HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: michaelh@netcom.com (Michael Hernandez)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Giants and Bonds - a $43 million mistake?
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:21:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <92345.192429COP80196@UCF1VM.BITNET> Bill Laird <COP80196@UCF1VM.BITNET> writes:
>
>In article <92345.26809.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM>,
>J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM says:
>>
>What is the deal with that? If Craig retires, the pitching staff which he
>manages to hold together with needles and pins is just going to crumple right
>up and fall apart.
>
>Bill

With the exception of 1989, Roger Craigs' handling of all the
Giants personnel and especially the pitching has been nothing 
short of pathetic.  

Two examples of recent note:  Trevor Wilson started the 1991 season
as a reliever...It was obvious to all concerned he belonged in the
starting rotation.  Wilson failed so miserably in the reliever role
that Al Rosen was going to send him down to the minors.  The Giants
had run out of options on Trevor and the rest of the 27 teams 
began making inquires on the waiver wire looking for Wilson.  Wilson
will flourish as a starter under a manager who will state what his
role will be and what is expected of a pitcher of his caliber.

Bill Swift, an aquistion from the Mariners, was aquired as a 
STARTING pitcher...Swift had been tried in that role with the
Mariners, and it was determined he did not have the arm strength
to give enough innings to warrant a spot in the rotation.  He was
moved to the bullpen and became an outstanding reliever.  Upon 
his move to the Giants, Swift had good success as a starter, but
around mid season, he began to experience arm problems.  After 
repeated attempts by Craig to continue the starter experiment,
he finally moved Swift back to the bullpen(and I might add,
probably extended Swifts career by a least 2 years).

I for one, am glad that the Rube Goldberg philosophy of player
personnel management of baseball, as espoused by Roger "Isn't
it amazing how we can't catch a break" Craig, is finally over! 

michael
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|michaelh@netcom.com             	   At the still point....       |
|SYSTEM V - MicroUNIX   	       	   There is the dance....       |
|(408) 241-0595 Voice		       ... And there is only the dance! |
|(408) 241-0371 Fax				T.S. Elliot		|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ccastmm@prism.gatech.EDU (Mike Marler)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves land Maddox !!
Date: 17 Dec 92 04:13:59 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <791.2B2D75DC@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG> deitch@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG (David Deitch) writes:

>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.

>     Well, yes and no.  The costs of running the Stadium and the team
> are enourmous.

At this point more yes than no.  Ted has payed his dues.  Just wished he
could have stayed awake in the 1991 WS (I couldn't get to sleep during or
after :-).

I think if you check you will find that Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium is run 
by the city/county  and the Braves have to pay for use.  The "city/county"
Stadium "Commision" collects all parking and concession fees and the Braves
get nada.  This is the very reason that Rankin Smith was determined to have
the Georgia Dome built and a "new deal" for the Falcons.  The city of Atlanta
"pissed" the Braves recently with the recent design proposed for the new
"post olympic stadium" since it would have retail store fronts outside of
the stadium.  But you are correct, the Braves have costs incurred in using 
Atlanta-Fulton County.  The Braves did at least cut costs by dropping minor
(and rookie) league teams in (or after) 1991.

> Plus, since we broadcast most of our own games, production costs must be
> added in on top of the player's salaries.

TBS did that when the team was below .500 and I am not sure what the Braves
pay other than the annoucers.  I think TBS gets (still got before) good
ratings due to the lack of BB on the tube.  They can raise advertising costs;
I sure ain't worried about 'em.

>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.

I can not handle the fact that people like WCW (wonder if Prime Time can
wrestle - he sure has the mouth :-) .  Turner and Turner Broascasting are
not hurting.

> 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.

You got that right, and they are close on closing the deal - heard that rumor
on the radio this morning.

Better start worrying about Avery's contract next.
-- 
Mike Marler                        | "Saving every nickel to spend on my
Internet: ccastmm@prism.gatech.edu |  my next set of thrills..." -somebody
Disclaimer: These views are not and should not be viewed as those of OIT.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: lars4752@mach1.wlu.ca (Bradley Larsen u)
Subject: Trivia Question
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:01:42 GMT

Name the eight ways by which a batter can reach first base.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: More on Bond's Antics.
Date: 18 Dec 1992 22:17:24 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <BzH4MC.5LL@ns1.nodak.edu> sivaram@plains.NoDak.edu (The  
Purple Bleeder ) writes:
> 
> One of the MLB official who travelled to Loisville for the
> winter meetings, was on the same flight as his Royal
> Highness, Mr Barry-Greedy-Bonds.
> 
> According to the official, Bonds was loud and rude on the
> plane and constantly complaining loud as to how the
> Yankees *insulted* him with their 5 yr $36 Million offer he
> had turned down a few days earlier (source S-I).
> 
> Talk of insults...what about people struggling on the streets
> in this country for getting a decent meal.. Mr Bonds should
> be knowing that.
>
In one sense I agree with you.  But let's change the scenario 
a bit.  Let's say you are a computer programmer working for
company X.  The average computer programmers of your caliber 
usually makes, say, $65,000 per year.  Some programmers who are less 
productive than you are now making $55,000 a year.  You have been 
told by your peers you are one of the best. All objective analysis 
shows you are far better than average.  Now, your company 
comes along and says: as a salary this year, we'd like to give
you $50,000. 

What's your reaction.  Remember, there are people living on 
the street to whom $50,000 would be a small fortune.  But
wouldn't you still feel insulted. It's not just the 
gross amount of money (and some of these players do make
a gross amount).  It's how much someone values you. If they
say you're great, but want to pay you below average for
what you can do, you'll feel insulted, no matter what the
absolute amount.


--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: RE: Women Sports Reporters
Organization: Clark University
Date: 20 DEC 92 17:02:40 GMT


In article <1992Dec19.063322.99660@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> cej0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu
(CHARLES EDWARD JAMES) writes: 
>OK if you are for women in men's locker rooms then how about men in women's 
>locker rooms afte r tennis matches etc. 

Sherri Nichols writes:

>The issue is not women in men's locker rooms, nor men in women's locker 
>rooms.  The issue is, do *all* reporters, male and female, have equal 
>access to the athletes?  Many of the professional team sports have chosen 
>to admit all reporters to the locker rooms to ensure this, while many of 
>the professional individual sports have chosen to admit no reporters to the 
>locker rooms, and instead have a separate interview room.  The only people 
>I'm aware of who are opposed to the idea of an interview room are male 
>sports reporters. 

I understand that many female sports reporters are opposed to the idea of
interview rooms.  Not only do they believe, as their male counterparts do,
that locker-room interviews are better (and provide more opportunity for
exclusives) than interviews in an interview-room or press-conference setting
-- they also know that if all reporters are banned from locker rooms, it will
be their fault.  It's difficult enough breaking into a male-dominated field
without being responsible for your colleagues' loss of privileges.  

It would seem reasonable to me for baseball to establish rules and guidelines
relating to athletes' conduct in the locker rooms.  I don't believe any exist
right now.  If a clear signal were given that harrassment wouldn't be
tolerated, the situation might be improved.  In any case, it would look
better for baseball if they had such a policy in place, rather than waiting
until a big lurid case hits the front pages.

Heather
HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 18:10:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.043952.11594@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
>In <18415@mindlink.bc.ca> Edward_Lunny@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Lunny) writes:
>
>And as for Molitor - do you honestly expect him to contribute as much as
>Winfield did last year?  Molitor won't play 90 games this year.
>
Sorry, Roger, I have to attack this one. Molitor has had 450 PA in
each of the last 5 years, with over 680 in 4 of the 5. He is 4 years
younger in 1993 than Winfield was in 1992, and his 90-92 stats are
much better than Winfield's 89-91 stats, even without using any fancy
statistics. Doesn't hit as many home runs, but hits more singles,
doubles, and triples. He's not the same type of player as Winfield,
but he is easily just as valuable.

At least he should be. Maybe he will break his leg on April 10 and
miss the rest of year. But there is no way that you can say that
Winfield looked better in December 1991 than Molitor does in December
1992.

And to make use of a "fancy" stat just once: the top 5 in total run
production since 1988, using park-adjusted equivalent runs, are Barry
Bonds, with 639; Will Clark, 610; Fred McGriff, 603; Rickey Henderson,
580; and Paul Molitor, 563. Winfield's 1992 was about equal to the
*average* Molitor season between 1988 and 1992.

>His starting pitching is comprised of 2 old farts, a potential phenom and
>a bunch of question marks.  If he doesn't sign Lee then he has lost half
>of the everyday infield, half of his starting pitching, half of a very
>effective relief pair, one of his everyday outfielders, and his full-time
>dh.
>
>Right on Pat!  Let's rebuild!  And when the jays go down the toilet this
>year all the stathead dorks in this group will be calling for Cito's head.

I only blame the manager when the team's concrete production (actual
wins, actual runs) don't measure up to the projected production. If
the player's who make up the team don't perform well enough, that
blame goes to the GM. GMs get flamed by statheads far more often than
managers do...

>roger maynard
>maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca

Clay D.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: sterbenc@ivhs.mot.com (Joe Sterbenc)
Subject: Re: Ryno talks (was Re: Atlanta Opening Day Starter)
Organization: MOTOROLA 
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 07:34:14 GMT
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball

In article <78487@hydra.gatech.EDU>, ccastmm@prism.gatech.EDU (Mike Marler)
wrote:
> 
> In <1992Dec16.175245.15171@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
> 
> >Ryne Sandberg has been blasting Maddux to the press in the last few days.
> 
> What is he saying?  He just does not talk all that much and even less to
> the press about other players.  What gives?

He apparently feels like Maddux lied to him and used him to pump up salary
offers. He reportedly told Ryno that he wanted to stay with the Cubs no
matter
what, so "please talk me up to the powers that be". Ryne did, and then
watched
Greg sign with the Braves and announce that they were "always his first
choice".
He sounds pretty hurt.

=====
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: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Maddux a Brave (Was: Re: Bob Gaj's Hot Stove, and Other Signings...)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 01:49:13 GMT
Organization: Boo!  
Keywords: Cubs, Maddux

In <Bz4y0E.3rF@Novell.COM> dtokarew@tokafew.Doc.Provo.Novell.COM (Deb Tokarewich) writes:

>In article <9DEC199223474469@pierre.mit.edu> kettler@pierre.mit.edu  
>(KETTLER, THOMAS R.) writes:

>[stuff deleted]
> 
>> I heard on the 11:00 news that Maddux has signed with Atlanta. The value  
>of the 
>> contract is $28 million for five years. I find it interesting that the  
>dollar 
>> amount is the same as for the contract he rejected at the beginning of  
>the 
>> season from the Cubs.

>You may find it "interesting." I find it...forget it...I can't come up  
>with a word for it.

>Some people have commented how wonderful it is to see a player not take  
>the big money (Greg turned down the larger Yankee offer). Sure, real swell  
>of him. Why couldn't he have accepted the same "cheaper" offer from the  
>Cubs instead of the Braves, though? Yeah, yeah...here's his chance to  
>finally be on a contender. I know. And I don't think there's anyone more  
>deserving of being on one than Greg. And the way the front office treated  
>him at the end is unforgiveable...but what was their ill treatment of him  
>at the start (or in mid-season?) when they first made the offer and he  
>wouldn't accept it? (Being away from home now, I don't always get all the  
>details from Wrigley that I'd like.)

What happened during the last off-season was this: Cubs management made Maddux
an offer of 5 years, $25 million and said he had to get back to them
within one day.  Maddux wouldn't decide in one day.  A few days later
Maddux got back to the Cubs and said he'd accept the offer, but the
Cubs said the offer was no longer on the table.

A deadline like that is fine when you're after a free agent and you don't
want to get in a bidding war.  But it seems kind of arbitrary to set
a deadline of 24 hours when there's no real reason for that deadline
except to show off your "power."

Maddux wasn't very happy with these chain of events, and obviously
left Chicago because of his distaste for how these were handled, and
not for the money.

Greg
From: arrow@netcom.com (Les Arrow)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: is it me, or are the yankees dolts?
Date: 12 Dec 92 11:23:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Dec12.112342.10266
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <92346.141524RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>i sincerely hope that there's no truth to this rumor about the
>yankees wanting ron darling.
>
>their rotation looked like melido perez, jim abbott, sam militello,
>sterling hitchcock, and bob wickman.  cranking and young.
>

It does look young, but crankin'? I can't remember the last successful
staff that had three rookies in the rotation.

>then they got key.  i can live with that.  i don't think it was
>brilliant, but i guess it wasn't too bad.  i guess it wouldn't hurt
>too much to see how hitchcock does at triple-a for a year.
>

Key's a good sign.

>but ron darling? bleagh.
>
>it's like as if said, "well, even though we've got a pretty neat
>rotation, signing cone and maddux will still help us," and then,
>after being spurned my both cone and maddux, decided, "jeez, the
>two starters that we wanted turned us down! we have to get two
>starters! hey, i know, key and darling!" apparently forgetting that
>cone and maddux were BETTER than the yankee pitchers, while key
>and darling....
>

I think this would be a tough choice. Darling as a number four starter
'aint bad. It just depends on whether you think Hitchcock can win. Personally,
I say sign Darling. Give Militello a full year in the rotation. Hitchcock
is only 22. He'll save. Bring him up next year. Or you can always
bring him up later in the season if things aren't going as expected.

--Les
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dbloom@bnr.ca (David Bloom P025)
Subject: Boston 93 Pitching staff?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:50:17 GMT


SP Clemens
SP Viola
SP Dopson
SP ?
SP ?

RP Melendez
RP Harris
RP ?
RP ?
RP ?
From: fls@acpub.duke.edu (Forrest Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Minor league Encyclopedia
Date: 18 Dec 92 15:22:11 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

I just spoke with Baseball America.  They said the book would not be
published until February.  I suspect it will be worth waiting for.


fls@keynes.econ.duke.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall)
Subject: Re: Worrell to the Dodgers!!!!
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: Swarthmore College Computing CenterCenter
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:16:20 GMT

In article <529@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) wrote:
> As it turns out, I was musing about *precisely* this topic last night (yeah,
> I know; it's been a loooooong week.)  Here's my all-time team.  Comments
> welcome, but NO FAIR RE-USING A LETTER.
> 
> 	C	Yogi Berra		SP	Carl Hubbell (under 'b')
> 	1B	Jimmy Foxx		SP	Mort Cooper
> 	2B	Tony Lazzeri		SP	Harvey Haddix
> 	3B	George Brett		SP	Red Ruffing
> 	SS	Luke Appling 		
> 	LF	Ted Williams		RP	Goose Gossage
> 	CF	Joe DiMaggio		
> 	RF	Henry Aaron
> 	DH	Al Simmons
> 
> Owner: Bill Veeck

Dr. Dave, please don't forget

MATT WALL

from your list - if you're willing to go into the deep, deep minors.

8-(
---------------------------------------------------------
This space left intentionally blank until spring training.
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mason/Maddux trade
Keywords: Mets, Padres
Date: 20 Dec 92 04:34:42 GMT
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

In article <18DEC199213242338@scsuc.ctstateu.edu> aboufadel@scsuc.ctstateu.edu (ABOUFADEL,E) writes:
>I read in the papers today that the Mets trades pitchers Roger Mason and Mike 
>Freitas to San Diego for pitcher Mike Maddux.
>
>How did the Mets acquire Mason?  Didn't they sign him as a free agent a few 
>weeks ago?  If that is the case, isn't it downright weird that they would or 
>even could trade him away like that?

You can trade anyone under contract, unless he's a 10 & 5 man or
has a no-trade clause.  Mason had more saves in 1992 than the
current career totals of all other Padre relievers combined. But
his contract is *not* guaranteed, so San Diego can dump him
w/o obligation for more than 1/6 of his salary.  Feitas looks like
a prospect, but Maddux is a fine pitcher right now.  Unfortunately
he has the Padre death mark - he's not an All Star and will get
over $1 million next season (probably - he's going to arbitration)
[yes I know Tony Fernandez *is* an all-star, but he has a huge 
salary...]

Locally, people are trashing ownership, and there are strong
rumors that the team is for sale.  Tampa Padres?

Dave

-- 
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: Brave staff greatest in recent history?
Date: 12 Dec 92 19:13:08 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake steph@perseus.cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson):
>
>Wow!  If we could just get Avery's ERA under 3, too.  What's the lowest
>high ERA for a team's starter in recent history?  (Include #5 starters).

Here's a guess:

1981 Houston Astros

	Nolan Ryan	1.69
	Bob Knepper	2.18
	Don Sutton	2.60
	Joe Niekro	2.82
	Vern Ruhle	2.91

...which accounts for all but 4 of the teams starts that season.

The famous '71 Orioles, of 4-twenty-game-winner fame, had

	Mike Cuellar	3.08	38 starts
	Jim Palmer	2.68	37 starts
	Pat Dobson	2.90	37 starts
	Dave McNally	2.89	30 starts
	Grant Jackson	3.12	 9 starts
	Dave Leonhard	2.83	 6 starts

-- 
       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: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Latest Jays News
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 13:52:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.233400.25708@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>In article <Bz3uu3.L6K@news.cso.uiuc.edu> hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks) writes:

>>>Well, it is not clear that the Expo's have a better offensive third
>>>baseman yet.  As for Baines, there is no DH in the National League...

>>The Expos had a third baseman who produced at a slightly better rate than
>>Wallach in ~half the playing time last year.  He's a lot younger so he's
>>more likely to improve if they let him play.  His name was Bret Barberie.

>WAS is exactly the point...they don't have a better offensive third
>baseman yet, because Barberie in no longer an Expo, and there was really
>not a whole lot the Expos could do about it.  The Expos weren't able
>to protect a third baseman in the expansion draft, and they lost their
>best one.

I believe Matt Stairs can play third...

>>The switch from Barberie to Wallach at third is another example of how
>>major league teams are willing to accept consistently poor performance 
>>(Wallach's '92 was a repeat of '91 at the plate) over an extended period
>>of time from a veteran when the same level of production from a young
>>player even for a short time is ticket to the bench or AAA.

>Baseball players are more than just numbers...they are human beings...

What does this have to do with the size of Huckabay's shoes?  

I can quote bumper stickers too: "Guns don't kill people, crazed baseball 
fans do."  

But how does that affect the fact that the only reason Wallach,
producing incredibly pathetically at the plate, was playing last year 
and not Barberie was because Wallach was a veteran?

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:37:17 EST
From: Edward A Farber <EAF110@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball Weekly Loses It
 <92352.120853BARBER@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
 <Dec.17.19.06.41.1992.19668@pilot.njin.net>
 <1992Dec18.023507.21834@u.washington.edu>

What i don't understand is this:  The Blue Jays added Stewart, Coles, Molitor,
and Sojo ( I think that's all).  They lost Cone, Key, Henke, Gruber, Maldonado,
 Winfield and Stieb.  I can't see how they improved.  Molitor will probably hel
p, but will he be that much better, or even any better, than Winfield was?  Doe
s Stewart even make up for the loss of Key, let alone Cone?  Didn't Baseball We
ekly have them as one of the more improved teams, like +3.5 or something?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.cricket