HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: Only 40 years? (was: Re: Dodgers sign Parrish and Ritchie)
Organization: Fordham University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:27:00 GMT
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Distribution: usa
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1ilr19INNdv6@mizar.usc.edu>, 
pcaster@mizar.usc.edu (Dodger) writes...
>More crazy moves from Fred Claire...
> 
>Before I post further...is it possible that Fred Claire is actually
>on the San Francisco Giants payroll?  His mission is to make sure
>the Dodgers finish in last place.  Is there any other logical explanation
>for Claire's moves?
[signings deleted] 
>These are surely the most trying times in the past 4 decades for 
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>us Dodger fans <heavy sigh>
> 
>					BleedsDodgerBlue
> 

Last year (63-99) was worse than that.  
Winning pct. of .389 was the worst for the Dodgers since 1912.
Losses (99) was the most for the Dodgers since 1908.
Last place finish was the only time since 1905.
Fred Claire built the worst team to wear Dodger uniforms for at least
the last *80* years.  
The jints seem fond of hiring ex-Dodgers [Craig followed by Baker].
Why let them have Claire now, openly on their own payroll?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Nissim, notorious Dodger fanatic     (nissim@mary.fordham.edu)  
Disclaimer:  "I speak only for myself."   
World Championships:  Brooklyn-----1955   
                      Los Angeles--1959  1963  1965  1981  1988
Trying not to remember 1992.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones)
Subject: Re: Clark v Thomas
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 22:02:59 GMT
Reply-To: mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com (Joe Sterbenc) writes:
: In article <1993Jan8.000104.20375@midway.uchicago.edu>,
: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) wrote:
: 
: I love Big Frank, but you're selling the Thrill short. Depending on who you
: ask, Clark is either the best defensive first base or one of the best.
: Frank
: is worse than average. Despite the recent dropoff in SB, Clark can beat

Even if we grant this (and it's at least plausible), how important is
defense at 1b? Not terribly.

: Most importantly, Clark has supplanted his half-brother Jack as the best 
: clutch hitter in the game. He has produced in the clinch consistently
: for years. I don't believe that Frank has done better in the clutch than
: overall to date.

Depends. What's your definition of "clutch"?

Will Clark           1992                      Last 5 years
             AB  AVG  OBP  SLG HR  K     AB   AVG  OBP  SLG  HR  K
Overall     513 .300 .384 .476 16  82   2841 .302 .379 .503 116 502
RISP        112 .330 .459 .545  5  27    752 .331 .435 .576  39 149
Late/close   87 .264 .404 .402  2  18    457 .274 .373 .457  17 100

Frank Thomas         1992                      Last 3 years (career)
             AB  AVG  OBP  SLG HR  K     AB   AVG  OBP  SLG  HR  K
Overall     573 .323 .439 .536 24  88   1323 .322 .447 .542  63 254
RISP        174 .310 .430 .471  5  30    374 .329 .458 .513  13  77
Late/close  108 .296 .379 .491  4  18    231 .303 .422 .498   9  53

If you accept "runners in scoring position", then Will has an edge. If you
go for the late/close definition (7th inning or later, batter's team ahead
by one, tied, or has the potential tying run on base, at bat, or on deck),
then Big Frank's numbers there are as good or slightly better than the
Thrill's numbers overall! Since Will deflates by about as much as Frank in
those situations, he keeps a comfortable lead "in the clutch". 
Disclaimer: I don't believe that "clutch hitting" exists as a talent or
characteristic of players.

   Mike Jones  |  AIX/ESA Development  |  mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com

If a person (a) is poorly, (b) receives treatment intended to make him
better, and (c) gets better, then no power of reasoning known to medical
science can convince him that it may not have been the treatment that
restored his health.
	- Sir Peter Medawar, The Art of the Soluble
From: paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Lists: The Best Players In Baseeball
Date: 8 Jan 1993 18:21:29 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Keywords: stars best baseball

>No Names With Eventual Star Potential (AL only)  
>SP: Sam Millitello and just about any other Yank pitching prospect  
>SP: Arthur Rhodes (or possibly Cal Eldred)   
>RP: Brad Pennington  
>1B: How 'bout John Jaha? 
>Players Most Likely To Make Big Strides In 1993 
   
   I could see Ricky Bones making big strides in '93. Not 20 wins or Cy Young
   contender or anything like that, but 15 wins and a mid 3 ERA would be quite
   a nice jump from his rookie year.

>					Gord Niguma
>					(fav player: John Olerud)
>
   Nice lists Gord. Although he might not replace John, you're really
   gonna like Paul Molitor.

   --salty


Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Date: Thu,  7 Jan 1993 08:14:44 -0500 
From: Ken_Ziolkowski@transarc.com
Subject: Pirates Management = Brain Dead


  OK, the Bucs have recently signed:

   "Payload" Pena    - $1.35M

    Tom Foley        - $500K

    John Candelaria  - $750K

    Lonnie Smith     - $1.0M

  That's a total of $3.6 in 1-year contracts
for a "possible" stopper and 3 "role players"

  Foley is a utility infielder, not expected
to play everday, right. Is he a better hitter
than say, John Wehner?  Although Wehner couldn't
hit his weight last year, I'd rate him as a better
fielder and can play all four positions. I don't
think Foley can.

  Candelaria is, in my opinion, a waste of breath.
His main role for the Dodgers was to pitch to left
hand batters, correct? And that was basically a one
batter appearance. This signing was a mistake

  Smith. Maybe he can still hit:

      1992 - 247/324/437
      1993 - 265/351/402 (projected)

  but he puts adventure into the fly ball. He will
probably be used to spell Al Martin in left, but with
Bonds gone, Van Slyke will have to cover more ground
in center. And Andy is slowing down - he is not the
fielder that he was two years ago.

  Payload may work out. I hope he does as Skippy Belinda
is not the answer until he learns to throw strikes.

  But couldn't the Bucs have used the $3.6M to sign one
an outfielder who could play everyday and maybe add some
pop to what looks to be a light hitting lineup? There had
to be someone out there that they could have signed to a
two-year deal for ~$6.5M.

  Sheri mentions that maybe Simmons is using the 1-year
contracts to buy time for some draft picks to make it to
the show.  I don't know but I think that the pickin's in
Buffalo are pretty thin and don't know much about our
prospects in AA and A ball.

  But it looks to be a brutal year for the Bucs. If Jim
Leyland can get 80 wins out of this team, he should be
awarded the Medal of Honor for performance "above and
beyond". Simmons and Sauer are stacking the deck against
him.

  By the way - who is going to bat leadoff? How about Jeff
King - that way we can get his sorry ass out of the way early.

  Prediction:  King will be either in Buffalo or out of base-
ball by July.

Ken


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane)
Subject: Re: Clark v Thomas
Organization: Wayne State University Math Department, Detroit
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:36:51 GMT

In article <sterbenc-080193101614@150.130.23.185> sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com (Joe Sterbenc) writes:
>
>Most importantly, Clark has supplanted his half-brother Jack as the best 
>clutch hitter in the game. He has produced in the clinch consistently
>for years. I don't believe that Frank has done better in the clutch than
>overall to date.

Thru 1991 (I don't have '92 situational stats), Thomas has hit slightly
better than Clark in clutch at-bats (career). This is probably just
chance; Thomas should probably have a greater edge.  But even if it isn't,
Thomas is still a much better hitter, because Clark isn't even close to
him in non-clutch situations.

Clark is almost certainly a better baserunner and better defensively, but
I don't think that comes close to making up for the difference at the
plate.

--
David Frohardt-Lane   dfl@math.wayne.edu 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Go Tigers, Lions, Pistons, Red Wings and Wolverines !!!!!!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: cecil "lind" fielder
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 05:50:01 GMT

In article <93012.123646RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>with all this cecil talk, i just remembered that in the 1988 stats for
>earl weaver baseball, cecil was listed with two defensive positions:
>his primary position was first base, and his secondary position was
>second base.
>
>my friends and i thought this was hilarious when we noticed it.  does
>anybody know if either ewb screwed up, or if cecil actually, uh, "played",
>to use the term loosely, some second base in 1988?

Yes, he did.  He also played third base that year.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
From: jjd@teak.cray.com (Jeff Drummond)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: The Minnesota Twins
Date: 8 Jan 1993 11:58:39 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


In article <1993Jan8.160407.19251@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <93008.004857MV013374@NDSUVM1.BITNET> steve eliason <MV013374@NDSUVM1.BITNET> writes:
>>       I just want to say I am a big Twins fan and wish them the best of
>>luck this year. I predict that they will be untouchable if and only if
>>they get their hands on a decent pitcher.
>
>What does their lineup look like?  The keys (Puckett, Hrbek, Harper,
>Mack) are all another year older, and the loss of Gagne will hurt.

It is true that Puckett, Hrbek and Harper have, in all likelyhood, put
their best seasons behind them (not that any of them will necessarily
be an embarrassment next year).  Mack, on the other hand, could still
improve.  Knoblauch should also continue to improve.

I do not think that the loss of Gagne will especially hurt the Twins,
unless they replace him with Belliard.  His excellent defensive skills
were hurt, IMHO, by his weak--even for a shortstop--offense.  Leius at
shortstop could be a wash or even a slight improvement.

>(Winfield more than makes up for Davis, though, IMHO.)

Yes, I agree.  Offensively _and_ defensively (Winfield can play some RF
and 1B).

>                                                        The left side
>of the infield looks weak, and the pitching staff is a bit shaky.

Yes, and yes.  Third base is a black hole at the moment; maybe Jorgensen
can fill that void.  Maksudian or Deshaies may provide some pitching
help.  Maybe.

>(Tapani and Erickson are solid, but Mahomes is still young and
>inconsistent, and the other spots are unknowns.)
>
>The Twins could win.  I don't think anybody really dominates that
>division.  But I think they need more than one more pitcher to really
>run away with it.  (Besides, where are they going to find one?)

Well, the Twins signed Bert Blyleven to a minor league contract
yesterday (with incentives if he makes the team and pitches well).
Somehow, I don't think that's going to do it...

>Cheers,
>-Valentine

-Jeff    jjd@cray.com
--
"The Tao is like a rosin bag:
used but never used up.
It is like the knuckleball:
filled with infinite possibilities."
-Lao "Lefty" Tzu in _The_Tao_of_Baseball_, Chapter 4.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg Spira)
Subject: Re: Hall of Fame voting (read - Disgusted)
Organization: Panix Public Access Internet & Unix, NYC
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:27:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.165754.20456@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>
>>2) Just check out the number of losses he had.  And don't give me that 'bad team'
>>crap.  Ryan and Carlton had the same problem, and managed to overcome it at least
>>somewhat.
>
>Is his W-L that much worse than Ryan's? 

In fact, Niekro's career W-L percentage is better than Ryan's, so it's more
than a little absurd to say that Ryan overcame it while Niekro didn't.
Of course, no pitcher can "overcome" having a bad offensive team behind
them; it'll affect any pitcher, good or bad, the same amount over the long
term (% wise).

But why is it that people have such blinders on when it comes to Nolan
Ryan?  It makes Don Mattingly syndrome look like a minor thing by
comparison.

Greg 





Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: defensive measures of performance (was -- Re: Lists: The Best Players In Baseeball)
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: RF, DA, ???
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 07:30:39 GMT

In article <c_2rlrg@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:
>In article <1993Jan8.205929.9120@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:

[Lot's of fine arguments by Kurt as to why RF is a good step, and DA a
better one, etc...]

>Maybe you're not reading correctly.  "IF WE HAD NO BETTER STATISTIC AVAILABLE".
>In the case of RF (or, now, DA), we didn't/don't.  The search goes on, the
>models are revised, and better alternatives are found.  But remember:  
>offensively, we've had 100 years to develop alternatives.  We only started 
>paying as much attention to the defensive side a few years ago.  DA isn't an
>end; it's a step.  That's all it claims to be.  Do I trust it more than my own
						^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>eyes?  Not when I can see the same player for 80-100 games.  But when I only
>get twele or thirteen games a year to see another team, & maybe ten or eleven 
>to see another player, and another fifteen to twenty times I can see a player
>on TV, and I only see that player for five seconds or so each play, and the
>other 100-120 games all I see are maybe a total of fifty of his "spectacular"
>plays, hell, yes, I trust that more than my own eyes, because I only get a
>handful of chances to actually _see_ the guy set up for a play, or land after
>turning two, or getting a jump on the ball each year.  If a player isn't on
>a team I see three or four times a week, I can't form a reliable opinion on
>him.  And I'm a former shortstop.

I want to point out, however, that this is mostly meaningless.  You can tell
with your own eyes if a guy is absolutely pathetic, like if Cecil Fielder 
was at shortstop.  

But you can't tell if a guy is decent or not, because there *is* no such
thing as decent.  Decent is purely relative to all the other players.
If the rest of the teams in the league are playing Lansford-clones at
third, Howard Johnson may be an above average fielder, even though
looking only at him, knowing what to look for, you might conclude that
he doesn't do a good job.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (Dave Bonar)
Subject: Re: Astros Contenders?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-988]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 01:24:52 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.094242.21337@Princeton.EDU>, niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes...
>In <1993Jan7.135620.16322@cs.tulane.edu> eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes:
>>In <C0Gurv.84H@cs.dal.ca>, niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma) writes...
>>>In <Jan.6.22.37.20.1993.23150@pilot.njin.net> gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes:
> 
>>> You do make decent points and perhaps I was harsh. I did think about park 
>>>factors but the OBP's posted by Anthony makes him clearly below average.
>>>Cedeno was awful as you agree.
> 
>>	I think you were too harsh on more then just Anthony and Cedano.
>>Taubensee and Gonzalez are both young and have shown the ability to walk
> 
>Taubensee, on the other hand?  Blech.  He did post a 402 OBP in Tuscon
>in 74 ABs in 92, but really, what ability to walk?  His next highest was
>a 377 in 287 AB at Colorado Springs, one of the best places to hit around.

	He managed a .299 OBA in slightly less then 300 ABs with a batting
average of .222.  This doesn't put him in Tettleton's class but it is better
then nothing.  With a batting average .023 below the average NL catcher he
still managed to post an OBA only .008 less then the NL catcher average.  
I doubt he is ever going to be great but it seems likely that he can increase
his batting average enough that he will post a respectable OBA with that
kind of walk rate.

>He is young, so I guess there's a chance for him, but I'm not optimistic.
>Actually, now that I look, I should change that to "optimistic in the
>near future."  He hasn't played that much minor league ball -- he jumped
>from A to AAA with only 127 ABs in AA, and then from their to the majors
>with just 361 ABs in AAA.
> 
>>be worth 10 wins.  Anthony, Gonzalez, Taubensee and whomever they play at
>>shortstop should be worth a combined 5 wins more then last year j. 
> 
>I don't think Anthony/Gonzalez/Taubensee/Uribe are going to be worth 50
>runs more than last year's crew.  They're also losing Incaviglia, who
>had a very decent year.

	I might well be overestimating, especially in Taubensee's case
(or in the outfield if newly aquired Chris James is put out on the field very
often).  

Dave
__________
Dave Bonar
eebonar@lsuvax.sncc.lsu.edu
__________

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:15:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.002323.3803@ncsu.edu> Perry@mte.ncsu.edu (Bill Perry) writes:

>	Please remember that when a team like Detroit signs Cecil to the big contract
>that they are also paying him back for past years of service.  (the same goes
>for Sandburg and the cubs)  The fact is he has been the biggest bat in baseball
>the past 3 years. He can't pick his teammates or pitch, so don't put his
>accomplishments down just because the Tigers have stunk over that time period. 
>He has many good years ahead of him, and he will win the MVP one year......

'90, he has a hell of a year; '91, he has a good (but not great) year; '92,
he had *average* written all over his bat.

The fact is, Fielder has talented players hitting in front of him; that is
why he gets bundles of RBIs.  (He also is an excellent slugger, for sure, but
he eats outs even more frequently than he eats pizza.)  Don't tell me that
Tony Phillips and Lou Whitaker have been playing well because of Fielder.

Sandberg is a different example.  Despite aging, Sandberg is still at least
one of the finest second basemen in the league; when you compare raw offensive
numbers between Sandberg and Fielder, of course you think Fielder is better;
what is lost is that first basemen are pretty easy to replace offensively, as
Fielder would have been pretty adequately replaced by an average first
baseman last season, but offensive second basemen are not; same for positions
like shortstop and catcher.  That is why guys like Barry Larkin and Mickey
Tettleton are so valuable.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: lsmith@deci.cs.umn.edu (Lance "Squiddie" Smith)
Subject: Re: SMOKING BANS at ballparks?
Organization: The Little Smoke-Free Squids of the Poor
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:34:32 GMT

In article <1ikhoaINNdkk@meaddata.meaddata.com> brian@meaddata.com (Brian Curran) writes:
>Today's paper reports that the Orioles have become the fifth major-league
>team to ban smoking at their open-air stadiums.  Two questions:
>
>1) What are the other four?

Minnesota is one. I'd guess at least some the domed stadia have bans.
Seattle and Toronto seem like they might have bans on smoking. I'd say
Houston, but Texans seem to be big on personal freedom.

>2) How effective has enforcement of this ban been?

People usually cheer when they announce "No smoking in the Metrodome."

---------------------------
 Lance "Cr2O3.2H2O" Smith | "Only as the screams and scratching slowly faded
   (lsmith@cs.umn.edu)    |  did we realize the horrible truth. The peanut had 
   If looks could kill    |  not been dead! We had accidentally vacuum-packed
   they probably will     |  him alive!"   _The Fall of the House of Planter_
From: barrym@informix.com (Barry Mednick)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball fans, players and owners
Summary: Your loss
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:28:47 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <1inj9cINN5u9@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.574@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>
>        Baseball players are overpaid, undereduated, moronic cretins who 
>lack basic social skills.
>        Baseball fans contain all of the above characteristics and are 
>pathetic because of their interest in such a useless sport which contains 
>all of the excitement of a good golf game.
This reminds me of the teenager who told me that Mozart wrote lousy music,
as if the youngster's inability to appreciate Mozart was somehow Mozart's
fault.
If you lack the ability to enjoy baseball, I pity you.  Baseball is a great
sport, bringing pleasure to millions.  If you are incapable to sharing
that joy with us, you have my sympathy.

Barry
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: vbdiep@iastate.edu (Vinh Diep)
Subject: Re: The Monthly Mattingly Flame War
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:32:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.015942.29092@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <C0M6pC.IIp@news.iastate.edu> vbdiep@iastate.edu (Vinh Diep) writes:
>>	While many of you are arguing about Will Clark and Frank Thomas, and 
>>one is better than the other, one player that some of you seem to ignore will
>>surprise baseball fans in 1993. That All-Star first-baseman is DON MATTINGLY.
>
>You meant 1983, right?  
	I did not mean anything. I was just trying to cause some controversies
among baseball fans. That was all.

>What are you smoking? 

	I'm not smoking anything. May I ask "What were you thinking at the
time?"

>My other question is why Mattingly fans are the most self-delusional
>people on the face of the earth.  Not even Cecil Fielder generates
>such myopia, and he's only had one below-average season, rather than 
>three in a row. 
	
	Who cares about the past. 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball