HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ifkm@hippo.ru.ac.za (Andrew Murdoch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Softball rules
Summary: Softball rules?
Keywords: Softball rules?
Date: 6 Oct 92 09:14:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: hippo.1992Oct6.091418.9110
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

I am in need of a full set of rules for softball, including field
distances.
I would also like to know proper bat dimensions, ball dimensions, and
what other equipment is used.
Please E-mail replies direct, I don't read this news group.
Thank
P.S. RSA = Republic of South Africa
-- 
     |\/|     v |     ANDREW MURDOCH   -   Institute for Water Research
 /_\ |  | \___@ |  Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown, 6140, R.S.A.
/   \     /   \ | Internet: ifkm@hippo.ru.ac.za     Phone: [xx27] [0]461 24014
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Torre!  Torre!  Torre!
Date: 2 Oct 92 17:10:37 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake morse@cs.unc.edu (Bryan Morse):
>In article <1992Oct1.224250.7263@adobe.com>, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>|> Not to pick on Russ, but I hear this sort of thing regularly: "If only they
>|> had won more games against Team Y, who beat them 15 of 18" or "If only they
>|> had played better against their own division (or the other division)".  I
>|> don't really think this makes any sense.  I mean, teams are going to lose
>|> 50-100 games a season; it'd be unusual if those losses were evenly
>|> distributed among all their opponents.

>I think that in general, you are right.  This isn't just any team, though--
>it is the team that they lost the division to.  

True.  But you can *always* look at it that way, for some team.  Whichever
team wins the division, pick out their division rival that they most stomped
on.  Who did the Braves beat up on?  The A's?  Find a team that finished
within 10 games of first, and you've got a case like the Cardinals.  In most
seasons, some team in some division can say "Gee, except for our head-to-head
with the eventual winner, we'd have won the division"...

-- 
       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: lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Kill the Catcher
Date: 25 Sep 92 19:15:13 GMT
Organization: Holos Software, Inc.

In article <Bv3HvL.FE0@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jhg8680@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon  Hamkins) writes:
>lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed) writes:
>
>>In article <1686AAE8B.ISTRE-A@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU> istre@RICEVM1.RICE.EDU writes:
>
>>If you're standing there holding
>>the ball waiting for the runner to come home, I can't see how that's
>>"blocking the plate."  

>Let's see here.... Block: "Sports. to hinder or bar the actions or
>movements of an opposing player, esp. legitimately."  Sounds to me that
>if you're standing there, ball or not, you're BLOCKING the plate.
>Having the ball is for determining the legitimacy of the block.

Oh, come on, going to the dictionary to support an argument about
fine details of baseball terminology?  In baseball parlance, when someone
speaks of the catcher blocking the plate, he's probably refering to blocking
it without the ball.  If you have the ball, you don't need to block
the plate, since you can just tag the runner.  The definition you
refer to applies to football and maybe hockey.  In basketball,
blocking is a foul (i.e., it's not "legitimate"); the legitimate
action is known as a pick.

>>Wrong.  Lonnie Smith, last year in the World Series, was out by 10 feet.
>>His only hope was to crash the catcher.  On the close plays the runner
>>can slide; 
>
>Sure, if he never wants to get near the plate.  You don't just slide
>past a catcher standing five feet up the line and expect to reach the
>plate.  You have to go around him or through him.  (This is not an
>endorsement of either strategy, BTW.)

Pay attention.  I said "On *close* plays the runner can slide."  You deleted
the part where I said that if it wasn't close, he would just be out.

If he's out by 10 feet, then under my rule he WOULD NOT GET NEAR THE PLATE.
HE SHOULD NOT HAVE GONE HOME.  Sorry I had to shout, but you don't seem
to be paying attention.  He could go around and be called out for
leaving the baseline.  He could go back, and be caught in a rundown.
He could stop and get tagged out as most players do everywhere but
at the plate.  What he could not do is go through the catcher.

>It has nothing to do with the ball.  If anything, blocking the plate
>would apply especially when you DO have the ball, according to my
>dictionary.

Again, using a general dictionary's definition to support a fineline
argument in a specific discipline is misguided.   If you prefer,
we can use the specific rulebook term of obstruction.  I don't see
what it has to do with your argument, anyway.

Here's my rule change: stand in the baseline with the ball, and the runner
can't crash you.  Stand in it without the ball and it's obstruction (this
is now true but not usually enforced at home).
To this, you argue that the runner shouldn't just have to get tagged
out, to which I say "Why the hell not?"  In what way is this different
from the rule that prohibits tackling a fielder in the act of fielding
a ball?  Either action can stop a sure-thing out.  One is illegal;
I claim the other should be.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: STATS Publications
Date: 3 Oct 92 21:22:35 GMT
Organization: Boo!

I'm taking a few days off from reading rsb so that I can count ballots,
get some two month long overdue projects done, and recharge my batteries.
But I promised to post the info on STATS publications, so here it is.

STATS Major League Handbook
Available November 1
$17.95
Career Stats of Major Leaguers
1993 Projections
Lefty/Righty Stats
Leader Boards
Basic Fielding Stats

STATS Minor League Handbook
Available November 1
$17.95
Career Stats For AA and AAA Players Who Didn't Appear In The Majors
1992 A Ball/Rookie League Stats
Minor League Equivalencies
Leader Boards

STATS 1993 Player Profiles
Available November 1
$17.95
"Comprehensive statistical player breakdowns for 1992 and last 5 years.
Batting order position, 2 strike, clutch and many more breakdowns for hitters
Ahead/Behind in Count, Pitch Counts, Days Rest and More Breakdowns For  
pitchers"  

Also, there's The Scouting Report ($16), and the STATS Scoreboard ($15),
both available in February.

Order more than one and get $1 off each.  For first class add $2.50
per book, for Canada add $3.50 (US funds) per book. Phone at 1-800-63-STATS
Write at 7366 N. Lincoln Avenue, Lincolnwood IL 60646.

My opinions: Most people know the Handbooks.  The Minor League Handbook
is somewhat annoying because most prospects, because they showed up
in the majors, will be in the Major League Handbook instead.  Its really
only useful as a companion, not by itself, and I think its an avoidable
extra for most people.  They'll probably be better and cheaper stuff than
the Major League Handbook in February, especially if Gary Gillete has
found a publisher for his stuff, but that's several months down the road.
The book is nice to have, but the last copy of Baseball Weekly with
season's stats is a lot cheaper.  I don't know any more about the Player
Profiles book than the STATS publicity says, but it sounds useful.

Anyway, I'll be gone from rsb till the end of the week (except for the
award posts), so please do insult me, ridicule me, and air my dirty laundry
in public while I'm gone.

Greg
From: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Can of corn?
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:48:47 GMT
Reply-To: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com ()
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


< the origin of the phrase 'can of corn',

This expression goes back to the days of the General Store, where
durable, nonbreakable goods were placed up on a high shelf.  When a
patron asked for a can of corn (or some other can of something), the
clerk in the general store would use a long stick to knock the can off
the shelf.  This was much easier & less of a strain than having to climb 
a ladder several times a day to fetch the customers desired cans.

After the clerk knocked the can off the shelf, (s)he would have to catch
it of course; otherwise it would fall to the floor & become dented. Which
means of course that another can would need to be fetched, as no customer in
their right mind would buy a dented can at full price.  The catch of the can
became a fairly simple & routine task.

The phrase carried over to baseball, to describe an easily catchable fly ball.
Honest!  I didn't make this up.

JoeK
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jkl@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (jon.k.lyons)
Subject: Re: Expos logo
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories - Holmdel, NJ
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:21:36 GMT

Lorne Epp writes:

>>I think it's supposed to be a big multicolored "M" with a little red "e".
>>It's a pretty sad logo.  What I want to know is what made them call the
>>team "Expos"?  Obviously it's because of Expo 67, but why did they think
>>anybody would care about that 25 (or 50 or 100) years from then?

Ted Frank responded:

>Indeed.  And when was the last time you saw a streetcar to dodge in Brooklyn?

Well, when you think about it, Dodgers seem to be an appropriate moniker
this year.  The Infielders have been dodging batted balls, the fans and 
Karros have been dodging thrown ones, most batters have been dodging
pitched balls, etc.

>If you think about it, most team names are silly.  "Marlins" and "Rockies"
>seem especially silly to me, but that's only because I've never known
>baseball without 26 teams, thus "Padres" or "Expos" didn't sound any stranger
>than "Yankees" or "White Sox."

Don't get me started on silly names.  Marlins and Rockies aren't so bad,
really.  At least it's not as bad as NBA, where fans root for the Heat?
(What's an individual player -- a "Hot"?)  How many lakes are there in LA?
Who plays Jazz in Utah?  Why did Orlando name themselves after the Lakers
star? (Magic)  The Hornets???  Ouch!  You're killing me!  Compared to how bad
they could be, I kind of like the likes of the White Sox, Athletics, Reds,
et. al.  The name "Expos", however, I could live without.
-- 
Jon Lyons                                            jon.k.lyons@att.com
AT&T Bell Laboratories                               att!jon.k.lyons
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert)
Subject: Brewers sked (WAS Re: Jack is a winner)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:33:59 GMT


In article <1992Sep30.022308.9055@midway.uchicago.edu>  
thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
> It's a bit soon for the Blue Jays to be tasting bubbly.  They probably
> will (they get to play Boston in Toronto), but then again, the Brewers
> are only two back in the loss column, and could easily win their last
> six if the Jays don't win four out of five.  (God forbid the Trib could
> print a pennant race schedule--I know Milwaukee plays Seattle Tuesday
> and Wednesday, but I don't know anything about their last four games.)

The Brewers' last six games: 
T @Seattle (won 7-4)
W @Seattle
R @Seattle
F @Oakland (uh-oh...)
S @Oakland
N @Oakland

A simple probablistic argument (P(W)=.6 for TOR&MIL) puts the Brewers 
prpbability of winning at about 6%. A more realistic model
(road vs/ home, who opps. are) zaps that to 3%-4%.
(I think - I did these in my head last night and never checked them)

john rickert
rickert@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@quads.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Oakland as King-Maker?
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:58:39 GMT

Interesting situation:

The last three games of Milwaukee's season are in Oakland.

Oakland could control who they get to face in the playoffs--it's to their
advantage to make the race in the East as close as possible (and maybe
even come to the 163d game).  The more important those last three games
are to Milwaukee and Toronto, the more likely they are to use importnat
pitchers and have them tired out for the seven game series...

Of course, what d'ya expect from seven team divisions? 
-- 
           .. . . .  .  .   .    .     .     .    .   .  .  . . . ..
          ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
         the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Lighten up!
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 15:36:47 GMT

Enough already!

I personally am rather tired of the whole stats vs. non-stats war.  I'm
tired of being accused of all sorts of nefarious things, from calling a
person a "dweeb" (which I honestly don't remember doing), to be insincere
in my apology, to (horror of horrors) defending another netter.  Look guys,
this is an open, unmoderated newsgroup.  Anybody can say anything they
like.  That includes stat heads *and* non stat heads.  You don't like
what's here, go elsewhere.  If you hang around, you have to expect that
occasionally, someone's going to say something you don't like.  That's
simply the nature of the net.

That being said, I would hope that we could interact here in a more
civilized manner.  Why don't we all, from now on, stop for a few seconds
before posting, and ask "Is this about baseball?", and if it isn't, take it 
to e-mail.

Obligatory baseball content: Zane Smith isn't on the post-season roster,
according to my local paper.  Does anyone in the 'burgh have the list yet?

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Camden/Comiskey/Bell
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 05:09:45 GMT
Organization: Boo!  

I recently took a look at the season statistics of the White Sox and
Orioles so that I could get a better idea of the park effects acting
on those teams.

Here are the results:

Camden looks like a pretty neutral park.  It has suppressed run scoring
by a percent or two, which doesn't really say much of anything.  It does
appear to be a good home run park, though (presumably Ben McDonald has
noticed) - home games have featured 15% more homers than away games.

New Comiskey Park appears to be a pitchers' park, albeit nothing like
the Oakland Coliseum or anything.  Last year the effect was tiny, only
about 1%.  This year the effect has been about 5 or 6%.

One thing I wanted to point out with this information is that people
should try and not always interpret data as if it means something.   Often,
what appears to be a meaningful effect can be absolutely nothing.  For
example, last year Frank Thomas had a huge home road/split (.371/.509/
.708 at home, .271/.399/.411 on the road).  Some people took this data to 
mean that Frank was helped a lot by his home park.  But it's pretty likely
that all that data meant was that Frank happened to hit better when he was
at home.  The park didn't seem to help hitters overall, and nor did it
seem to help any specific type of hitters a lot either.  This year, the
park has looked like it might even be a real pitchers' park.  And Frank's
splits - .306/.430/.509 at home, and .340/.450/.571 on the road - show   
that he has  actually hit significantly better on the road this year.
In the case of home/road splits, the overall effects of the park are 
usually a more reliable indicator of the park's effects on an individual
player than that player's home/road differential.  

Oh, and on George Bell.  Bell has hit .277/.312/.440 with runners on
base, a little - but not a whole lot - better than he has hit with nobody
on.  George has had 336 at-bats with runners on, which almost certainly
leads the league.  I doubt anyone else is over 300.  Last year Ruben
Sierra led the majors with 341 at-bats with runners on, and no one else
was over 300.

Greg  
-- 
  spira@panix.com       "The one-O delivery to Fisk.  He swings.  Long drive,  
 cmcl2!panix!spira      left field!  If it stays fair, it's gone!  Home Run!"  
158-17 Riverside Dr.                     Ned Martin, 10/22/75   
Whitestone NY 11357          (Insert your favorite baseball moment here) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham)
Subject: Replacing Puckett (was Re: Arrogance, Statheads, and Life.)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Distribution: na
Date:  6 Oct 1992 10:24 EST  

In article <1992Oct5.203237.9842@news2.cis.umn.edu>, lsmith@deci.cs.umn.edu 
     (Lance "Squiddie" Smith) writes...

>At this point I'd rather the Twins sign Smiley than Kirby.

You can never have enough pitching, and Smiley is a good one.

>I'm not too happy about a 4 year contract, but given the choice I'd
>prefer Smiley. It also means I wouldn't have to put up with the juvenile
>crowd in the upper deck.

Upper deck notwithstanding, who takes over if Puckett leaves?  Please
don't say "Gene Larkin" ;-).  But I would like to know.

RG

"Mumble mumble fans in Cleveland mumble mumble baseball mumble 200 hits."
 -  Carlos Baerga, in a radio interview
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Date: Fri,  2 Oct 1992 09:56:27 -0400 
From: Eric Alva Dunmire <ed19+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: PIRATES AGIAIN!!!
	<6521@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>

>>>CLINCHED 3rd STRAIGHT !!!!
>>>
>>>ANY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>
>>Yeah.  How come they can't win the NL Championship?
> 
>That's an easy one!  Those other teams had Bobby Bonilla taking up space
>in the outfield and wasting a spot in the order.  Now that he's taking his
>rightfully earned lumps in New York the Pirates will murdalate the Braves. 
> 
>>
>>Sorry, couldn't resist!!!!  :-)  
> 
>Neither could I 8^)


DITTO
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: NL ROY: More Fuel for Debate
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:06:20 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Sep30.130143.1281@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
> In article <1992Sep30.090431.28508@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>> In article <1992Sep30.023825.1269@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>>>
>>>Well, I would consider Bonds worth 5/9ths a run a game more than
>>>Pendleton (basically just subtract the higher RC/27 from the lower,
>>>divide by 9 (unless Bonds can take up 2 batting slots :-)) and that
>>>will be the player's *rough* advantage in runs/game).
>> 
>> If this is what the RC/27 numbers read, it is laughable!  Bonds is good,
>> but he's not *that* good.
> 
> 	Well, just for curiosity's sake, I took the latest RC/27 posts, and
> figured a 'composite' RC/27 for the Astros listed (I know, should have done it
> using the Pirates or Braves...). Basically, I divided each RC/27 by nine, then
> added them to get a 'team total', which ended up at 3.86 (which excludes 
> pitchers and bench players, which shouldn't add too much (well, except that
> Casey or Raffy probably has better RC/27's than Cedeno...). Considering the 
> Astros generally below-average offense, this number sounds about right for 
> them. 

	That should be 4.26 runs/game (I forgot Taubensee).

	BTW, for the Pirates, its 5.14 runs/game with their 'primary lineup'
(there wasn't a RF listed for Pittsburg in the RC/27, so I assumed an avergae
player, with RC/27 4.89). Bonds accounts for over 20% of that number...

Brandon Cope
From: msw10@nepenthe.as (Michael S. Wong)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:59:46 GMT
Reply-To: msw10@nepenthe.as
Organization: Sun Microsystems


In article 24516@cs.cornell.edu, tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <steph.717717072@pegasus.cs.uiuc.edu> steph@cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson) writes:
>>In <1992Sep25.050240.2328@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>
>>>But the basic "problem" with Lofton is this: the best centerfielder in
>>>baseball probably isn't worth as much defensively as the worst defensive
>>>shortstop.  
>>
>>This seems too strong to me.  If we can use the concept of
>>"replacement level defense" for a moment, I would suspect the worst
>>defensive shortstop in the league would convert *less* plays into outs
>>than his replacement would, and is hurting his team defensively.  The
>>best centerfielder in baseball converts *more* plays into outs than
>>his replacement would, and his helping his team defensively.  So the
>>best centerfielder would be far more valuable defensively than the
>>worst shortstop.
>
>You are right.  Except that your replacement CF will hit a lot better
>than your replacement SS.  Suppose we have a player who can either
>play CF well or SS poorly.  Let's call him HoJo.  Suppose we have both
>a replacement level SS and a replacement level CF, and we have no
>other alternatives at either position.
>
>If we play HoJo in CF, our defense will be much better.  If we play
>HoJo at SS, our offense will be much better (since our
>replacement-level CF hits better than our replacement-level SS).
>
>Is HoJo more valuable as a shortstop or CF?  Dunno.  (Actually in
>real life, he is *not* a good defensive CF, so he is almost certainly
>more valuable at shortstop.  But that's not the question here.)
>
[Frank Thomas example deleted]
>No, or he would be played at that position.  Consider a player's value
>as follows:
>
>(Offense above average at position) + (Defense above average at position)
>

This doesn't quite seem to capture what you were talking about above.
I think it would be something more like:

<same first operand> + 
(Defense above average at position)*(importance of position defensively)

Not that this defines a precise formula by any means. I simply mean to capture the
idea that an mediocre ss is more valuable defensively than an above average cf,
IMHO. In your above example, I'd contend that HoJo hurts the team defensively at ss
more than he helps the team defensively at cf. I also can't judge his value.

>Thomas' offense would be *way* above average at shortstop.  But his
>defense would cost the team even more runs than that.  He might even
>be a net *negative*, while he's a great contributor at 1B.
>
>Back to the HoJo example, at SS he rates very highly in the first part
>of the sum.  At CF, he isn't penalized so much in the second.
>
>Cheers,
>-Valentine
>-- 
>Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
>Clemens four Cy Young!

Michael Wong
msw10@amdahl.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball