HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks)
Subject: Re: NL East analysis.k
Organization: NSSL
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:44:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.064945.24146@bradley.bradley.edu> dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell) writes:
>iacurtop@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Iacurto Paul) writes:
>>
>>So it looks like a thrre team race between the Mets, Expos and
>>Cardinals. Cubs and Phillies will fight for fourth. Pirates will
>>finish last.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Is my ratings system accurate?
>
>I don't know....you're not really considering defenses in all that.
>
>>Have I over estimated or under estimated certain players?
>
>Well, you failed to take into consideration that, in all likelihood, Jose
>Oquendo will resume his starting position at 2nd for the Cardinals.  His
>.300 bat and 40+ SB speed might make more of a difference than Pena.

Jose Oquendo?  .300? 40+ SB speed?  Let's not get carried away.  I don't
have his '89 numbers with me, but other than that, his best average 
has been .297 in 138 AB and his best for a full season was still only
.277.  More recently, he hit .252 and .240 in '90 and '91, respectively.
I think it's _much_ more likely that Oquendo, who turns 30 next year, will
hit below .250 than at or above .300, or even .275, in '93.  I think the
'90-'91 numbers represent a real decline in Jose's level of performance.   

As to his speed, again, in the absence of the '89 numbers, he only has
30 stolen bases total in his career in 56 attempts.  He's only had one
season with 10 steals.  For '90-'91, he had a grand total of only 
2 steals and 3 caught stealings.  

Now, it's possible that Oquendo will hit .300 and steal 40+ bases this
year, but, as my office mate likes to say, it's also possible that a 
meteor will land in my backyard, split open, and be full of diamonds.
The evidence seems awfully strong and unless you think that all outcomes
are equally likely, I think you're vastly overrating Oquendo.  At .240
with an OBA of .352 and a SLG of .301 (as in '91), he's not much of an 
offensive player.  Barring injuries to Pena and Alicea, it would be 
disappointing to see Oquendo as a starter in '93.

Harold
-- 
Harold Brooks                    hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu
National Severe Storms Laboratory (Norman, OK)
"Better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late."
--Branch Rickey
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: molinari@ccs.northeastern.edu (Bert Molinari)
Subject: Re: Lou Gorman - chowderhead
Organization: CDSP Computing Lab, Northeastern University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:44:29 GMT

the problem is that lou thinks *very* short term and *very* locally.  if you
ask the question 'are the sox better now than at the end of last season', the
answer is yes, IMO.  however if you ask the question, is the red sox
organization better than last year the answer is NO.  the guy is trying, in
his very warped way to put a good team on the field *next* year without
caring about the future, although he has avoided any long term contracts with
the chumps he's been signing.

keep the change

bert

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dorian@engin.umich.edu (Young W Kim)
Subject: Caveat Re:Brave "awesome" pitching staff
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 08:14:51 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

I've been reading so much of late about how GREAT brave's pitching staff is
going to be next year. Well, I'd like to advice caution as far as predicting
the success of that staff. First of all, I seem to recall that there was an
article in McThang about the year_after affect for cy young award winners.
Admitted that Glavine seemed to have escaped that after his cy young campaign,
but you gotta wonder about Maddux. There is also the matter of him going from
a temproray pitcher friendly park, Wrigley(before I get flamed for this, please
check Last years' numbers, not last Few year's trend) to a hitter's park,
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^    	       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Fulton County Stadium. You also have to wonder if Glavine is completely over
his late season injury, and whether Pete Smith has really arrived. If I recall
correctly, he only started 14~ or so games last year. Also, Avery seemed to 
have made progress from 90 to 91, but seemed to regress a bit in 92 so another
down year is possible. IMHO, this staff has (due to age and talent) the best
potential to be an incredibly dominant staff in a long time, maybe since 86
Mets or even more so, however, just because they have 2 cy young award winners
and mounds(pun not intended) of talent doesn't mean they'll be great (cf. Mets
90 and 92) 

	To digress a bit, what in the  %^#%^$^ are the Mets doing signing 
Tanana? Even if it's a 1yr deal, sheesh! As I see it now, Mets have Gooden,
Sabes, Sid, Shourek, and (fill in the blank) For the blank, Hillman, Young or
some other AAA pitcher could have filled in. Blowing 1.5 mil on Tanana! I
thought they were on a tight budget! If they needed another starter, why 
didn't they protect Jose Martinez, he of 95+ mph fast ball and ~30bb in 
~140inn with ~150Ks? I don't understand what the Mets are doing anymore.....
*sigh* Oh, well, I endured thorough 82,83,91 and 92, so I guess I can bear it..
What is that, avg of ~93 loses during thoses 4 seasons? Still, I guess 93 should
be better than 92, it couldn't get any worse...Well, enough of my moaning and
despairing over my fav. ML team....

					-dorian-
					Fav. Player: Cone
			(how can you not like a guy with 7 pitches?) 8-)

	*Still dreaming of the day Mets pitching staff is *
	*  Gooden, Sabes, Sid, Jose Martinez, Tom Wegman   *
	*  with Julian Vasquez the closer	          *

p.s. Al Harazin, please get Martinez and Vasquez back, I'll forgive you for
	letting Cone go.

=============================================================
|    I have of late,        | *Bye, and as always, Hello*   | 
| But wherefore I know not, |   dorian@engin.umich.edu      |   
|  Lost all my mirth....    | dorian_kim@um.cc.umich.edu    |    
|  Hamlet, Act II, scene II |   wi.6839@n7kbt.rain.com      | 
============================================================= 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dave@snitor.sni.ca (Dave Till)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: Siemens Nixdorf, Sietec Open Systems, Toronto, Canada
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:27:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.032238.9715@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
>I think you are wasting your time here Dave.  The nerds can't measure this
>kind of contribution so they claim it doesn't exist - or if it does its effect
>is trivial.

Hey!  Wait a minute!  We nerds don't like it when you toss this label
around!  (Why do I hear a chorus of "Which side are you on, boy" in the
background...)

>Some of us understand that the only true measure of quality is merely  
>the measure of a team's success.  Others feel that success is incidental
>to quality. 

The problem here, I think, is that there is *no* real way of measuring the
quality of a manager.  If you and I were to get into an argument about
the merits of Rickey Henderson, Joe Carter, or Cecil "I cover first base"
Fielder, there are facts we can look at and/or discard.  However, a
manager's contributions are far more difficult to quantify.

All you can really do is compare the performance of teams run by one manager
versus the performance of teams with similar-quality personnel run by
another.  (By "performance", I mean not only wins and losses; I also
mean the stats of the players playing for the manager in question.
Sorry, Roger, but I must take off my sheep's clothing now:  I am one
of those people who looks at the numbers.)

Using this metric, Cito comes out ahead of Jimy Williams.  Williams
gave up on Tom Henke in 1989, burned out his middle relievers, chose
his lineup at random, alienated several of his top players (thus affecting
their performance) and never solved the second base problem.

Cito may also rank ahead of Bobby Cox:  Cox was outmanaged in the playoffs
in 1985, and outmanaged (by Cito!) in the World Series in 1992.  Cox
also has trouble managing a bullpen:  he tends to go with the hot hand,
and doesn't define bullpen roles clearly.

Because Cito can get the best out of his players, they win for him.
Pure and simple.

>yep.  Jim Leyland is a real genius ain't he?  

Actually, I think he is a good manager.  He manages a pitching staff
very well:  year after year, he gets good performances out of a collection
of turkeys.  Would you want to start a season with a bullpen consisting
of Stan "Skippy" Belinda, Roger Mason, Vincente Palacios, Ken (or is it
Bob?) Patterson, and whatever odds and sods the Pirates have rescued
from oblivion?  And Bob Walk is still pitching effectively, for chrissake.
I don't know how Leyland does it.

>Where the heck is Roy Howell hanging out these days?

He probably froze to death.  He's the only ballplayer I ever saw who
insisted on playing in shirtsleeves every day, regardless of the weather.

--Dave "I'd be an SDCN, except I'm too lazy" Till
  e-mail address:  dave@silver.sni.ca or dave@snitor.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jjungbau@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu (Jim Jungbauer)
Subject: Re: Trivia Question
Organization: Washington State University, Pullman
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 00:39:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.230447.23093@ntmtv> robh@ntmtv.UUCP (Robert Hendriks) writes:

>THE eight ways of reaching base safely (first or otherwise) are:
>
>1. walk
>2. hit
>3. hit by pitch
>4. wild pitch on third strike with batter beating the ball to first
>5. fielders choice
>6. error
>7. catchers interference
>8. player leaving the field while time is in

I know that every time I've heard the answer to this question, "error"
and "catcher's interference" have been listed separately, but isn't the
latter just one instance of the former?  I've always wondered why it gets
treated separately.

Jim
-- 
Jim Jungbauer               | Go Vikings, North Stars, Twins, Cougars!
jjungbau@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu  | 
EECS Department             | "Nice move by Bellows... big drive... SCORES!"
Washington State University |    -- Mike Emrick, 1991 Norris Division Finals
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: All-time Teams (Cardinals)
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:35:12 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks):

>I thought I'd give a shot at an all-time Cardinal line-up, complete with 
>back-ups.  I tried to give considerable weight to longevity with the team.
>
>      Starter          Back-up

> C:  T. Simmons      T. McCarver

OK.

>1B:  J. Bottomley    J. Mize

Is this one of those "longevity" calls?  Mize was a significantly better
hitter *and* fielder.  I'll take The Big Cat over Sunny Jim.

>2B:  R. Hornsby      F. Frisch

In a DH league, we get Frisch and Schoendienst, with Hornsby and Cepeda...

>SS:  O. Smith        M. Marion

Clearly.

>3B:  K. Boyer        W. Kurowski

Whitey Herzog would have chosen Oberkfell... :-)

>LF:  S. Musial       J. Medwick

Can we cheat and put one in left and one in right?  I'd rather have either
than Slaughter, by a good bit.

>CF:  T. Moore        C. Flood

I'd swap these, I think.  How long did Reggie Smith play for the Cards?

>RF:  E. Slaughter    T. Douthit

See above.

>SP:  R. Gibson  J. Dean  H. Brecheen  J. Tudor  J. Haines

Gibson, Dean, Mort Cooper, Steve Carlton (6 years!), Max Lanier.  Tudor only
pitched, what, 3 healthy years? 

>RP:  B. Sutter  T. Worrell  K. Dayley   L. McDaniel

Sutter from the right, McDaniel from the left.  Never thought much of Worrell
and his "geodesic ball".  Dayley for spots.  Hrabosky in the hearts of the
fans.

>I decided to start Musial in left rather than first because I thought the 
>fall-off from Medwick to a back-up (Brock or Hafey) was larger than Bottomley
>to Mize.  

I'd agree, since the drop-off from Bottomley to Mize is negative :-).  Still,
how much do you lose defensively by putting either one in the wrong field?

>Frisch doesn't beat out Schoendienst by much.

He was a much better hitter and a better fielder.  What's left?  (Red did have
that one awesome year, 'way above his established levels...)

All in all, good picks.  But then, the Cards are a lot easier than the
White Sox...


-- 
       David Tate        |"Out of the dugout endlessly swinging,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | Out of the manager's throat, the sound fundamentals,
 Prof. of Story Problems | Out of the six-month season..."            
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR | 	Walt "Lefty" Whitman
From: gp2011@andy.bgsu.edu (George Pavlic)
Subject: Re: Who are these new Pirates ?
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:51:34 GMT

In article <BzByJ3.Du4@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v085f2wd@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu
(Theodore J Kury) wrote:

> Since the Pirates seem to be missing a cleanup hitter, these players all
> hit 4th in this many games for the Bisons:
> 
> Brian Dorsett        104

I would love to see this guy as the backup catcher to Don Slaught.  He had
an incredible spring last season and even better regular season at Buffalo.
 Don Slaught should be the Pirates #1 catcher and Dorsett the backup.  He
could (have) done a much better job than LaValliere.  This is why the McGee
- LaValliere trade looked so good to me.  Alas, My bubble burst last week
when I saw that Brian Dorsett had signed with another team (Cincinnati?). 
Now I am grateful that the trade never went through because that would have
left Prince as the backup catcher and for sure, a last place finish.

George
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Worrell to the Dodgers!!!!
Date: 13 Dec 92 19:42:58 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: CSE Dept., UC San Diego


In article <b0#ry=q@lynx.unm.edu>, kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:

|> Overall, he's a decent leadoff hitter *now*.  Of course, one thing I have 
|> noticed is the decision of many people here to define "average" as "mediocre",

well, what do you think mediocre means?  It sounds pejorative, but it
really *does* mean average. Webster says "ordinary"; "of moderate or low quality".

|> rather than "decent".  Offerman won't ever be the *best* leadoff man in the
|> NL, but I think a .290/.370/.370 season is at *least* "decent".  Offensively,
|> that's what he'll be doing in two or three years...

Yeah, he's fine.  He'll be ok on defense too.  He's unlikely to become a star,
but he'll be good enough to get his 10 years in.  In 2008 we might be
discussing whether he should get any HOF votes...  I predict that he
will get some, but will deserve them for his glove.

Dave

-- 
Dave DeMers			 ddemers@UCSD   demers@cs.ucsd.edu
Computer Science & Engineering	C-014		demers%cs@ucsd.bitnet
UC San Diego					...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114	(619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: All-Time St. Louis Browns Team
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:12:35 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Actually, this team isn't all that bad.  No left-handed pitching, which
would be a serious weakness, but otherwise solid:

	C	<interchangeable>
	1B	George Sisler
	2B	Del Pratt
	3B	Harlond Clift
	SS	Bobby Wallace
	LF	Ken Williams
	CF	Baby Doll Jacobson
	RF	Burt Shotton
	
	RSP	Ned Garver
	RSP	Urban Shocker
	RSP	Henry Howell
	RSP	Elam Vangilder
	LSP	Sam Zoldak

	RP	no relief for Browns' fans

-- 
       David Tate        |"Out of the dugout endlessly swinging,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | Out of the manager's throat, the sound fundamentals,
 Prof. of Story Problems | Out of the six-month season..."            
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR | 	Walt "Lefty" Whitman
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jmk.admin@mhs.unc.edu (Jim Kirkman)
Subject: Re: Holy Mother of God! (was: Re: Lou Gorman is a moron)
Organization: UNC Office of Information Technology
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:03:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.162834.23791@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.145106.22341@samba.oit.unc.edu> jmk.admin@mhs.unc.edu (Jim Kirkman) writes:
>>
>>Interesting comment by Phil Rogers of the Dallas Morning News 
>>in his Major-League Notebook. He puts the Melendez/Plantier
>>trade as his best trade winner! Called Ozzie's deal the 
>>best contract,player and Griffey Jr. best contract,team. First
>>positive comment I've read about Melendez.
>
>So Phil Rogers should be covering tiddlywinks rather than baseball...
>
Stuff deleted.

>I'd say that Rogers is 0-3.

Care to comment on #4? Worst deal: Abbott for the three "fringe prospects"
Called it Whitey's my-way-or-the-highway deal.


  The Padres pulled a real coup, getting
>Plantier for Melendez.  On the other hand, Melendez is a pretty good
>player.  He should help solidfy the Red Sox pen.  And Dawson, while
>not as valuable as Plantier, isn't *that* bad.  I mean, he *is* better
>than Billy Hatcher...
>
>Lou Gorman is obviously trying to win *now*.  In my opinion, this is
>rather short-sighted of him.  I think the Sox would have done better
>to spend one *short* year rebuilding, aiming to contend in 1994.  By
>then, some of the young pitching will be ready, and Greg Blosser will
>be able to help out.
>
>I don't think the current team can contend without a lot of breaks.
>They need quality (and healthy) years out of the starting OF/DH:
>Greenwell, Burks, Dawson, and Calderon.  IF that happens, the pitching
>may carry them to a title.  The infield of Vaughn, Naehring, Valentin,
>and Cooper is young but solid.  (Okay, so it has a hole at second
>base.)
>
>But how many people expect the outfielders to produce a combined .750
>OPS season?  Because that is what the Sox will need.
>
>-Valentine
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: '93 Royals Infield?
Date: 14 Dec 92 00:32:10 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Dec13.222332.27109@cs.tulane.edu> eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes:
>In article <kbanaian.106.0@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu>, kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) writes...
>>>1B	Joyner
>>>2B	Lind
>>>SS	Gagne
>>>3B	Jefferies
>> 
>>Aside from Jefferies, looks like a second-division infield to me...
>
>	Actually, I rather like this infield.  Joyner, Lind and Gagne are
>very good defensively.  Its a little weak offensively but not horrible;
>if Jefferies has a good year it isn't that different from Atlanta's 1991
>infield of Bream/Hunter, Lemke, Belliard, Pendleton.  However, Atlanta
>had a great set of outfielders and terrific pitching.  With the people KC
>is going to have this infield isn't going be good enough.

Of course the Royals also don't have Blauser coming in off the bench for
400 PA....

Lind will be 29, and is coming off a 235/275/269 season.
Gagne is 31, and has a lifetime OBA of under 300, coming off a
246/280/346 season in *Minnesota* where his speed numbers (triples 
and SB%) plummeted.
Joyner will be 31.  Younger than Bream, but much older than Hunter.  Still
below average, doesn't look to get better.
Jefferies is okay, though he hasn't shown any improvement in the
last five years offensively, so I'm skeptical as to whether he'll
be more than slightly above average.  

True, not much worse than the Atlanta infield, but Brian McRae is not
quite Dave Justice.  He's not even Otis Nixon.

Signing Lind and Gagne does *nothing* to build this team.  They'll both
be out of baseball by the time the Royals are ready to contend, and then
KC will have to find someone else to play those spots.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dtokarew@tokafew.Doc.Provo.Novell.COM (Deb Tokarewich)
Subject: Re: Atlanta pitching
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 20:31:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.170000.11170@athena.cs.uga.edu>  
shimkus@athena.cs.uga.edu (Doc) writes:
> 
> Incedently, I am surprised that in all the talk about why Maddux went to  
the
> Braves, no one has mentioned what I think was one of the biggest reasons  
of all:
> Damon Berryhill.  Berryhill and Maddux were close friends in Chicago,  
and Maddux
> said publicly that he wouldnt mind pitching to Berryhill again.
> 
> Food for thought. :)

I'm trying not to choke on that food!  I can see a pitcher feeling more  
comfortable about going to another team that has a catcher he used to  
pitch to.  But to go to another team *because* of that catcher?   
Especially Berryhill (who's still a.k.a. Dingleberry to many a Chicago  
fan)?!?  HaHa!!  (excuse me...)  HeeHee!!  (sorry...)  ;-)
Date: Monday, 14 Dec 1992 13:47:22 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: European style league structure for baseball?

this is a pretty common idea... i've seen it in mc(bi)weekly, and a
couple of times in this conference.  i don't think it would be all
that great for baseball.  where would teams get their new players from?
sure, high school.  how many players make it in the majors directly
after graduating high school? uh, ken griffey junior, robin yount.
two.  (probably more, but you get the point).  so to stay in the majors
for more than, say, five years or so, a team has to hang on to its old
fogies.  after all of them get canes, they're going to plummet straight
to the a-leagues in three years.  and no rookie is going to get much
playing time, except in the low minors.  even aaa would probably be
a bunch of geezers.

i could be wrong, of course.

bob vesterman.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Who are these new Pirates ?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:10:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.143314.3708@cs.tulane.edu> eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes:
>	What's the deal with Dorsett?  He had a pretty good looking season
>for the Bisons but I've never heard any mention of him as a possible player
>(at catcher or first). If I remember correctly he was a first round pick
>a couple of years ago.  Why is he not being promoted (or am I just missing
>it by living so far south).

It was more than a couple of years ago.  The reason you don't hear anything
about Dorsett as a prospect is because he'll turn 32 years old next spring.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com



Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bonds rejects Yankee offer..
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:14:24 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <1992Dec17.134701.1@us.oracle.com> kcastro@us.oracle.com writes:
>In article <If_FRw600WB94Lx4gM@andrew.cmu.edu>, al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Amit Likhyani) writes:
>> Do you still keep in contact with Bonds?  That must be cool to know a
>> guy who is a major league star.  Your comments were pretty insightful. 
>> Why did he take number 7 when he was promoted to Pittsburgh?  He changed
>> to 24 later.
>> 
>Yes, we've stayed in touch.  As far as I know (and I definitely could be
>wrong), 24 was taken when Barry came to Pittsburgh.  The 7 has no particular
>significance.

7 was the number given to a succession of Pirate rookies as they came up
during this period.  They'd all wear 7 for a while, then switch to some
other number.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball