HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hasch@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Bruce M Hasch)
Subject: Re: AL-pennant race.
Summary: Whaaaaaat??? 
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:10:00 GMT

In article <thurston.715492299@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu>, thurston@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu (Tad Thurston) writes...
>sivaram@plains.NoDak.edu (Sivaram Hariharan ) writes:
> 
> 
>>The AL-pennant race shows some interesting points. The top
>>3 teams in the East, the Jays, Oriloes and the Brewers are
>>playing at the same pace as the second & third teams in the
>>West, the Twins & the White-Sox.  The Twins, the Sox, the Jays
>>Orioles and the Brewers are having similar percentage wins
>>from the same number of games played so far this season.
> 
>>Which only means this: the Oakland Atletics are on a tear.

I think the tearing you hear is that of Sandy Alderson tearing apart his
franchise...

> 
>>S.H
>yeah, except that the O's just swept 'em!!!!!!!
> 
>YYYYEEEEESSSSSSSSS!!!!!!
> 

Impressive pitching or lame offense on Oakland's part...?
I certainly hope it's the former...

The O's can't let down this weekend.  Unless Langston or Abbott shut us out, we
should beat the Angels, who have got to be the worst offensive team in the
league.  Gaetti leads their team in HR's with what, 10?  They don't hit, they
don't walk, they can run sometimes--if they ever get anyone on base.  The O's
have had inexplicable problems beating lousy teams recently (Kansas City, 
Seattle, Cleveland--although they're not THAT bad), and haven't been able to
get their offense moving lately.  So I'm a little worried. 

>Tad "Flanagan for the Cy Young" Thurston
> 

Yikes!!!!  When did they change the definition of the Cy Young Award to 
"Pitcher who most resembles one which has been dead for a half-century" :-)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce 'Slower than Sam Horn' Hasch              hasch@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu
Brad Pennington Fan Club                        O's all the way in '92!!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert)
Subject: Re: Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics (was Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:16:25 GMT


In article <1992Sep3.175424.9344@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca>  
91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
> In <1992Sep3.005752.13903@midway.uchicago.edu> nss3@kimbark.uchicago.edu  
(Noel Steere) writes:
> 
> >you postulate above).  I mean, who would you rather have at the plate
> >with the bases loaded, Frank Thomas or Pat Tabler (Tabler is something
> >like 50-for-102 in that specific situation)?  I'll give you one guess
> >(two if you guess Tabler :-)).
> 
> Why not Tabler?  Is 50-102 (or whatever) not a big enough sample size?
Nope. By the way, Tabler's average is no longer in the .460's (or whatever). 
Not long after this 'ability' was noticed his BLBA started dropping quite  
rapidly (as expected for a random fluctuation).

> A batter's ability will not change from situation to situation but his
> capability does change.  Some hitters derive greater advantage from a
> drawn in infield, or a first baseman anchored to the bag or the knowledge
> that all pitches will be in the strike zone than other batters.  In 
> certain situations then some batters are likely to increase their  
production
> at a greater rate than others in the same situation.
I'll agree with that, but I'm not sure how much predictive significance there  
is in some of these things. 

> RBI's are strongly corelated with runs scored.  Since we are trying to  
measure
> an individual's participation in the total runs scored by the team (and not  
the
> player's ability) RBI's are a strong indicator of how many runs scored an
> individual participated in.  How many of the player's on this list would  
have
> as many RBI's (or participated in as many runs scored) as Cecil has if they
> were batting in his place? 
> > [list deleted]
Probably most of the ones with higher SLG.
But is it really worth it to have Fielder get 10 more RBI than 
Frank Thomas while the next batter gets 30 fewer RBI 
because of reduced opportunities
(and the next looses 2 or 3 and the next looses .314159... :-)   ?

> I think it has become trendy to knock Fielder.  Fielder is a good ball
> player.  He may not be the best but he is far from the worst.  He is
> consistent and he comes to play.  He is a valuable part of Detroit's
> offense.  
I'd say he's about average or a little better this year 
(let's see.. .777OPS, .747OPS for the avg.. aL 1b.....)
and has been good for the last few years.
IMHO people are concentrating on the pointing out the negatives 
(200 men left on with a month left to go!!??!!)
when reacting to the people who claim Cecil is an MVP candidate this year  
because he has 108 (or whatever it is now) RBI.
Apparently they feel that the positives are obvious and the 
negatives need to be emphasized.

john rickert
rickert@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
From: stown@pyramid.COM (Scott Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: How to get rid of Strawberry
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:46:11 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation, Mountain View, California


Keywords: 

Well, the Dodgers very, forgettable year is almost over. Only 4 more weeks of
misery for the team and their fans. Looking to next year, there are many
questions to be answered for the Dodgers. One of the more interesting ones
involves the Straw. I am sure there are many opinoins of what the team should
do about him. Let me here your opinoin! Below is mine.


I think that the Dodgers need to get rid of Strawberry for the following reasons:

	1. He is injured and has refused to have surgery. He has a chronic
	    back problem that can only be fixed by surgery. The surgery is
	    not guaranteed and is risky business. He has known this for several
	    months, and still thinks he will get better with physical
	    therapy.

	2. The Dodgers will be building a young team. The youth movement has
	    begun. Straw is not the right role model to have around for all
	    of these younger players.

	3.  Perhaps some other team will take a risk on this ex-superstar,
	    and give the Dodgers something worthwhile in return.

How to get rid of Strawberry??
------------------------------

	There are several choices depending upon how bad you want to get
	 rid of him.

	     1. Don't protect him in the expansion draft. More than likely
	        either Miami or Denver would take him to sell tickets and
 	         gamble that he will play OK for them. This is my choice.
	         This will definitely get rid of the guy and his big contract
		 and his lousy atitude.

	      2. Hold out for a trade with either a NL or AL team. Again it
		  is the gamble factor. Straw has the big contract ($4m/yr),
	          and the Dodgers will need to convince the other team that
		  they are getting a good deal. Like selling an Edsel!!

	       3.  Assign Daryl to AAA. Straw will definitely not report
	 	   to AAA and the Dodgers may be able to get out of his 
		    contract if he won't report.


		4. Convince Daryl that he needs surgery. Work with him in
		    rehabilitation and then trade him.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: A question on free agency
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 18:22:02 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Sep1.231830.9733@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:

>In article <1992Sep1.185654.26176@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>>
>>Normally with free agents, their old club has to offer them salary
>>arbitration in order (I think) to retain the right to bargain with
>>them.
>>
>>1) If the club fails to offer arbitration, does it still receive the
>>draft pick compensation?

>No.

I don't think this is exactly right.  There is a deadline for offering
arbitration to free agents.  I believe it comes after the beginning of the
period during which the free agent can start entertaining other offers.
If he signs quickly, before the deadline for offering arbitration, than the
club still gets the draft picks even though it never offered arbita\ration.

If I'm wrong about this, use any force necessary to correct me.

Oh, and by the way, if the owners decide they want to negotiate a new
contract (which I believe they have the right to do), then the old one
is null and void and all this presumably goes out the window.

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: st1ge@Rosie.UH.EDU (Edward Hui)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Ugliest Man in Baseball??
Date: 2 Sep 92 05:25:18 GMT
Reply-To: st1ge@Rosie.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston

In article <1SEP92.20311267@vax.clarku.edu>, hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>I had thought that Randy Johnson was the ugliest active player
>in baseball, but I saw the Braves/Mets game the other night, and
>I have to say that Otis Nixon just might edge Randy out of the
>coveted number-one slot.  There are several other worthy contenders,
>of course, too many to list here.  (Juan Berenguer is one outstanding
>candidate.)
     How about Willie McGee?  Andre Dawson?  Pascual Perez?

>Heather
>HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu

Edward Hui
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Dick Williams as Manager of the Padres?!?!?
Date: 25 Aug 92 17:18:56 GMT
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

In article <1992Aug25.063307.15080@midway.uchicago.edu> nss3@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <37132@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers) writes:

>>Billy Martin is working for the Angels now, as is Herzog.

...

Wow, do I have to put smilies on sick, dry humor?  I've had
over 20 people write to tell me that Martin is, in fact, still
dead...

-- 
Dave DeMers			 ddemers@UCSD   demers@cs.ucsd.edu
Computer Science & Engineering	C-014		demers%cs@ucsd.bitnet
UC San Diego					...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114	(619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: <None>
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:32:25 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu:

>In article <5440@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:

>> Thus spake 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard):
>>>
>>>Why not Tabler?  Is 50-102 (or whatever) not a big enough sample size?
>> 
>> Exactly.  Especially after you take into account the fact that you're only
>> looking at Tabler because he was the extreme point in a large population of
>> players.  If I toss 200 coins 100 times each, one of them will likely show
>> a very skewed ratio of heads to tails, even if all the coins are fair.
>
>	From a statistical standpoint, 102 AB is enough in this kind of
>situation for a sample size.

No, it isn't.

If you were looking at only one player, chosen at random, then this would be
true.  But you aren't; you're looking at Pat Tabler in particular, and you're
looking at him precisely because his batting average with the bases loaded is
so eye-catching.  It now becomes a question of (drumroll, please) Extremal
Value Theory, which deals with the distribution of the most extreme observed
value in a collection of independent observations.

This was the point of my comment about tossing 200 coins.  If you toss one
coin 102 times, we have a very good idea of what constitutes surprising vs.
non-surprising numbers of heads to observe.  On the other hand, if I toss
200 identical coins 102 times each, do you have any feel for how many heads
you should expect to see from the coin that comes up heads most often, even
if all the coins are fair?  I doubt it; I certainly don't.  There is a branch
of statistics that deals with these questions, though; I'll try to post a
quick summary of relevant results sometime soon.

The point is that you can't treat Tabler's numbers in isolation as if they
were an arbitrary player's numbers, because they aren't.  They were selected
for their unusual nature, and this biases the various expectations.

>	Also, are you saying that it is impossible for someone to be very good
>at one thing, especially if the one thing he is good at he is much better than
>other players? 

No, but I do suspect that it's impossible to be very good at one thing, and
yet quite mediocre at very similar things.  As Roger said, if Tabler's so damn
great with the bases loaded, why isn't he at least pretty good with men on
first and second, or second and third?  If it's a mental thing, then mostly
I would conclude that Tabler is "choking" in 99% of his PAs...


-- 
      David M. Tate      | From my dugout sleep I fell into the Game
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | And I crouched in the circle while my insides froze
 Randall 'Chico' Jarrell | One out from death, one hit from dreamt-of glory
"Death of a Pinch Hitter"| I woke to 'Strike One!' and the nightmare sliders...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com
Subject: Re: Managing in the AL
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:48:24 GMT

Regardless of whether the DH makes AL managing "easier" or not, I like
the rule, because it leads to more offense.  There is not a guaranteed
out in the number nine spot.
 
Remember the All-Star Game?  The NL was staging a comeback, and making
the game exciting in the bottom of the ninth.  That comeback ended with
Norm Charlton striking out feebly against the Eck.  Wasn't that a fun
way to end the game?  The only pinch-hitter left was Lee Smith.
 
Jim McMaster
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: epstein@sparc9.cs.uiuc.edu (Milt Epstein)
Subject: Re: CUB'S MADDUX EASY CHOICE FOR CY
Reply-To: epstein@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 05:15:37 GMT

In <92245.104824ENVIRON@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> ENVIRON@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU writes:

>In article <1992Sep1.150405.15602@news.iastate.edu>, jnelson@iastate.edu (Jeremy
>F Nelson) says:
>>_HOW_ can you possibily say Wrigley field is a hitter's ballpark?  How many
>>times has the wind blown out this season? 6? 7?
>> Wrigley field has given up less homers than the Astrodome this year.
>> Come on!
>
>     Maybe that's *because* Maddux has been pitching so well..?  And I'm only
>half kidding.  It's tough to take one bizarre statistical anecdote as proof
>that Wrigley isn't a hitters' park...

There was recently another thread about conditions at Wrigley and how
they affect scoring.  Some organization (Stats Inc.) had done a study
over one year, I believe, and they figured out the average runs scored
for different wind conditions at Wrigley.  Basically they found that
when the wind blows in, less runs than league average are scored there
(so, good for pitchers); when the wind blows across, more runs than
league average are scored; and when the wind blows out, *many* more
runs than league average are scored.

So, if the statement above about how many HR's have been hit in
Wrigley this year is in fact true, that lends credence to the
hypothesis that conditions there have been more favorable for pitchers
this year.  And as to it being just one piece of evidence, the fact
that the Cubs pitchers' ERAs are so low is in fact another piece of
evidence supporting this hypothesis (and it is equally plausible, if
not more so, than the hypothesis that the Cubs' pitchers have been
pitching great this year).

In fact, this hypothesis can be easily confirmed by lots of other
stats, such as comparing Cubs pitchers' home and away ERAs, comparing
runs scored in and away from Wrigley, and even by simply checking the
weather charts.  Not having access to the necessary data (nor even
having an idea how to begin to find it -- anyone have any
suggestions?), I'll leave this to others.

-- 
Milt Epstein
Department of Computer Science
University of Illinois
epstein@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: Re: Ugliest *ever* (was: Re: Ugliest Man in Baseball??)
Organization: Fordham University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:01:00 GMT
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <6146@transfer.stratus.com>, gene@ok.sw.stratus.com 
(Eugene Loparco) writes...
>In article <3SEP199209395268@mary.fordham.edu> nissim@mary.fordham.edu 
(Leonard J. Nissim) writes:
>>Bill James, in "The Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract" (1985) gives the 
>>ugliest player(s) in each decade, in his opinion:
>>
>>1870's: Charlie Gould
>>1880's: Jim Whitney
>>1890's: Fred Tenney
>>1900's: Hal Chase, Addie Joss
>>1910's: "Rabbit" Maranville
>>1920's: Joe Martina
>>1930's: Ernie Lombardi, "Suitcase" Seeds
>>1940's: Ewell Blackwell
>>1950's: **Don Mossi** (**Ugliest of All-time**)
>>1960's: Bill Skowron, Dick Donovan
>>1970's: George Foster
>>
>>A picture of Mossi is on page 219 of the hard-cover edition, and he is ugly 
>>enough to frighten small children.  James' description:
>>     "Mossi's ears looked as if they had been borrowed from a much larger 
>>species, and reattached without proper supervision.  His nose was crooked, 
>>his eyes were in the wrong place, and ... he had no neck to speak of, just
>>a series of chins that melted into his chest."
> 
>What an asshole.  I know that everybody is having fun with this thread and
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^    
I do hope that you don't mean me.  (LJN) 

>I see nothing wrong with that, but did Bill James really take the time to
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>research this and then print it in his book!?  It seems like he is insulting
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Yes.  I wouldn't give the title, author, and year of publication of a book 
and then make up quotes.  Being a meticulous researcher, I'm sure that Bill 
James looked at hundreds of photos before making his choices.  (LJN)

>the guy big-time and lowering his own respectibility and credibility at the 
>same time.  What is this garbage doing in a book?
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If you don't like Bill James' editorial judgement, then don't read his 
books. (LJN)

> 
>By the way, I'm not flaming you, just Bill James who I am sure looks
>strikingly similar to Cary Grant...
> 
From his own dust jacket photo, no.  (LJN)

>-Gene
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Now 54-79.  Wait 'til next century?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:29:20 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Sep4.132629.11731@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> g_waugaman@nac.enet.dec.com (Glenn R. Waugaman) writes:

>In article <1992Sep4.115956.12910@cs.wayne.edu>, dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane) writes...
>>In article <1992Sep3.213256.13572@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> g_waugaman@nac.enet.dec.com (Glenn R. Waugaman) writes:

>>>Instead of telling us how much better other players would be doing than 
>>>Fielder based on simulations, how about telling us when Fielder's going to 
>>>start performing as the simulations expect?  Three years in a row and it's 
>>>not happened yet...

>>He has been performing as they expect, it's just that you're using RBIs
>>as the only measure of performance.

>Fielder's bases empty/men on base splits were so pronounced over 1990-91 
>that I find this hard to believe.  Do you have actual simulation results 
>or is this theory?

Of course, the splits for the first part of his career were the opposite,
and this year I don't know what they're like.  As I showed earlier, his 
career numbers are *not* a significant split in the SLG department, which
is, after all, the part of one's offense that creates RBI.  

Anyway, two years of big splits doesn't mean much, statistically speaking.

Roger
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nolan@helios.unl.edu (Michael Nolan)
Subject: When did Sosa of the Cubs break his foot?
Reply-To: nolan@helios.unl.edu
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Distribution: usa
Date: 26 Aug 92 05:17:12 GMT

I was out of town and off the net for a week, how and when did Sammy Sosa of
the Cubs break his foot?  How long is he out, the rest of the season?
---
Mike Nolan
nolan@helios.unl.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell)
Subject: Re: Little League WS semis
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 20:00:10 GMT

stanm@comm.mot.com (Stan Macasieb) writes:

>In article 715006883@craft.camp.clarkson.edu, farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Bri Farenell) writes:
>>Since this is rec.sport.BASEBALL, I thought I'd post something on the

>>They will play Santo Domingo, Dominincan Republic who beat the
>>Phillipine team.

>Wrong, Bri. The Filipinos beat the Dominicans 5-1 yesterday. The Filipinos
>will face Long Beach at 3:00 pm CDT Saturday.

Whoops, I guess someone better tell that to CNN Headline Sports' graphics'
department.

BRI


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jfc@athena.mit.edu (John F Carr)
Subject: Re: Reardon to Braves
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 03:47:43 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.035012.12631@cs.cornell.edu>
	tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:

>Quintana and Gray may never play again.

What's the latest word on them?  I thought Quintana was nearly fully recovered.

--
    John Carr (jfc@athena.mit.edu)
Organization: Junior, Civil Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Date: Thu,  3 Sep 1992 15:54:47 -0400 
From: Peter Stephen Lee <pl16+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: CUB'S MADDUX EASY CHOICE FOR CY
	<1992Sep3.012815.1219@cs.wayne.edu>

>Maddux has an outstanding ERA while playing in a hitters' park, will
>have nearly 200 strikeouts when the season is over, he leads the league
>with an OPP.SA of .267(!!!), and has pitched more innings than anyone
>else in the league.  If that's not a Cy Young winner, I don't know what
>is.

Isn't this about the same argument as the Clemens vs Welch thing
a few years back?
Looks like were headed that way this year too.


Pete
From: dkl@cs.arizona.edu (David K. Lowenthal)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Trading Deadline
Date: 28 Aug 92 16:32:56 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

In article <1992Aug28.160726.8970@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>
>No.  The waiver process does begin with the team with the worst record having
>the first chance to claim the player, but *all* teams must sign the waiver,
>in reverse order of record, in order for the player to clear the waiver.
>Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)


This is not my understanding.  I agree that for a player to clear waivers
everyone must pass on him.  But on a pregame show a while back, they
had the Cubs president of something or other baseball affairs.  He said
that...(an example of a waiver deal)

  Bad team, say Phils, want to trade someone to the Reds.  They put
the player on waivers, knowing that if the Reds claim him, they will
get compensation and the trade is made.  In reverse order of CURRENT record,
teams can claim him.  So the Pads could block the trade but the Braves
could not.

--dave


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball