HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
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: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 22:22:24 GMT

In <1dlpv8INN907@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes:

>In article <1992Nov7.005056.25732@midway.uchicago.edu>  
>thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Mmmm... Purple) writes:
>> Was Babe Ruth a better hitter than Bob Uecker?  How do you know?

We don't need stats for this one.  There has been plenty of testimony, from
those who saw Ruth, that has come to us through 2 films and countless books
and "eyewitness" reports (How many millions of people were in the park the
day Ruth "pointed"?) 

>Since Roger a few posts back said that it wasn't a good idea to
>even judge hitters by just stats, I'd guess that he wouldn't
>be able to tell us that Ruth was a better HITTER than Uecker.
>Or did I misread Roger, when, in an earlier post, he said:

>> Huh?  "Best" hitter?  No, you can see who had the "best" statistics  
>in 1927
>> by looking it up in a book.  And if you are prepared to say that  
>the "best"
>> hitter is the one with the "best" statistics then you are  
>unenlightened.
>> 

well that "unenlightened" was a bit provacative wasn't it?  If all we have
is statistics about a player then we have no choice but to decide, based on
those statistics alone, who we think might be the "best" hitter.  And even
then we get into trouble.  Williams?  Ruth?  So what it comes down to is an
argument about which statistics are more meaningful and not which player is
the "best".

But the context of the conversation is Mattingly's defense.  And when we talk
about how good a player is *now* we are really talking about how well we 
expect him to perform in the immediate future.  Now some are using statistics 
to predict behaviour rather than just as a sum of performance.  My personal
opinion is that more information must go into a useful prediction than simply
a summation of past performance.

Is the difference between Cal Ripken's and Tony Fernandez' styles of defense 
readily apparent in statistics?  Ripken can more easily afford to lose a step
than Fernandez because he plays a less athletic, more intelligent game.
It is the manager's job to look them over in Spring Training and decide 
whether or not they can still do it.  If they have both lost a step Tony
may get cut while Cal doesn't.  These are the types of decisions that one
can make only if one sees the game and truly understands what he sees.
BTW I am not suggesting that I see the game any better than anybody, only
that professional scouts and managers do and they for the most part are
much maligned in this group. 

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Florida awaits the Giants!
Date: 8 Nov 92 00:03:54 GMT
Organization: Boo!

Lost the credit to this article ...

>LEGALLY, baseball is not a business. So ruled the Supreme Court when they
>upheld their exemption from the anti-trust agreements. They are a sport.
>Hence they can restrict franchise moves, conduct drafts, limit free-agency
>and do lots of stuff businesses can't get away with. 

Other sports without antitrust positions do
some of these things, too.  There are football and basketball drafts, very
limited free agency, etc. all without an antitrust exemption.

>This is yet another reason the owners have to be careful, because they
>really, really don't want to lose that anti-trust exemption and if they
>tread on the wrong toes, they very well might.

The problem is that, over the years, baseball has been so afraid of losing
their antitrust exemption that they haven't really done anything to take
advantage of that exemption.  The only thing that the antitrust exemption
has really provided baseball with in recent years is an ability to prevent
franchise movement.

Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: MLINDROOS@finabo.abo.fi (Marcus Lindroos INF)
Subject: Re: Expand the Play-offs
Organization: Abo Akademi University, Finland
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 09:23:19 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <Bx8wEp.AG2@zoo.toronto.edu> rising@zoo.toronto.edu writes:

> As the number of ML teams increases via expansion, it seems to me
> that it would make sense to expand to three or four leagues, which
> logically would expand the playoffs.  With the present number of
> teams I would prefer to see the playoffs unchanged, although I
> wouldn't be unhappy with a best of 9 series with no days off
> in the midst.
> -- 

Hm, why not do like the National Hockey League and turn the entire
playoff-format upside down?! This way, 24 teams out of 28 qualify for
the AL/NL championship series. It sure would be more profitable this way,
especially with the financial problems plaguing baseball at the moment.
162 regular season games to determine the worst team in each division,
sounds great to me! Forget about Jerry Reinsdorf, I'm the next MLB
commissioner:-)

> Name:     Jim Rising
> Mail:     Dept. Zoology, Univ. Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada    M5S 1A1
> UUCP:     uunet!attcan!utzoo!rising 
> BITNET:   rising@zoo.utoronto.ca

MARCU$
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 5 most unbreakable records...
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:07:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: emoryu1.1388
Distribution: na
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

baseggio@uucp (Franco Baseggio) writes:
: What about that amazing pitcher for the Red Sox in '86, Tim Lollar.  Didn't
: he have a 1.000 winning percentage *and* a 1.000 Batting average?  
: (Based on 1 decision and 1 AB).  Obviously this is breakable (in terms of
: number of decisions/at bats with no losses/outs), but will it ever be?
: 
: On a tangent, what is the *most* breakable record?
: 
: Franco Baseggio

The most breakable record, IMHO, is the single-season save record.
It's likely to be broken ever three or four years for awhile.
Bill:  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: jints to stay
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:52:35 GMT

In article <1ds6cdINNhlc@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bm562@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard L. Trionfo) writes:
>is the new Bo Schembechler of the Tigers, the BS settlement 
>for expansion, and finally the blatant breach of contract.

I know the Florida fans are upset, and I very much sympathize with them
(and am pulling for more expansion), but I find it hard to see a breach of
contract claim here.  When the Tampa Bay group signed the contract, they
knew full well that MLB claimed the right to reject the sale.  You can
argue whether MLB does indeed have that right or not (which goes to the
issue of whether the anti-trust exemption would hold up in court again),
but I don't see a breach of contract.  The contract stipulated that Bob
Lurie would not consider any other offers, and he didn't; it stipulated
nothing as to what the rest of the owners could or couldn't do, or as to
what the city of San Francisco could or couldn't do. 

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com



Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: elle@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Ellen Keyne Seebacher)
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Reply-To: elle@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:09:55 GMT

spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>Who should run baseball?
>
>>George Bush
>>Background: Ran global spy network, former hurler in Japan ...

>Actually, I wouldn't be totally surprised to see the owners try and
>bring in Jim Baker as the new commissioner.  I doubt he'd accept, but
>I've heard definite rumblings indicating that the owners very well might
>ask him.  Bush himself would be a candidate if his son wasn't an owner.

According to the _New York Times_ a couple of days ago, Baker has
already been asked, sometime in the last couple of years, and declined
the job.  The same article said that Bush's name was being brought up
for the same position, but that he was extremely unlikely to accept
any job Baker had turned down.

--                    __
Ellen Keyne Seebacher \/             elle@midway.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mlstocku@zeno30.math ()
Subject: Oakland Rumours (Gimme rundown)
Originator: mlstocku@zeno30.math.UWaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:21:25 GMT

 How about some A's fans/followers give us a rundown on trade/signing rumours.
Are they going to go after anyone? Who is going to pick up all those oldish
picthers?        
/Michael

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jplee@zeus.calpoly.edu (Jason Lee)
Subject: Re: Villanueva
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:27:42 GMT

In article <9211092348.AA18487@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> C Robert Claydon <cclaydon@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>For those of you who haven't heard...
>
>The Chicago Cubs released catcher Hector Villaneuva today!!!

Paul White of the USA Today Baseball Weekly is not going to take this well.
What a blow!

>
>(Seeing as how he was a net-hero at one point in the recent past, I was 
>wondering how people would react to this...).
>
>Any word on anyone trying to sign him?  (Hmmm, Hector in Denver, miiiighty 
>iiiinteresting.... :-)
>
>Rob

Now batting for Rockies, catcher, Hector Villanueva!
Sounds good!

-- 
Jason Lee
email:  jplee@poseidon.calpoly.edu
GO ROCKIES 1993
Don Baylor for President!!!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: scott@asd.com (Scott Barman)
Subject: Re: Still more on Don Mattingly
Organization: American Software Development Corp., West Babylon, NY
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:04:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov3.091140.1@sscvx1.ssc.gov> kasper@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:
>The discussion of Don Mattingly's fielding having degenerated into repetitive
>salvos of "yes he does" and "no he doesn't", I thought I'd put my two cents
>worth in.  If forced to align myself in the silly stat-head, non-stat-head
>wars, I would put myself in the stat-head camp, but I have never seen a
>statistic that gives a decent measure of fielding ability for a first baseman;
>all manner of range factor and defensive average numbers seem to miss many of
>the important aspects of fielding for a first baseman.  Late in my 20 year
>career of playing fast-pitch softball, I was forced by injury to play first
>base and it is clearly true that anybody (well, almost anybody) can make most
>of the plays required at the position.  But there are enough plays that are
>difficult (and there are even more in baseball than in softball) that a good
>fielder at the position can really help a team.  (I'm not saying that defense
>at 1b is as important as at most of the other positions.)  

Gee... I used to say things like this about Keith Hernandez tieing it
into how he made Wally Backman a better looking fielder only to get
"shouted" down that the DA numbers do not back it up.  (Non-stat proof:
look at Backman's performance after he was traded--but that's another
story I'm sure I'll hear about :-)

>Those who say that Mattingly is an "average" fielder, or not a good fielder,
>have clearly not been watching him.  Go to a game and watch how quickly,
>smoothly, effortlessly he fields ground balls.  Watch how he invariably picks

Don Mattingly was voted to his seventh(?) Gold Glove Award.  Yes, I know
the GG is an opinion poll of coaches and managers and not backed up by
numbers, but these are the people who have to play against him and feel
his presence means that much more for the Yankees to give him this award.
I have no problem with this.

-- 
scott barman			| <This space intentionally left blank>
scott@asd.com			|
 (I can barely speak for myself, you expect me to speak for my employer??)
From: yankees@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Kenneth M Gelfand)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 5 truly unbreakable records.
Date: 13 Nov 92 04:26:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1602.2b028880@atlas.nafb.trw.com>, dsimon@atlas.nafb.trw.com writes...
>>>8) Fewest pitches thrown in an inning: 3.  many people
>> 
>> This one, easily the most insightful record of all time, 
>> made me wonder.  Wouldn't that record be one?  If it's the
>> bottom of the ninth, and the leadoff batter hits a game
>> winning homer on the first pitch, the game is over, which 
>> seems to mean the inning is over, with only one pitch thrown.
> 
>I guess the original poster meant "fewest pitches thrown in a 3-out inning."
> 
>But how about the following scenario.  The pitcher gives up a single to 
>the leadoff batter on the first pitch.  He then balks, runners on
>first and second, 1 pitch thrown.  He then picks off both runners.
>The next batter pops up on the first pitch thrown to him.
> 
>The pitcher recorded three outs and got through the inning with only 
>two pitches.  I wonder if anything like this has ever happened.
> 
>- Dan Simon -

	I don't follow.  Okay, one pitch...single.  Then a balk.  How does
this put runners on first and second?  A walk, not a balk, would put the
runner on base, a balk would simply allow the runner to advance one base.

	Of ocurse, there have been the interesting cases where a pitcher
has gotten a win without throwing a pitch.  I believe it was Preacher Roe
of the Dodgers who once came into a game with 2 outs and a man on first.
He picked the guy off and the Dodgers won the game and Roe got the W, 
without throwing a pitch.

						Kenny G




Tom Seaver: Pitching genius, broadcasting disaster.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Mmmm... Purple)
Subject: Tree Stump Retires?
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:52:33 GMT

My paper's reporting that Carney Lansford's accepted "voluntary
retirement."  Is this for real, or is it just a ploy so they don't
have to protect him, and then CL will make a miraculous "comeback"
in March?

Oy, I'm getting cynical.

Ex-Pirate, Yankee, and Mariner Rod Scurry died yesterday.  Drug use
is suspected.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
also at quibeaux@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ddsokol@unix.amherst.edu (D. DANIEL SOKOL)
Subject: Re: Brewers in 93?
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 07:04:20 GMT

Shawn T. Burgess (Shawn.T.Burgess@dartmouth.edu) wrote:
> 
> Just a question:  do you guys think the Brewers season this year was a
> fluke or can they pull it off next year?  Also, who are they likely to
> lose this year (free-agent, draft, etc.)?
> 

The Brew crew have always been contenders but they just can't make it to the
World Series.  They will lose Bosio for sure and maybe also Fletcher and
Seitzer.  There is hope for the future in rookie of the year Pat Listach who
will be a mainstay for the next ten years.  The starting rotation is one of
the best in the league but they need some relief help.  Worst of all,
Robin Yount is showing his age and Paul Molitor can't stay amazing forever
either.  Unless there is some major help in the pen and a new slugger for
next year, I just don't see the Brewers on top of the AL East.
-Danny Sokol Amherst College
DDSOKOL@Amherst.ed
From: v085f2wd@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Theodore J Kury)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: rumor: Jay Bell for Derek Bell + a prospect
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:14:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <sf0RLxa00WB54NrWdS@andrew.cmu.edu>, al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu 
(Amit Likhyani) writes...
>I don't want to scare anyone, but WTAE radio in Pittsburgh said that
>there is a rumored Jay Bell to toronto for Derek Bell and a prospect. 
>Jose Lind is supposedly on the block also.  If both deals go through,
>Garcia plays short and King plays second(or possibly vice-versa, but 
>can't imagine it that way).  Lind may be on his way to LA.

I don't have the MLEs (sorry) but I've seen these guys play in Buffalo
for the past couple of seasons, so I thought I'd toss in my 2 cents.
I honestly can't see Carlos as a major league shortstop, I don't think he has
the range or the arm. He can certainly do the job at second, though. He won't
have Chico's range, but he'll hit better (probably should hit seventh, but
a dangerous seventh). Jeff King at short would be a joke.

>Obviously, Kevin Young would start the season at third and I don't know
>who plays first.  I would be suprised if Merced is starting at first.  I
>expect a move to get a first baseman.

I've only seen the kid (Young) for one full season and I'll miss him. He's
ready for the majors.

>The bad news is that: 1) Garcia is not going to hit as well as Bell.  He
>does have more speed and the Pirates have a serious lack of team speed. 
>I am not as high on Garcia as some other people.  He is not *that* young
>and his walk numbers are terrible.  2) Derek Bell has not exactly set
>the world on fire.  I don't have much information, but I don't get the
>impression that he is all that great a prospect.  Shortstops are in
>demand.  The Pirates should be able to get one hell of an outfield
>prospect for him.

Carlos will not hit the same way that Bell does. The upside of Carlos is
someone like Robby Thompson. He won't be an acknowledged superstar, but
he deserves his chance. Downside ?? Tim Jones, maybe.

>The Pirates need young outfielders bad.  At least they are trading a
>surplus(infielders) for their deficiency(outfielders).  I don't have a
>problem with trading Jay Bell, but I don't think Derek Bell is enough of
>a return.

Can we say Moises Alou and Wes Chamberlain ? Thank you Larry ! Seriously, 
though, Will Pennyfeather looks pretty good, and so does Al Martin. Won't
make you forget Bonds and Bonilla, though.

Ted Kury
v085f2wd@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
From: gene@bogus.sw.stratus.com (Eugene Loparco)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mattingly, what a fine fielder (was: Hardly not etc.)
Date: 5 Nov 92 20:41:34 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <7941@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>In article <7936@transfer.stratus.com> gene@bogus.sw.stratus.com  
>(Eugene Loparco) writes:
>> I think Mr. Lee's point (and mine) is that if you want to think  
>that
>> Luis Rivera is as good as Ozzie Smith defensively that is your  
>opinion
>> and you are entitled to it.
>
>But if you take that attitude, then really not much is worth
>disucssing. If everything is a matter of opinion and all opinions
>are equal, then why talk about anything: it doesn't matter.
>Of course, the truth is that all opinions aren't created equal.
>Some are well substantiated, some are nonsense, and most are
>somewhere in between. 

You are missing my point.  My whole argument is that I don't think it
is right that the people who argue that Don Mattingly is a poor to average
fielder claim that it is a FACT and not a well thought out OPINION.  Now,
I agree when you say that some opinions are more well thought out than
others but that does not mean that the one that is more well thought out
is a fact.

>
>> 
>> I personally felt that Alvaro Espinoza was an exceptional fielder,  
>in
>> fact one of the best in baseball, just by seeing him play.  I was  
>flamed
>> to charcoal for that statement, but I defended myself by saying it  
>was
>> MY opinion and not fact.
>
>Fine, the Earth is flat and Elvis is really alive and running a
>gas station somewhere.  Just an opinion, so don't try to
>use facts to disuade me of this.

Those have been proven wrong (well, one anyway), so they are not opinions,
they are misconceptions.  The "fact" that Don Mattingly is a poor to average
fielder has NOT been proven right yet (although I'm sure it has in some of
the "stathead"'s minds).  This is an opinion.

> 
>> I don't think there is a defensive stat that can accurately measure  
>a
>> player's performance...
>
>Why?  And, for answer you give, why wouldn't this also apply to
>hitting?  You can argue that you need to watch a player to see
>how gracefully he fields. But does how gracefully a batter
>swings enter into how good he is at the plate?  Do you want
>someone on your team with a .330 BA and .410 OBA who swings ugly
>or someone with .280 and .330 who swings pretty?

Why?  Because there are too many things that the statistics don't measure
that are relevent (to me, anyway) such as managers putting shifts on, the
quality of the team the player is on, the pitching staff of the team the
player is on, firstbasemen holding runners on, etc.

Your argument is bogus because I never claimed that I thought (noticed I
said "thought") Mattingly was a good fielder because he looked good.  I
said that in watching him play I noticed that he was an exceptional
defensive first basemen last year.


-Gene
From: lsmith@deci.cs.umn.edu (Lance "Squiddie" Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: NL Stats, 1992 --- Typos?
Date: 12 Nov 92 03:38:01 GMT
Organization: Stat Drunk Squids of the Poor

In article <1992Nov12.014658.1889@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> cs3ea3ai@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Edberg '92) writes:
>>Did Lankford really strike out 147 times? No one else in the NL is close. 

>That's right.  Dave Hollins was second with 110 K's.
>Lankford, 26, walked 72 times, and hit 20 homers and 40 doubles.
>Are that many K's justified?

Well, his OBP of .371 is just a little less than Kirby "I'm goin' to
Oakland!" Puckett who had an OBP of .374 and only 97 K's. Both Lankford's
OBP and SLG were higher than Cecil "Donut" Fielder's who struck out 151
times. 

>>Did Bonds really walk 127 times? No one else in the NL broke 100. 

>Right again.  Second place was 96 for Fred McGriff.  You have to realize
>that Barry was walked intentionally 32 times, also in front of Fred McGriff's
>32.

That's 23 IBB for McGriff. My favorite stat for Bonds is that with runners
in scoring position (118 AB) he hit .314/.508/.737.

>>Did Offerman really make 42 errors? No one else in *either* league is close.

>You're three for three.  In second place was Gary DiSarcina and Mark Lewis, tiedat 25.  Offerman's fielding percentage was .935.  The averages for both leagues
>were 14 errors and a .973 fielding percentage. Offerman had 12 more errors than
>RBI's.  Ouch!  Can L.A. backup how horrid he was?

Offerman had a range factor of 4.23 and a STATS Zone rating of .845 (avg for 
MLB SS was .885).

(Just trying out my STATS 1993 Player Profiles)
--
  Lance "Cr2O3.2H2O" Smith | "I aint never seen the peanut before. Maybe 
    (lsmith@cs.umn.edu)    |  Bugs just hired himself some new muscle. Don't
    Reynard and Tybert's   |  matter. Put him up against the wall with the
        Biggest Fan        |  rest."                _Mr Peanut in Chicago_
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: milleman@athena.cs.uga.edu (Richard Milleman)
Subject: Re: Who was the favorite player of your youth?.
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:53:47 GMT

Cesar Cedeno

-- 
                                                The Rickster
                                                milleman@athena.cs.uga.edu
"We fear change."
 -Garth Algar