HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira)
Subject: Re: Sandberg (was Re: Ty Griffen)
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 21:30:38 GMT

00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:

>In article <2272@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:
>> Thus spake 00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu:
>> 
>>>There was talk of moving Ryno back to third when Griffen got
>>>to the majors. He was thought to be THAT good. Well anyway Ryno became more
>>>than just a former MVP, he bacame the premier second baseman in history 
>> 
>> Hee hee.
>> 
>> Do they really believe this in Chicago?  Talk about parochialism...
>> 
>So who do you think was better? And please don't say Joe Morgan. Maybe if you
>go back before 1950 you could make a case. Although I admit I should have said,
>one of the premier second basemen in history.

Why not Joe Morgan?  There's no real comparison between Morgan and Sandberg,
actually.  Morgan's one of the top 25 players in baseball history by any 
reasonabled definition, and Sandberg's simply not close.

Let's compare Morgan's career numbers - Morgan played in extreme pitcher's
parks for most of his career, except for his 8 years in Cincinnati -
against Sandberg's road stats 1984-1992 (this eliminates one of
Sandberg's good years and one of his bad years)

              OBP  SLG
Morgan - C    .395 .427
Sandberg R4-2 .357 .452

The 38 points of OBP are obviously worth a lot more than 25 points
of slugging, and we're not even taking into consideration all of
Morgan's speed and the fact that Sandberg hasn't had his down years yet.
(It is safe to say that Sandberg is the better defensive player, but that
doesn't begin to make up the offensive ground between them.

Of course, it's hard to tell what Sandberg is going to do during his
down years; he could end up much closer to Morgan in career value than
I anticipate.  Of course, Sandberg will never get close to Morgan in
terms of peak value; Morgan had one of the 10 best peaks ever.

By the way, TB ranks Morgan as the 15th best player ever in terms of
LW.  James ranks him 8th in peak value, 22nd in career value.

What other 2nd baseman are better than Sandy?  Well, there's Rogers
Hornsby, of course.  Charlie Gehringer, who died just yesterday.
Rod Carew.  Eddie Collins.  Jackie Robinson, at least peak-wise.
Nap Lajoie, of course.  Frankie Frisch.  Maybe Billy Herman.

And while we're here, let's compare the underappreciated Booby
Grich to Sandberg's road stats.  (Grich played in pitchers' parks, like
Morgan)


         OBP   SLG
Grich C  .373  .424
Sand R   .357  .452


About even.  And unlike Morgan, Grich is Sandberg's equal defensively.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with downgrading Sandberg.
When the time comes, he will be a Hall of Famer, and a worthy one at
that.  It's just that he isn't in the same category as the fellows above.

Now, if only Ron Santo could get in...


Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: prm@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (paul.r.mount)
Subject: Re: Mets reserve infielders?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 20:56:45 GMT
Summary: randolph not retiring voluntarily

>      Randolph I believe is retiring. Junior Noboa is not the answer.

My friend works in a supermarket and someone there pointed out
that Mrs. Randolph was in shopping.  He spoke to her (he is a big
Yankees fan) and told her how much he admired Willie's play
with the Yankees.  She said that he is still looking for work,
he still wants to play, there have been discussions but nothing solid.

And I agree.  There were several times last year where the Mets
were down to their last few outs to win a game and who do they
send up to pinch hit but Junior Noboa.  I seriously believe that
some of the Mets pitchers had higher averages than Noboa.

Junior Noboa...Sammy Mejias...Boots Day.  Three players I think of
together (all Montreal flops?)

If we're lucky Noboa will be released and go back home to live wtih
his father, Senior Noboa.   Noboa, No Bowa, yes we have no Boa.
(this posting is getting silly so it is time to take out a 
sandwich in center field, get greasy fingers and get the pitcher
ejected for throwing a spitter after I make a putout.)
From: prb@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Botts)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Ten Best Peaks (was Sandberg)
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:39:04 GMT
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX

In article <1993Jan25.141143.28302@holos0.uucp> lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.213038.14499@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes:
>
>>Morgan had one of the 10 best peaks ever.
>
>Sounds like an interesting topic for off-season arguments.  Okay, as a Red and
>especially in 1975-76 Joe Morgan was incredible.  Who else makes the top ten? 
>To qualify, we need someone who had a peak well above what one would expect
>when looking at the rest of the career, and a peak that didn't consist of
>a single great year.  (Of course these guidelines, like evrything else on
>the net, are arguable.)
>
>To start it off, here are a couple of gimmes:
>Mantle and Kofax.
>
>At the other extreme is Henry Aaron, who somehow hit 755 homers but never
>hit 50 in a single season.
>-- 

No, but he did have a couple of monster seasons all-around - remember
that in his young days he was far from just a HR hitter, he hit for
average (won a batting title), stole some bases, was an excellent
outfielder, etc.

Which is not to say he had one of the Ten Best Peaks - he didn't. I
would nominate Ernie Banks, who hit 40+ homers five years out of six,
while winning a Gold GLove at SS, leading the NL in RBIs, and so forth.
He was the first person in the history of the NL to win back-to-back MVP
awards.

I agree that Koufax and Mantle would have to make the list. So would
Pete Alexander, and maybe Dizzy Dean.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com (Joe Sterbenc)
Subject: Re: Lefty Grove....
Organization: MOTOROLA 
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:52:36 GMT
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball

In article <21631@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu (Gary
She's Making Eyes Huckabay) wrote:
> 
> 
> Douglas Fowler writes:
> 
> +                           Boston Red Sox
> +
> +Starting Pitcher
> +Cy Young
> +Babe Ruth
> +Roger Clemens
> +Lefty Grove
> +
> +     Boston-Because of their park or something, there is a misconception
> +that this team is not pitching-rich.  However, unless you're the Pirates,
> +after 90 years you should have at least some pitching!  Look at this:  Cy
> +Young in his prime; Babe Ruth, about whom Tris Speaker said that "he made a
> +mistake by switching to the outfield"; Roger Clemens; and a still very good
> +Lefty Grove. 
> 
> In my opinion, Lefty Grove is the BEST pitcher in the history of baseball,
> bar none.  I don't think Young, Ruth, or Clemens deserves to be ranked 
> ahead of him, as you imply here.  Perhaps Clemens WILL deserve that at some
> point, though.
> 
> Grove...
> 
> Played 17 years in the bigs, and led the league in ERA 9 times in those
> 17 years.  His career ERA of 3.06 is AMAZING when taken in the context of
> the era in which he played.  Clemens' career ERA of 2.89, when taken in
> context, is roughly comparable, perhaps not quite as good.
> 
> (Source: TB II.)
> 
> Of course, Grove played with Philadelphia, too, so there's that to consider,
> but I don't think anyone, with the exception of Koufax, has the peak
> value of Grove, and I don't think anyone comes close to the career value.
> 
> 
> -- 
> *   Gary Huckabay   * "Well, with the Benzinger signing, I think you'd have  *
> * "Dabbling around  *  to agree the Giants have gone a long way towards      *
> *   the Gajarsky    *  plugging their outfield holes.  He's a switch hitter  *
> *       tree."      *  with power." - Walt Gray, Ch. 3 sports director.      *

I believe that Grove was at his peak pitching for the then-minor-league
Baltimore Orioles, and that he then spent a lot of years with the A's. He
probably wasn't at peak form when he was on Boston.

=====
Joe Sterbenc - Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems - Motorola
All opinions are my own, but can be rented for reasonable rates
sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com
=====
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rja@mahogany126.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Re: 1993 MLB WS odds
Originator: rja@mahogany126
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Distribution: na
Date: 21 Jan 93 15:53:08 CST


In article <1993Jan21.132431.24404@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, marwood@csri.toronto.edu (Simon J. Marwood) writes:
> 
> The following odds chart appeared today in the Toronto Star, and represents
> the odds listed by the Flamingo Hotel sports book in Laughlin, Nev. The
> odds represent the odds to win the 1993 WS:

It's obvious that the stats are based on money wagered, not any 
real baseball analysis.  Hence the odds are tilted towards major 
markets (ie more people, more money wagered).

> Team		Odds
> ----		----
> 
> Atlanta	3:1
> Toronto	4:1
> Montreal	8:1		[alright!]
> Chisox	8:1
> Cincinnati	8:1
> Milwaukee	10:1
> Baltimore	10:1
> Oakland	10:1
> San Diego	12:1
> NY Mets	12:1

SD & Mets have better odds than the Twins?

> Minnesota	15:1
> Los Angeles	15:1

LA the same as the Twins?

> St. Louis	18:1
> Chicubs	18:1
> NY Yankees	18:1
> Houston	20:1
> Pittsburgh	25:1
> Texas		30:1
> Kansas City	30:1
> San Francisco	35:1
> Cleveland	35:1
> Philadelphia	35:1
> Boston	40:1
> Seattle	50:1
> California	60:1
> Detroit	75:1
> Florida	300:1
> Colorado	300:1
> 
> Now a few of these are clearly ridiculous (ie LA!!), but fun nonetheless.
-- 
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!)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: AVERAGE/GOOD values...
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:42:57 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.185938.8709@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes:
>Yes, but one question: Why doesn't Gillette use DA in the book?

The short answer is, he's never asked for it.  He does know about it.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com



Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Organization: Wayne State University Math Department, Detroit
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 02:35:28 GMT

In article <2356@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:
>And I *still* don't see why you'd ever compare to replacement level directly;
>it's the variance that you're interested, not the lower bound.  Replacement
>level tells you how badly your team's winning percentage would fall if all the
>shortstops in your organization were killed by a freak meteor shower, so that
>you had to go out and sign AAA players and released major-leaguers.  That has
>nothing to do with your chances of winning the players you *do* have.

Replacement value is not totally useless.  If you are trying to measure
a team's value in expected wins, then you would comparehe team to the
league average.  However, if you are measuring a player's worth, it
would be best to use replacement value.  Why?  Because a replacement
level player is what you would be replacing him with.

--
David Frohardt-Lane   dfl@math.wayne.edu 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Go Tigers, Lions, Pistons, Red Wings and Wolverines !!!!!!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: gt0317c@prism.gatech.EDU (BHANSALI,ANIL P)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Cardinals
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:02:24 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Assuming the Kruk for Zeile does go down, how would the lineup look?

My guess is this:

2B G. Pena
SS Ozzie
1b Kruk
RF Felix Jose
CF Lankford
LF Gilkey
3b Royer or Woodson
C Pagnozzi
P 

Anyone have any thoughts?  This is going to be the year if this trade
goes down.


-- 
BHANSALI,ANIL P
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt0317c
Internet: gt0317c@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tloughin@IASTATE.EDU (Thomas M Loughin)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Reply-To: tloughin@IASTATE.EDU (Thomas M Loughin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:51:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.212135.25921@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu
(Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
> In article <GRABINER.93Jan21141053@germain.harvard.edu>
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:
> >
> >I don't believe this is true, though.  The value of a player to your
> >team does not depend on standard deviations; it depends on the number of
> >games he helps your team win and lose.  If you trade a shortstop who
> >slugs 50 points better than average and an average first baseman for an
> >average shortstop and a first baseman who slugs 50 points better than
> >average, your team will still score the same number of runs.  Since you
> >break even on the trade, you must have traded players of the same value.
> 
> After some thought, I have to disagree.  The key isn't value-above-
> average.  The key is value-above-replacement-level.  Which is
> significantly below average.  Therefore 50 points above average is
> more valuable at a position with a higher variance in talent.
> 
> -Valentine

Now why couldn't _I_ have said that...:-}

-Tom.
From: mdp2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MICHAEL DENNIS POLICARPO)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: looking for people to join rotiessiere
Date: 27 Jan 93 04:14:41 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University





Hey, is anyone out there interested or have information on a rotisierre
baseball league.  If so, please let me know.
                                          --LU'93

      If you can't hit the curveball, I can't use you!!!
                                      -Bucky Martin #13

      Come on 3 6!!!
                --S.A.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: DONS000 <DONS@UNB.CA>
Subject: Re: MLB in Vancouver, B.C. (was Playoffs)
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:56:54 GMT

>
>     A really smart move, I think, would have been for the Mariners to
>move their AAA team into Vancouver.  Vancouver is already a very good
>AAA city (NOT a major league city, as the original post asked), and to
>have the parent team just three hours down the road would be very good
>for both.  Over the years, I could imagine people developing a real
>interest in the Mariners if the team was filled with players we had
>cheered for here in Vancouver a few years before.
>--
>Chris Roney  (e-mail chris_roney@sfu.ca)
>.
>.  Chris,  You are absolutely right.  I wonder whether the relatively
   new Japanese owners of the Vancouver Canadians have thought of this.
   It would have made great business sense to get the Calgary team
   (i.e., the Mariners farm team) to move to Vancouver instead of
   bringing in the Edmonton team -- at least in regards to building
   the following you mention.  You should start a movement to
   popularize this idea.  Hell, except for when the Mariners
   play the Jays, the biggest interest that Vancouverites seem to have
   had in the Seattle team is when they had the chance to go down there
   and razz Schaefer just like they did when he was in the minors.

   Don Soucy

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: YANKEE REFLECTIONS ANYONE???
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 15:26:16 GMT

In article <C1E68G.JM9@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Timothy.J.Young@dartmouth.edu (Timothy J. Young) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.213722.12327@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:

>> I wouldn't count on it.  Remember Jack Clark, Wade Boggs, Mike
>> Schmidt, and others.  With any player over the age of about 32, there
>> is a significant risk that they will suddenly and entirely cease to
>> produce.  Von Hayes.  Jack Clark.  Wade Boggs.  I can't really say
>> that Stewart or Morris or Molitor *will* be a total failure next year.
>> But when you have those three *and* Carter *and* Borders *and* White,
>> and no real depth to replace any of them (not that I know of, at
>> least...  Unless Domingo Martinez is able to play the OF?), the
>> probability of catastrophic loss at *some* position is pretty high.

>   Exactly. The Yanks, just like in the mid-80's, are trying to buy the
>pennant. It doesn't work, especially in the cases of the Red Sox, the
>Mets, and the Dodgers last year. N.Y. does have a good farm system, but
>after a few years of King George we'll see if that's still the case.
>They're over-rated : they could be weak in the rotation this year if
>their young pitchers don't make it. 

Huh?  The Yankees are trying to buy the pennant?  Where do you get that?
They only signed *3* free agents, two of whom are mostly irrelevant to the
team's chances.  (Spike Owen and Jimmy Key.)  Wade Boggs is the only
major free agent they got.

How is that buying a pennant?

Of course they could be weak if their young players don't make it.
They could also be weak if their old players don't make it.  What's your
point?

Buying a pennant isn't inherently good or bad.  The problem is that most
big name free agents are over the hill *when* they become free agents,
not after.  Most teams think players peak at age 32 or something; the
peak is 27-29 or so.  By 32, which is often when they're signed, they're
already going down; the only question is how fast.  Further, the hot
free agents are those that had big years the previous season.  But that
person isn't likely to repeat his big year, so counting on him to do
that is silly.  Now, if it's Barry Bonds, you're okay, because his
*average* year makes him one of the top people in baseball.  But when
it's Joe Carter, you've got a lot more to worry about.

It's *Toronto* which is in trouble.  Morris and Stewart are old *and*
overrated.  Carter is there, too.  I'm a huge Molitor fan, but he's
getting old, too.
-- 
David M. Nieporent   | "We don't need anymore [sic] wretched refuse.  It's 
niepornt@phoenix.    |  time to send the Statue of Liberty somewhere else"
   princeton.edu     |      -- Jack "Not a bigot" Schmidling, 1/7/93
Baltimore Orioles 93 |
From: fls@econ.duke.edu (Forrest Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Sandberg (was Re: Ty Griffen)
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:58:19 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu (Gary Prisoner Huckabay) writes:

> Offensively, Sandberg can't carry Morgan's jock, and defensively,
> Morgan could MORE than hold his own.

Maybe Joe'd've been a better fielder if he'd kept his hands free. 

-- 
   __  __                                     
  |__ |__                             %  
  | |  __|  fls@keynes.econ.duke.edu  %  See what the bears in the
    |__                               %  back room will have.
From: rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: i want.
Date: 26 Jan 1993 18:28:44 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
Reply-To: rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert)
NNTP-Posting-Host: g215a-1.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

In article <1993Jan26.170253.2399@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri  
Nichols) writes:
> In article <93025.170947RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>  
writes:
> >     7) none of this cheesy ignoring when a batter pitches, or a pitcher
> >        bats
> 
> Most sources will contain pitching records for non-pitchers, but the only
> source I'm aware of (though I don't own it, sad to say) that contains
> pitcher batting records is the original edition of the Big Mac, published
> in 1969.  

The Franklin Electronic BB Encylo. also has pitchers batting stats.
I think we're just going to have to wait for a decent cmputer encyclopedia to  
come out (and a decent portable computer to put it on).

john rickert
rickert@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
Go Brewers!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: AVERAGE/GOOD values...
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:57:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.185938.8709@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes:

>Yes, but one question: Why doesn't Gillette use DA in the book?

One possibility (a speculation on my part, which might or might not be way off
base) is that since Project Scoresheet is a volunteer effort, Gillette might
feel that it is unethical to use the data gathered there that is used to
compute DA for his own material gain?  Just a thought.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: poutsmaj@mace.cc.purdue.edu (unknown)
Subject: Replacement value vs average
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:43:54 GMT

The current discussion of Average vs Replacement level is sort of like
asking "Which is a better measure of how warm it is, Fahrenheit or Kelvin?"

Both measure the same thing, but the scale is just different.  Which is 
better depends on your perspective.  For most Americans, 100 F is recognizably
hot while not all would realize that 100 K is significantly colder (I realize
this is extreme for the present case, but I hope you get the idea).  On the
other hand, if one is interested in doing thermodynamics, only the Kelvin
scale will work in this case.

To say that one can't tell a players 'value' by comparing them to averagee
is like saying you can't tell how hot something is by reading the temperature
in fahrenheit...

just my thoughts (scattered though they be)

paul

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: szs@world.std.com (Stephen Z Stein)
Subject: Baseball Simulation (was Re: Batting Average Inversely Correlated...)
Keywords: pure sabermetrics
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 03:53:06 GMT

Clay D. as drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker) writes:
>
>I also have this lineup simulator I put together. You feed in a
>lineup, set a couple of parameters (error rate, randomization seed,
>number of games) and it plays that lineup through as many games as you
>wish. I put in a lineup of nine players with the stats given in
>Steve's post, and ran it for 16200 games each.
>
>The team of nine players with the higher batting average scored 821.2
>runs per 162 games. The other team scored 829.7, an advantage of 8.5
>runs.

I used to do quite a bit of system simulation.  Simulators can be very
convincing, revealing and fun.  They can also be seriously misleading
if they are flawed.

I, too, have written a home-grown baseball simulation (for my hobby of
batting order investigation) in which I have nearly no faith.

How does one develop confidence in a baseball simulation?

Test 1: How does the Runs Created stat from your simulator correlate with
the actual runs scored for a collection of different but representative
data?

Test 2: What is the on-base situation distribution from your simulator?

My simulation did fairly poorly on both tests.  How does yours fare?
(If it does well, I'm *seriously* interested!)

Does anyone else have simulations they have confidence in?
Can anyone suggest other tests to apply to bb sims to gain confidence in them?

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball