HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pablo@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Pablo A Iglesias)
Subject: Re: Stupidest rule in baseball (perhaps a new one)
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 12:41:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.092848.370@walter.cray.com> mb@cray.com (Maynard Brandt) writes:
>My apologies if this replicates an earlier post.  To me the dumbest rule
>has always been:
>
>With 0 or 1 strikes on a batter, a foul ball is a strike.  However, except
>for a bunt, a foul ball with 2 strikes on a batter is *NOT* a strike.
>
>If it isn't a strike the last time, why should a foul ball ever be included
>in the ball-strike count?
>
>I remember someone commenting on a TV broadcast that at one time foul
>balls weren't included in the ball-strike count.  Does anyone on the
>net know if this is true or false and, if it is true, when the rule
>changed?

Yes it was true; Wee Willie Keeler's 44 game hitting streak cam when
this rule applied.  I am not sure exactly when it changed, but I believe 
that it was before the 20th century.
>
>If it was true during Babe Ruth's or Walter Johnson's time, it just may
>change some net opinions concerning Ruth's hitting ability or Johnson's
>strikeout total when making comparisons to current players.

It had definitely changed by then.

>Maynard Brandt
>Cray Research, Inc.


-- 
Pablo
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian)
Subject: Re: Stats Inc Major League Handbook
Organization: Pitzer College
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:42:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.135338.1588@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>
>As an aside, does anyone really believe that they'll be able to develop
>a pitcher projection system?  I don't.

Look closely, and you'll see they limited themselves to projecting pitchers 
with over 500 career IP.  Hell, by that time you *know* what the pitcher 
would do.

As a forecaster, I propose we perform the following experiment.  For this 
group they projected compare two forecasts:  STATS vs. "he'll have the same 
stats as last year".  We'll square the errors for ERA and ratio.  (I'll 
forgive them for wins and innings and count totals:  even they cannot guess 
who gets injured next year.)  How many of you believe STATS will beat this 
naive forecast?

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (Dave Bonar)
Subject: Re: Astros rotation
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-21878]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:16:33 GMT

In article <42515@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers) writes...
> 
> 
>So, looks like Drabek, Swindell, Harnisch for sure.  Who will
>fill out the rest of the rotation?  Will Kile get a chance?
>Jimmy Jones (!)? 

	I don't have any real sources but I'd have to guess the rotation
would go;

Drabek
Swindell
Harnisch
Portugal
Williams

with Kile in AAA waiting for anyone to falter.  Jones can do long relief
but they already have loads of right handed relievers.  My first guess
would be that he will go to AAA also.  

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

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbos@lacerta.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose)
Subject: Re: same name (WAS Re: Maddux signs with Braves (Was Re: Juan Guzman/STATS))
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 15:39:04 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Dec12.230224.28841@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>In article <1gdq1iINNqn9@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu> rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert) writes:
>>I also saw a AA game a few years ago in which 
>>Chuck Howard faced Chuck Howard (I still don't know 
>>if it's ever happened in the majors - Anyone got some 
>>1981 box scores so that we can check out the Mike Marshalls?)
>
>no, though i do remember the battery of Steve Trout and Steve Lake.
>i always did like that one.
>
>(i suppose Ken Griffey and Ken Griffey is cheating, right? :^)
>

Well, before we go on and on about this (didn't we do this in summer? :),
I'd like somebody to mail me Dave Johnson's stats he accumulated with the
Orioles, please... :)

(just kidding...)


-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Walks: not that sexy.
"Halt!  Based on conclusive dental evidence that truly bites, I arrest you 
 hereby for the murdering of the dead Belzic Tascar.  I am obliged to warn you 
 that my weapons are registered as offensive fronds!!"- R.M.Allen, "Monkey See"
From: ddyte@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Assorted "all-time" teams
Date: 13 Dec 92 12:27:22 +1100
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia

Seth Robson posted some nifty all-time teams including:

>The Dodgers:
>This team is a few steps behind the ones I'd rate as the best tha we put
>together, such as the Giants, Phillies, Yankees, Red Sox, and Cardinals.

Better than the Giants. Definitely. I'll never say otherwise.
And I don't care if I'm wrong.

>They didn't have enough old-timers with ridiculous stats to help them out.

Well, you did forget Wee Willie Keeler...

>C:  Roy Campanella
>1B: Jack Fournier

Well, yes, but then there's Gil Hodges. And Dolph Camilli, my
favorite bum.

>2B: Jackie Robinson

Or Jim Gilliam, and put Robinson at third, or OF.

>3B: Pedro Guerrero

How about Billy Cox? And see above.

>SS: Glenn Wright (and you thought I'd say Bill Russell...)

No, I thought you'd say Maury Wills. I would have.
Or Pee Wee Reese.

>LF: Tommy Davis
>CF: Duke Snider
>RF: Babe Herman
>etc: Jimmy Sheckard, Zack Wheat (platoon with Davis, most likely), Carl
     Furillo, Reggie Smith, Lefty O'Doul

Also Casey Stengel, Hack Wilson had _one_ great season too.
If we're playing at Ebbets Field, maybe Furillo would edge in to a
starting place for his fielding- he knew that scoreboard very well.

>SP; Sandy Koufax, Dazzy Vance, Don Drysdale, Orel Hershiser (really!)

Five man rotation: add Don Newcombe or Nap Rucker or Jeff Pfeffer.

>RP: Ron Perranoski, Rube Marquard, Phil Regan, Jim Brewer

They would've missed one of those pennants without Joe Black. And
he should've been in organised ball a lot longer- but for his color.

GOOD JOB!! Thanks.
--
>Seth I. Robson; srobson@ucscb.ucsc.edu  [ Giants in, uh, '95? ]
>University of California, Santa Cruz
>"There's something kind of EUUUUUUUGH about a kid that doesn't like
> to play baseball..."  -- Foghorn Leghorn.

               - David Dyte
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Statheads and park effects
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 04:00:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.034702.1492@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz) writes:
>Perhaps Boggs just doesn't hit well of the road- like on road trips.
>(Maybe he is too busy with other pursuits!) So maybe settling in Yankee
>Stadium, he will hit like he is home. Let's all remember that it's not
>necessarily the park- it could be the state of mind.

Yeah, I guess that Boggs got an extra 10 doubles a year from the layout of
Fenway that will be flyouts in Yankee Stadium is completely irrelevant.  And
I'm sure playing an extra 70 games a year in a stadium with a much larger
foul territory will do absolutely nothing to his batting average.  

If park effects are irrelevant, why is it that both Boston hitters *and*
their opponents consistently hit much better in Fenway?  Year after year
after year?  Or do just the hitters have the state of mind, and the pitchers
somehow feel more comfortable on the road?  Maybe the visiting hitters
are extra relaxed at Fenway because they hit X-night at Axis the day before
the game, while the visiting pitchers feel bloated from eating at the
Wursthaus.  And if they switched their activities, the pitchers would
do better and the hitters would do worse.

But I suspect the park has a lot more to do with it. 

I grew up going to games in the Astrodome.  Then I went to Wrigley on
a windy day.  There's simply no comparison.  Even though the weather was
cold and miserable, the ball *flew* off of the bats.  The foul territory
was smaller.  There were five home runs hit that day, and in the 'Dome, 
you'd be lucky to see five home runs in a week.  Seeing isn't everything,
but, boy, do the statistics back me up on this.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (Dave Bonar)
Subject: Re: Benito Santiago
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-21684]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:51:16 GMT

In article <Bz3yKr.C39@encore.com>, jlundy@bilbo.encore.com (Joe Lundy) writes...
>Just heard word that according to "family members", Benito
>Santiago is close to signing a one year deal with the Marlins.

	I liked the signing of Magadan.  I'm not too hot on this one.  One
of the strengths of the Marlins looked to be their catching.  Decker, Natal
and Johnson seemed pretty solid.  Signing Santiago means that he'll get the
bulk of the catching.  Yuck, he's decent but he's not going to make the 
Marlins win in 93 or 94 and after that he'll be too old to be contributing
more then one of the other three could put out.

>So far, this is not too shabby:
> 
>C  Benito Santiago
>1B Orestes Destrade
>2B Bret Barbarie
>SS Walt Weiss
>3B Dave Magadan
>OF Junior Felix
>OF Chuck Carr
>OF Monty Fariss
> 
>....with a rotation of (Armstrong, Carpenter, Chiamparino, Hough) and
>Corsi and Harvey in the Pen.

	It looks even better if you put Conine in RF, Felix in CF and Fariss
in LF (and drop Carr to AAA).  For that matter, I'd go with a rotation
of Bowen, Hough, Chiamparino, Rapp, and Martinez with Armstrong in the pen
but available if one of the young guys (Rapp or Martinez) looks really bad
(not just bad; really bad).

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

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: Brian Dorsett
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 16:32:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.001813.18968@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>In article <18DEC199212052600@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu> doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller) writes:
>>In <1992Dec17.214529.2185@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@midway.uchicago.edu says:
>
>>>Sure there is.  A prospect is someone who is potentially successful.
>>>In baseball, 32-year-olds aren't "might become"s, they're "used to be"s.
>>>Dorsett isn't going to become a better player.  He's a poor fielder,
>>>and not such a great hitter.
>
>>	Dorsett probably sucks.
>>	But, 2 years ago, what did all you guys say about that 33 year-old
>>castoff, retread, and nobody, Skeeter Barnes?
>
>I said he probably sucks.  And I haven't seen anything to change my mind
>about that, either.

OK, all the fuss about Mr. Dorsett (is that pronounced DORsit or
dorSET, BTW?) made me change my mind and cue up his projections, even
though, at 32, I don't consider him a prospect. These are my MLEs, not
James'; our formulas differ but are results generally agree.

     BRIAN DORSETT 1961       
              ab     h  db  tp  hr   bb   sb  cs   eqa  eqr   ba   oba   sa
  1988 EDM    159   35   4   0   8   23    1   2  .234   21  .220  .319  .396
  1988 CAL     11    1   0   0   0    1    0   0  ****    0  .091  .167  .091
  1989 COL    393   96  13   1  18   26    2   2  .234   51  .244  .291  .420
  1989 NYY     22    8   0   0   0    1    0   0  .271    3  .364  .391  .364
  1990 COL    418  109  22   1  12   39    1   1  .245   58  .261  .324  .404
  1990 NYY     35    5   2   0   0    2    0   0  .067    0  .143  .189  .200
  1991 LV     205   52   7   0   9   13    0   0  .238   27  .254  .298  .420
  1991 BUF    104   28   4   0   2    6    0   0  .226   12  .269  .309  .365
  1991 SDP     12    1   0   0   0    0    0   0  ****   -1  .083  .083  .083
  1992 BUF    490  133  23   1  17   34    1   0  .251   70  .271  .319  .427

    MAJ        80   15   2   0   0    4    0   0  .110    2  .188  .226  .213
    MIN      1769  453  73   3  66  141    5   5  .241  238  .256  .311  .413
    TOT      1849  468  75   3  66  145    5   5  .237  241  .253  .307  .404
    MAJ       619  116  15   0   0   31    0   0
    MIN       602  154  25   1  22   48    2   2
    TOT       603  153  24   1  22   47    2   2

This shows that he has been a very consistent minor league hitter,
with equivalent averages right around .235 every year. That is the
major league average, and is above average for catchers. 1992 was his
best year; my formula is substantially kinder than James' for '92. The
**** in the eqa column means his rating is negative; adding those
numbers to a team would result in fewer runs produced.

He is probably, right now, a better hitter than Dan Wilson. He is not
as good as Joe Oliver. Defensively, I have no idea, but I would
*suspect* he is pretty bad. There must be some reason he was kept in
AAA.

Clay D.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: deitch@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG (David Deitch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves land Maddox !!
Date: 15 Dec 92 05:25:46 GMT
Organization: Galaxy Information System (GIS) Atlanta, Ga

Dateline Fri, 11/Dec92 17:58.
In , Edward [Ted] Fischer of tedward@cs.cornell.edu  wrote to All at 1:133/411,

 E[F> Huh?  Ted Turner is making money hand over foot off of the 
 E[F> Braves.  He spent a bit on Maddux, but freed up salary 
 E[F> from a couple other players.

     Well, yes and no.  The costs of running the Stadium and the team are enourmous.  Plus, since we broadcast most of our own games, production costs must be added in on top of the player's salaries.  Revenue sources include MLB (but there are also expenses there too), ticket sales (raised $2 for '93 to $12 field-level), merchandising, and commercial revenue.  
While post-season play has been a real boon, WCW is a bigger money maker, and all the profits must be offset by the costs of running all those different networks.  The bottom line is the Braves are not the only factor in how Turner (the company, not the name) is doing.

 E[F> With this much talent around, the Braves can probably afford 
 E[F> to let Glavine walk.  Unless he's willing to sign for 
 E[F> as little as Maddux did...

     Not a chance.  Glavin has already stated that he is interested in signing this year even though his current contract will not expire until next year.  He wants a 4/5 year secure deal now rather than play the hold-out game next year.  You may notice this has been a trend where players are passing up bigger bucks to play for teams they feel strongly about (much to the Yankee's chagrin).

          David Deitch, (GIS) Atlanta
--  
----------------------------------------------------------
               __
              /  \             User: David Deitch
             /|oo \            Via FidoNet node: 1:133/411.0
            (_|  /_)
             _`@/_ \    _     FidoNet <==> UUCP Gateway
            |     | \   \\    FidoNet Net 133, Atl96
            | (*) |  \_  ))
  ______    |__U__| /  \//     David Deitch, Administrator
 / FIDO \    _//|| _\   /     Galaxy Information System
(________)  (_/(_|(____/ (jm)   (GIS) Atlanta            

UUCP: wittsend!gisatl!deitch
INTERNET: deitch@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dave@snitor.sni.ca (Dave Till)
Subject: Re: All-Henderson Team
Organization: Ed Sprague Appreciation Society
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:39:41 GMT

In article <15DEC92.03193833@vax.clarku.edu> hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>Our opponents in the All-Name League:  The Smith Brothers, The
>James Gang, The Jolly Millers, The Vodka Collins (well, maybe the
>League wouldn't approve of that name), The Fabulous Baker Boys...
>there must be more...?

How about the all-Dave team?  Check out this batting order:

Davey Lopes, 2b
Dave Henderson, cf
Dave Parker, rf
Dave Kingman, dh (also serves as vice-president of public relations)
David Justice, lf
Dave Hollins, 3b
Dave Magadan, 1b
Dave Concepcion, ss
Dave Rader, c (we're a little weak here, I'm afraid)

And look at this pitching staff!

Starting rotation:  Dave Stieb, Dave Stewart, Dave McNally,
Dave "Boo" Ferriss, Dave Lemanczyk.  (A little weak in the #5 slot,
but, man, those first three are tough cookies.) 

Bullpen:  Dave Righetti (bullpen ace), Dave Giusti (set-up man),
David Nied (young pheenom), Dave Roberts (cannon fodder).

And on the bench:

Dave Roberts, reserve catcher (to confuse the opposition, I plan an
all-Dave Roberts battery in the late innings of blowouts);
Dave Stapleton, defensive 1B replacement (take that, John McNamara!);
Dave Collins, OF and pinch-runner;
Dave Cash, utility infielder;
Dave Martinez, utility outfielder.

The manager is, of course, Davey Johnson (who is also the 25th man on the
roster).  Dave Bristol is the third base coach, and I am the first base
coach (it's my team, after all).  The broadcast crew will be Dave Van
Horne and Dave Campbell.

The team slogan is, "They're not booing -- they're shouting 'Dave, Dave'."

The position of team mascot is still open.  I'd offer it to Dave Kirsch,
but I'm worried that he might get zonked and start waving Li'l Carlos
at the players' wives.

Heather, I claim that my team can whup your team big-time.
Play ball!

--Dave "maybe I'll sign Dave Clark and give him the number 5" Till
  e-mail address:  dave@silver.sni.ca or dave@snitor.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mzickar@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Mike Zickar)
Subject: Re: All-Time Twins Team
Organization: UIUC Department of Psychology
Distribution: world,local
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:33:55 GMT

I'm not a Twin's fan but doesn't Lyman Bostock deserve a place on this team.
I forget his tragic story but hadn't he had several .300 seasons for the
Twins, circa 1976-1977, and then he got shot to death.  I'd be intereseted
in his story again.

Thanks,
Mike Zickar
mzickar@s.psych.uiuc.edu

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dietz@parody.Data-IO.COM (Kent Dietz)
Subject: Twins queries: Any news on Winfield? etc.
Organization: Data I/O Corporation
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 23:46:16 GMT

Does anyone have a good rumor about pending signing of Dave 
Winfield?  I have heard that both Kansas City and the Twins have
been talking to him.  

Sounds from Seattle say that the Mariners are out of the bidding;
not enough dollars left after signing Martinez (before the season
ended), Griffey, Bosio and Felder. 

I think it would be great for the St.Paul native (a friend of mine 
recalls pitching duels back in high school) to come home for his
last (or last few) seasons.  He should be able to replace Chili 
Davis even if he doesn't have the year he had this year.  Any
thing stirring in the Twin Cities?

Are the Twins going to be satisfied with keeping Puckett and losing 
Gagne and Smiley?  Who is projected to replace Gagne?  Reboulet or 
Leuis?  I saw Reboulet play in Seattle this year and was impressed
with his defensive play, but his bat was hurtin'.

Any hot prospects in the minors?  McCarty I have heard about.  Anyone
else?

Win Twins!

Kent Dietz
Twins in '93

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: prb@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul Botts)
Subject: Re: Greatest Players by team
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:17:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.165940.28908@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>
>Kiner led the league in homers seven times in a row;  but there were
>several offensive threats of his caliber all through that run, not 
>least Musial.  Musial was indeed awesome, taken over his whole career,
>but the length and height of Schmidt's peak are very hard to find
>parallels for.  Cobb had Jackson, Speaker, and Collins up there near 
>him, though his peak (around 1910) is one of the most amazing of all; 
>and Greenberg only dominated for a short while.
>
>>are others that could compare to Schmidt for pure offense, too.
>
>Perhaps, but not for that long, and in as tough a set of competitors.
>

Well, Musial wasn't just great for longevity, he had some amazing peaks,
too, like one season in which he led the NL in 12 different offensive
categories (missing the Triple Crown by one HR). He is underrated by
modern fans.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:51:27 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.032238.9715@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
>
>Some of us understand that the only true measure of quality is merely  
>the measure of a team's success.  Others feel that success is incidental
>to quality. 

And the truth lies somewhere in between.  The best manager in the
world isn't going to help the Mets win next year, and even with the
worst (Jimy Williams?), the Blue Jays would be an above-average team.

There is a reason why the players are paid umpteen times more than the
managers.  It's because there are probably 15-20 players each year who
have more impact on the success or failure of the team than the
manager does.  It is silly to give even a great manager credit for
more than half a dozen wins a year.  The game simply doesn't work that
way.  Making it difficult to tell the difference between a less
talented team with a great manager and a more talented team with an
idiot manager, if all you look at is the W-L record.

Cito Gaston has a very short managerial record, and has *never*
managed a team that is short on talent.  Let's see how he does with
the 1993 Jays (which looks like it will be the worst Jays team since
he took over) before we induct him into the HOF.

>>I'll take Cito, thank you very much.
>
>So should every team in baseball.  At least in '92.  Because the team he
>managed won it all and that's all there is to win...

That is the most ridiculous statement I've seen in ages.  And I'm not
even taking it out of context!

I'll take Alfredo Griffin, thank you very much.  "So should every team
in baseball.  At least in '92.  Because the team he played for won it
all, and that's all there is to win...".

It is a stupid statement because it says nothing of interest.  Was
Cito the most successful manager in 1992?  Of course.  Was he the
best?  Not by any normal definition of "best".  (I know.  You prefer
your own dictionary, in which "best" and "most successful" are
synonyms.  Why don't you just accept that the rest of the world
defines the terms differently?)

-Valentine