He hit better than that in
>Pawtucket last year, but hit *much* worse in New Britain.)  In any

It is very unfair to do any MLE for New Britain without *serious* park
adjustments. Beehive Field is about the size of Alaska (okay, okay, without the
panhandle) and averages just plummet there. There has been serious talk in the
Boston media about the negative effect this has had on some players, setting
back their careers because of the pyschological shock of losing 50 points or
more on their BA between Lynchburg and NB--I think Eric Wedge was an example.

>case, any time a player hits better in the majors than in the minors,
>you *know* it is a fluke.  He was 25 last year, so isn't far from his
>peak.
>
>Still, I'll be *very* happy if he hits .240/.330/.370 for a few years.
>That's quality production for a solid defensive shortstop.
>
>-Valentine
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: apollo@ecf.toronto.edu (Vince Pugliese)
Subject: exhibition stadium -- bye
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:03:41 GMT

all this talk of exhibition stadium really has stirred
up some less than pleasant memories of games past.
anyway it seems that with the argonauts being served an
eviction notice for their corporate headquarters as well
as being told to find a new practice field, exhibition
stadium will soon have a run-in with the wrecker's ball.
a new complex will go up in it's place so can the NBA
be far behind??

.vp
-- 
apollo@ecf.utoronto.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Greatest moments in baseball history
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:32:29 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

At a party the Saturday night, I got into a discussion with a friend
about great moments in Dodger history, most of which were very bad for
the Bums. Our bad list included:

*having triple play against you in WS, 1920, and unassisted at that
*having your best hitter, Babe Herman, double into a double play (the
 famous three men on third play)
*Mickey Owen's passed ball in 1941
*Bobby Thomson's HR in the 1951 playoff
*having the only perfect game in WS history thrown at you, '56
*taking three shutout losses in '66 WS
*having Greg Nettles rob you blind again and again, in 78 WS
*having Reggie go deep three times in one game, in 77 WS

The only clear offsets we had were
*Kirk Gibson's HR in '88
*Lavagetto's two-out 9th-inning double to end Bevens' nohitter and win
 the game
*Sandy Amoros' catch of Berra's drive in '55

Clay D.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey)
Subject: Re: jints to stay
Keywords: Giants
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:10:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.210046.24315@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.193814.18923@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:
>>From what I've heard and read, Lurie himself voted against the sale.
>
>Lurie did not have a vote; the vote was 9-4, which only adds up to 13,
>while there are 14 NL teams.

Sherri is right of course.  I saw the list of teams that voted *for*
the move and noticed that San Francisco was missing from the list.
For some reason I forgot that 9 + 4 <> 14 :-)

Ken Kubey    kubey@wpd.sgi.com
From: molly@uga.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves protected list
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:41:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: rigel.1992Nov12.204152.1172
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <10424@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> jwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Jeff Wilson) writes:
>
>From the Atlanta Constitution this A.M., the Braves protected list (from an
>anonymous source close to the club, I believe)
>
>Pitchers:
>
>Tom Glavine
>John Smoltz
>Steve Avery
>Mike Stanton
>Mark Wohlers
>
>OF:
>
>David Justice 
>Ron Gant
>Deion Sanders
>Otis Nixon
>Melvin Nieves
>
>IF:
>Ryan Klesko
>Jeff Blauser
>Terry Pendleton
>Brian Hunter
>
>C:
>
>Javier Lopez
>
>That's right. They protected BOTH Sanders and Nixon, AND Hunter (ugggh).
>They're gonna lose either Pete Smith, Kent Mercker, or David Nied in the first
>round, then they'll protect the other two, and hopefully they'll protect Keith
>Mitchell as well. 
>-- 
>jwilson@ncratl.atlantaga.ncr.com (Jeff Wilson)
>"Turkey Fact Number 12: Turkeys are filled with enough L-Tryptophan to knock
>you on your sorry Thanksgiving ass." Tom Servo, MST3K

Isn't this list suppose to be top secret?  How come it is out then?
Just confused...

MR
From: RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 5 most unbreakable record in baseball history
Date: 3 Nov 92 17:41:21 GMT
 <1992Nov2.202025.381@victrola.sea.wa.us>

in 1981, mike schmidt had 112 hits, including 19 doubles, 2 triples,
and 31 dingers in 354 at bats.  this puts him at a .644 slugging
average for 1981.

not only is this ridiculously less than ruth's 1920 slugging average
of .847, but it is also less than ruth's LIFETIME slugging average
of .690.  sorry mikey, take a seat.

bob vesterman.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: pmorris@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: Jays' player changes and 1993
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:57:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov08.021328.28191@r-node.gts.org>, shadow@r-node.gts.org (Jay Chu) writes:
> In article <1992Nov4.112723.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca> pmorris@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
>>> Sorry to get in your case, but since your post is being read by people
>>> all over the world, just want to get the facts straight by a person
>>> who has the closest perspective of the Jays --- a Torontonian.
> 
> 
>>Have you ever heard of the media. Perhaps you may not be aware of the fact
>>that we do get television here in Newfoundland -- oh yes and newspapers, 
>>radio, magazines and many of the other sports information sources you get 
>>in Toronto. Unless you are directly plugged into Pat Gillick's mind, or are 
>>part of the Jays' organization, you would have no better information on 
>>which to base your opinion than me.
>>
>>Frankly, I'm a little amazed that this kind of naive superiority complex 
>>still exists in the big city.  At any rate, you're as entitled to your 
>>assumptions as to what will happen in 1993 as I am, and, paternal attitude 
>>aside, they are interesting points.
> 
> Sorry stig the newfie, didn't mean to get flamed by you.
> 
> Well, here in Toronto, where the Jays are situated, we do get better
> coverage...  We have a 24 hour sports station on the radio called
> "THE FAN 1430"...  Pat Gillick comes on every now and then (like 5 to 6
> times a week) and gives us, the fans, a chance to get "plugged into Pat
> Gillick's mind" and have "better information on which to base" my
> "opinion than" you.

Jay:

Are we to assume that the coverage of Pat Gillick on CFAN never gets beyond
the airwaves in the Toronto area? You don't suppose that reporters in other
media would repeat some of the stuff that Gillick may spout on your radio
station do you?

The reality is the sports media get their information from whatever sources
that are readily available. If Gillick says something today on CFAN, you 
can be assured that it will turn up in the pages of the Globe and Mail 
or the Canadian Press wire service before the day is out. It will also
be on TSN, CBC, CTV, and national radio -- that is if it's something of
substance and not rumours or other such dreck that almost always permiates 
broadcast outlets that must fill their 24-hrs. per day with limited (i.e. 
one subject such as sports) programming.

To assume that a 24-hr. radio station gives one better information than 
that which is available through the myriad of other media outlets is naive at 
best and stupid at worst.

If you can get inside Pat Gillick's head by listening to radio, then you 
have a great future in neuroscience -- or comedy.

Stig  (amazed in Newfoundland)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Giants to Stay (YUCK!)
From: wmcgillivray@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (Dark Knight)
Date: 12 Nov 1992 16:16:53 GMT
Reply-To: wmcgillivray@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: oavax.csuchico.edu

I sincerely think that MLB missed a chance to help the Giants get the
new stadium that they have been pushing for.  If the owners had not
only voted to reject the move the Tampa Bay, but also told the SF group
that they had a specific amount of time to produce the stadium in
question or the vote would be nullified and the team allowed to move.
This would have necessitated the executive board of MLB running the
team in the meantime, but it would have kept the Tampa Bay people
possibly out of court with a possibility that they could still get
the team.  It would also prove how badly the Bay Area wanted to
keep the Giants.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,tor.general
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Toronto Fans
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 05:07:20 GMT

In article <Bx7CyM.InJ@watcgl.uwaterloo.ca> cjwein@watpix.uwaterloo.ca (Chris J. Wein) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.154345.25876@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> sinhaa@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Anand Sinha) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov4.002336.462@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>>>If you're going to use the 4 million+ attendance numbers since Skydome as
>>>evidence, you should put them in context.  My 1990 Almanac lists Toronto as
>>>having a population of over 3.4 million, based on 1986 census numbers.
>>>It's not clear from my source whether this refers to just the city alone,
>>>or whether it refers to the metropolitan area.  If it's just the city
>>>alone, and we compare comparable numbers for the city alone for the US
>>>cities, Toronto would be the largest city with only one team.
>>>
>>>Does anyone have numbers for the metropolitan area of Toronto?
>>
>>The population of 3.4mil for the Metro Toronto Area.  The city of Toronto is
>>not very large in population itself, probably less than 1mil.
>>
>
>What is the population of metro Houston?  Isn't it in the 3-4 million range?

	well, one point is the "official" population, which everyone
	seems concerned about. another is what one might call the
	"practical" population, which could be defined as the population
	within x minutes commute of the stadium.

	the definition of "metropolitan area" varies from city to city.

	you can be sure of one thing though: there are plenty of cities
	out there whose population, combined with that of the immediate
	surrounding areas, equals or exceeds that of toronto. houston
	is probably one, boston is definitely another (the greater
	boston area contains at least 5 mil)

--
charles
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: shadow@r-node.gts.org (Jay Chu)
Subject: Re: Jays' player changes and 1993
Organization: R-node Public Access UNIX Information System (416-249-5366)
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 1992 02:13:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.112723.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca> pmorris@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
>> Sorry to get in your case, but since your post is being read by people
>> all over the world, just want to get the facts straight by a person
>> who has the closest perspective of the Jays --- a Torontonian.


>Have you ever heard of the media. Perhaps you may not be aware of the fact
>that we do get television here in Newfoundland -- oh yes and newspapers, 
>radio, magazines and many of the other sports information sources you get 
>in Toronto. Unless you are directly plugged into Pat Gillick's mind, or are 
>part of the Jays' organization, you would have no better information on 
>which to base your opinion than me.
>
>Frankly, I'm a little amazed that this kind of naive superiority complex 
>still exists in the big city.  At any rate, you're as entitled to your 
>assumptions as to what will happen in 1993 as I am, and, paternal attitude 
>aside, they are interesting points.

Sorry stig the newfie, didn't mean to get flamed by you.

Well, here in Toronto, where the Jays are situated, we do get better
coverage...  We have a 24 hour sports station on the radio called
"THE FAN 1430"...  Pat Gillick comes on every now and then (like 5 to 6
times a week) and gives us, the fans, a chance to get "plugged into Pat
Gillick's mind" and have "better information on which to base" my
"opinion than" you.

>Stig (still in Newfoundland, but far from isolated)

So, it's true that you are far and isolated.
-- 
        ______                shadow@r-node.gts.org
       | |__| |   If it's there and you can see it       - it's real
       |  ()  |   If it's there and you can't see it     - it's transparent
       |______|   If it's not there and you can't see it - you erased it!
From: Shawn.T.Burgess@dartmouth.edu (Shawn T. Burgess)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Who was the favorite player of your youth?.
Date: 7 Nov 92 22:31:50 GMT
 <1992Nov6.194915.18664@cs.tulane.edu> 
 <1574.2afa8514@atlas.nafb.trw.com>  
 <1992Nov7.212633.18631@informix.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a6@newshost.dartmouth.edu

nolan ryan

***shawn.burgess@dartmouth.edu***
Texas Rangers in 93!
(or 94 or 95 or 96, etc.)
My opinions in no way represent the views of Dartmouth College.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: steph@pegasus.cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson)
Subject: Re: Gold Gloves Announced
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:20:24 GMT

In <1992Nov5.222415.5191@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:

Comparing to range factors (for what it's worth).
>From memory:
>NL
>1st: Grace
>2nd: Lind
(Behind Robby Thompson in range)
>Short: Ozzie
(Behind Jay Bell in range)
>Third: Pendleton
(Behind Tim Wallach in range)
>OF: Van Slyke, 
(Behind Nixon, R. Sanders, Dykstra, D. Jackson, Lankford, and Lewis)
>Bonds,
(Behind L. Gonzalez, Gilkey, J. Clark)
>Walker
(Behind Justice, Jose, O'Neill, Bonilla, Gwynn, McGee)
>C: Pagnozzi

>AL:
>1st: Mattingly
>2nd: Alomar
(Behind Bordick, Blankenship, Reed, Fletcher, Baerga, B. Ripken, Sojo,
H. Reynolds, Whitaker, P. Kelly, Miller, Sax, and Knoblauch)
>Short: Ripken
(Behind Gagne, Velarde, Stankiewicz, Rivera, Vizquel, Fryman, Listach,
DiSarcina, Howard, Grebeck)
>Third: Ventura
(First, believe it or not)
>OF: White,
(Behind W. Wilson)
 Puckett,
(Behind Wilson, White, Lofton, Kelly, L. Johnson, Cuyler, Felix)
 Griffey
(Behind all the above plus Yount, Finley, and Devereaux)
>C: Rodriguez

>My opinions: The only award that I strongly disagree with in the NL
>is Van Slyke.  5 years ago he was very good.  Now he gets on more
>highlight films, but doesn't cover the ground he once did.

>The AL, on the other hand, seems silly to me.  Puckett just isn't that
>able to cover very much ground - I wouldn't even play him in center -
>and Griffey is much better at appearing in highlight films than playing
>center field.  Not surprisingly, I don't agree with Mattingly either, but
>that's been dealt with either.  Also, I don't think that Roberto Alomar is
>as consistent as he is spectacular - I may not take much stock in one year
>range factors, but its extraordinarily unlikely that the guy with the worst
>range factor in the league is the best fielder.         

The range factors really didn't correlate well in the AL at all.  Only Robin
Ventura was at the top, or even near it.  At least most of the NL are second.
I thought it was interesting the NL had a LF, CF, and RF for gold gloves -- 
when was the last time that happened?

I can think of all sorts of things that can go wrong with range factor, but
is it a better indicator than Gold Glove voting?  When and where will Defensive
Average numbers be available?

-- 
Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic

  "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not 
   overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum)
Subject: Re: Yankees protected list
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 19:06:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov13.004749.4275@Princeton.EDU>, niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov12.170129.22484@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:
|> >In article <1992Nov12.091438.4421@Princeton.EDU>, you write:
|> 
|> Wait -- do you mean:
|> LF: Bonds
|> CF: Bernie
|> RF: O'Neill/Tartabull
|> DH: Tartabull/someone
|> 
|> If so, I mostly agree, though I don't know why you don't leave Tartabull
|> as full time DH and play O'Neill+someone (Gerald Williams?) full time in
|> RF.

 Well, against some righties you probably want a lefty DH. But still, I'd be
happy with any combo to get Bonds in every day!!

|> Why not Bam Bam?  Why Mattingly?

  Mattingly has a guaranteed contract had must be protected by draft rules.
  
  Muelens? Well, he hasn't seemed to have improved much the last couple years,
  so I don't know if anyone would want him.

  As for the Yanks catching situation - since they protected no catchers - what
are they going to do about that position? Fisk was not protected, so he may
be available and would be teriffic for the young Yankee pitching staff - but
I think he'll be taken by some expansion team for just that reason. And even with
Fisk, the Yanks would need another catcher or two since Pudge's age makes it
impossible for him to catch even close to every day. OF course, if I think 
something is good for the Yanks - they're sure not to do it!

-Ron
From: jwc@netx.com (Jeffrey W. Comer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Extra playoffs
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:38:47 GMT
Organization: The Chaos Bobs

cwechter@cyclone.mitre.org (Christine G. Wechter) writes:
>This year I watched
>I stop dealing with hockey after the regular season, those playoffs are
>ridiculous.  Don't even care who wins the Cup.  Watching a few extra 
>football games is one thing, but extra 3-, 5-, or 7- game series -- way
>too much.  

Agreed, the Cup playoffs are ludicrous, as are the NBA playoffs. 16 teams
out of a field of 22 (now 24) teams. No, it's true! Stop laughing!!

>Besides, if the expanded playoffs were as exciting as most of the '92
>playoffs, I don't think my heart could take it.  

Another good argument against it. What does everyone think heightens the
drama anyway? I'm sure the streamlined format is why the games get so
intense.

>We'll see, it should be interesting,...bet they do it though.  

I would like to wish they wouldn't, but baseball's hatchet men Bud Selig
and Jerry Reinsdorf are sure to push for it.

-jc
Your faithful Orioles cub reporter.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Mattingly, what a fine fielder (was: Hardly not etc.)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:44:51 GMT

In <1992Nov5.180753.839@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:

>In article <1992Nov05.005627.159157@zeus.calpoly.edu> jplee@zeus.calpoly.edu (Jason Lee) writes:
>>pointless.  I haven't seen that many games this year, but I think to a
>>certain extent I'm qualified to at least discuss baseball. 

>You don't have to see any games to be "qualified" to discuss baseball.  

This is just about the most rediculous statement I have ever seen any member
of the FofDT Society post.  You seem to be suggesting that one could be
"qualified" to discuss baseball if one had never seen even one game.
Leaving aside the obvious question of why one would wish to discuss 
something one had no first hand familiarity with, let me just point out
that one does not have to see baseball if one wants to discuss baseball
statistics, which after all, are nothing more than detailed second-hand
descriptions of the real events.  Once again we have an example of the 
fundamental SDCN confusion - Baseball is not statistics and statistics
are not baseball.

>>see one game, that certainly qualifies you to discuss is.  Mr. Loparco
>>has the right idea here.  He says the only real way to judge a player is
>>by watching him.

>I disagree.  I think in many ways, that's the worst way to judge a player.

I stand corrected.  You just outdid yourself.  I guess when you want to
know what the weather is like outside you just flick the remote to the 
weather channel right?

>>What difference does it make?  He said he *feels* that Mattingly is as
>>good as McGwire.  Arguing about it is the whole fun of it.

>It's one thing to say that I enjoy watching Mattingly play defense.  It's
>another to say "Mattingly is the best defensive first baseman in baseball,
>and anybody who thinks he's only average is clearly crazy."

I guess if you don't understand the fundamentals of how a player should
field a position, and I guess if you are unable to see whether one is an
athlete or not then I guess you have no recourse.  One thing is for sure:
if you don't watch any games you won't have a clue.  Then again, some 
people spend half of their lives watching games and they don't have a 
clue neither.

rm


-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 1st Expansion Draftee Contest: update
Date: 11 Nov 92 16:50:02 GMT
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Originator: rja@mahogany126


Please, God, let it be David West!   :-)


-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)