HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall)
Subject: Re: Gorman's reply
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: Hi, I'm Matt, and I'm...a Boston Red Sox fan
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:48:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan19.113345.544@otago.ac.nz>, guilford@otago.ac.nz wrote:
> 
> In article <1993Jan15.161510.20450@adobe.com>, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
> 
> > In article <C0vEAA.D5p@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jacg9914@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (John
> > A. Chandy) writes:
> 
> > (from Lou Gorman's letter)
> >>     You obviously were not a math major since Bonds and McGwire
> >>signed for a combined 71 million dollars and all the players we signed did
> >>not exceed 17 million dollars.
> 
> > Geez, what a nice guy.  He must think that you guys are such devoted fans
> > that he can insult you, and you'll still buy tickets.
> 
> I think Gorman thought that their statement was way off (though of course
> he's clearly not thinking about it properly) and was trying to point that
> out in (what he felt to be) a humorous fashion.  In any case, one 
> somewhat unfortunately worded passage can hardly diminish the fundamental
> niceness of Gorman's replying to these guys.  
> 
> Bill Guilford

I agree that Lou was very, very nice to reply, although I feel the original
letter was respectful enough that it deserved a reply. I along with several
others wrote Lou non-contentious thank-you notes in recognition.

As for the Math Major quip...Lou himself didn't do the math right. If you
look at it on an *annual basis*, with what the Sox are paying Calderon and
Dawson, they could've purchased 1 Bobby Bonds or 1.2 Mark McGwires, so I
stand by the original contention about the money being there but simply
spent according to a different philosophy. Lou was clearly looking at the
total cost of the length of the contract vs. some mythical total budget for
that period, which I guess is part of a GM's job, but for the short-term
the costs are virtually identical.

BTW, Lou spelled it 'McGuire' in the response; we took this as proof he
wrote the response himself!

- Matt (original letter author)


---------------------------------------------------------
This space left intentionally blank until spring training.
From: kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: GM Nicknames (was Re: Baines to Baltimore?)
Date: 21 Jan 1993 15:43:12 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
NNTP-Posting-Host: carina.unm.edu

In article <1jmch1INN944@menudo.uh.edu> chee1l5@Jane.UH.EDU writes:
>
>>>> Ooooo, I like this!  We in Pittsburgh can attest to being Simonized by
>>>> the latest Bucco signings!
>>>> 
>>> Are Phillies Phans being LEEched of their chances of fielding a good team?  
>>> 
>>> Maybe they'd rather Duquette out with the Expos up north...
>>
>>Did the Blue Jays roster get a real good " Gillicking" in the off season ????
>>
>
>I don't know why you guys are complaining. At least you didn't get Schuerhosed
>in the playoffs by Jeff Reardon.
>
Anyone else think that the Dodgers' plans for future contention are as Claire 
as mud???

-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Walks: not that sexy.
Me: "The relationship just didn't work.  She had this...Chaplinesque quality."
Lisa: "You mean, you didn't like her because she was always being funny?"
Me: "No. [pause] I didn't like her because she was a little tramp."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: savoy@hg.uleth.ca (Jim Savoy)
Subject: Craig Colbert move?
Reply-To: savoy@hg.uleth.ca
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 1993 02:44:45 GMT


Can someone tell me where (former?) Giant catcher Craig Colbert will
be playing in 1993? I thought I had all the player moves down pat, but
I think I read somewhere that Colbert had signed with the Marlins or
Rockies, yet I've still got him listed with the Giants in my data
files. Tanx muchly.

 _____________________________________________________________________________
     Jim Savoy          University Of Lethbridge         savoy@hg.uleth.ca

    I had dinner with my father last night, and made a classic Freudian
    slip. I meant to say "Pass the salt.", but it came out "You prick,
    you ruined my childhood."

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tshann@transquest.oe.fau.edu (Ted Shannon)
Subject: Where is the '93 All-star game???
Organization: Center for Marine Acoustics and Vibrations
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:54:47 GMT


	I think I remember something about San Diego but I'm
not sure. (Maybe that was last year).
	Doesn't matter whether you post or email, please.

				Thanks,
					Ted
From: kasper@sscvx1.ssc.gov
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: YANKEE REFLECTIONS ANYONE???
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:45:52 GMT
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory

In article <2497@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes: 
> Just a nit:  Don Mattingly certainly _is_ an impatient hitter by my
> standards.  I imagine that at least Gary Huckabay has similar standards,
> and perhaps a few more netters...

This seems to be a recurrent theme.  It is true that Mattingly walks
infrequently, but this could be attributed to the fact that he almost always
makes contact and puts the ball in play rather than to impatience.  It is
difficult to walk a lot if you rarely swing and miss.  In any event, this is a
testable hypothesis, if anyone had the data and the inclination to do the test. 
I once did a rough analysis of the relationship between Ks and BBs that showed
some (not huge) correlation between very high Ks and very high BBs but I could
never figure out whether this was caused by a missing-BB connection or by the
fact that high Ks are associated with power hitters who frighten pitchers who
then walk the hitters to avoid worse damage.

One other Mattingly question:  are the incessant complaints about Mattingly
that appear here caused by: a) the fact that Mattingly isn't as good as he used
to be or b)people really believing that he is no good.  All of the stats from
the last few years do not show that Mattingly stinks - they only show that
there are other first basemen in the league that have performed better, and
that there are other first basemen in the league that have performed worse.

Raph Kasper
From: johnson@physics.berkeley.edu (Steve Johnson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: GM Nicknames
Date: 21 Jan 93 13:34:38
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
Reply-To: johnson@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: clgs11@vaxa.strath.ac.uk's message of 21 Jan 93 12:37:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.123710.1@vaxa.strath.ac.uk> clgs11@vaxa.strath.ac.uk writes:


> Did the Blue Jays roster get a real good " Gillicking" in the off season ????


Yep!  And the Twin's McPhailed to get pitching...


--Steve

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz)
Subject: Re: Consider Whitaker when talking about good 2B...
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 03:22:07 GMT

In article <C19t7z.K9r@world.std.com>, jle@world.std.com (Joe M Leonard) writes:
|> 
|> I do know that Whitaker came up in '76 or so and has been stringing
|> seasons back-to-back since then.  Sure, some have been rather boring,
|> but on the whole, he'd be a big plus to any team during that perion.
|> While I don't have the exact numbers, his power improved as he aged,
|> without giving up OBA...  Pretty good glove, and a LH-batter to boot.
|> 
|> One could do worse :-)
|> 
|> Joe Leonard
|> jle@world.std.com
|> 
What do people out there think about Whitaker's chances for the HOF?

And, while we're at it, how about Trammell?
-Jonathan Katz
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Brewhas intereseted in Brunansky?
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:03:10 GMT

In article <C1JDx4.5q4@acsu.buffalo.edu> v393qp56@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Viktor Brenner) writes:
>Anyone have home/away numbers on Bruno?  i worry about offensive numbers
>piled up by Boston hitters when they get away from the fens.

1992: 216/308/328, 5 HR
1991: 200/269/324, 6 HR

Less than optimal.  :)
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 1993 MLB WS odds
Date: 24 Jan 93 01:09:50 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <1993Jan23.231323.1674@cs.wayne.edu> dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.234242.2030@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>Second, these are the odds to win the World Series.  Once you win
>>the division, you have a 50-50 shot of winning the playoffs, and
>>a 50-50 shot of winning the World Series.  That's 3:1 right there.
>>Are you really so sure of the Braves' chances that they're a 100%
>>shoo-in to win the division?  You're getting taken at 3:1 odds.
>
>I wouldn't say so. I think Atlanta has something like an eighty precent
>chance of winning the division. If they get in the playoffs, they should
>have a better than fifty percent chance of winning each of the series. 
>3:1 sounds about right to me.

I'm still skeptical.  They're not going to have the home-field advantage
for either the NLCS or the World Series, for one thing.  Not a big difference,
but I think it takes the odds of winning a best-of-7 series out of the
55% range.

I think 80% is too high an estimate, as well.  Especially in an expansion
year when there are a lot of fluky things happening.  Cincinnati could win
23 out of 25 from the expansion teams.  Phil Plantier could hit 45 home runs
to give the Padres a real Murderer's Row.  Somebody's arm on the Braves'
pitching staff could blow out.  The Stros could fall into place.  Yeah,
each of these individual events is unlikely, but do they all total up to
only 20 percent?

>>>> Pittsburgh	25:1
>>
>>>whatcha doing all the way down here?
>>
>>Actually, this is another one that is just about right.  Maybe a little
>>overvalued, but not much.
>
>Aw, c'mon.  Pittsburgh doesn't have *near* a 25:1 shot at the World
>Series.  Who's their top hitter now?  Jay Bell?  I guess Andy Van Slyke
>is alright, but he'll be way down from last year.  The Pirates don't
>have no 1 in 6 chance at winning the division.

It's a weak enough division.  They could sneak in if the Expos falter,
and the Cardinals turn down the gift.  I mean, it sure as heck ain't going
to be the Mets or Cubs.  (Also, it's 1 in 6.5, not 1 in 6 :).
-- 
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: djohnson@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (David Johnson)
Subject: Re: Js Need for LH SP (Was Schofield...)
Organization: University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:34:41 GMT

In article <kalford-210193083106@staffws.maclab.comp.uvic.ca> kalford@sol.uvvm.ca (Keith Alford) writes:
>In article <kbanaian.189.0@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu>,
>kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) wrote:
>
>> >The one problem the Jays and Expos have is the Canadian Dollar.  One report
>> >that I heard is that for every cent that the Canadian dollar drops the
>> >Jays lose $700,000 (because income is mostly in Canadian Dollars and the 
>> >payroll is in US dollars)
>
>>> and the Can. Dollar has dropped about 10 cents in the last 6 months.  That means a loss of 
> >>about $7 million.
>
>The Can. dollar goes up and down a couple of 100ths of a cent every
>day--but there's no way it dropped this much. The Jays are making a FORTUNE
>on memorabilia from their World Series win. Easily enough to pay several
>Winfields for several years.

One Canadian dollar could get you approx. 88 cents US last summer but now
it will only get you 78-79 US cents.  That's about a 10 cent drop.

>From what I read, the Jays are the most money-making team in all of
>baseball. The Indians make more money (per game) playing as visitors in the
>Skydome than they do at home.

I can believe this.  They have one of the largest TV and Radio contracts in
baseball, draw 4 million fans a year and have large memorabilia sales.

--David Johnson
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Yankees chances in '93  (was Re: 1993 MLB WS odds)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 22:44:57 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.010405.1867@cs.wayne.edu> dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.152627.1@ualr.edu> ajsmith@ualr.edu writes:
>>In article <1993Jan21.132431.24404@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>, marwood@csri.toronto.edu (Simon J. Marwood) writes:

>>> The following odds chart appeared today in the Toronto Star, and represents
>>> the odds listed by the Flamingo Hotel sports book in Laughlin, Nev. The
>>> odds represent the odds to win the 1993 WS:

>>> NY Yankees	18:1

>>With the additions of Boggs, Owen, Abbot, Howe (cringe the damn drugie) I'd 
>>place the Yankees a little higher

>Well, Spike Owen isn't going to help any, but with the additions of the
>other three plus Jimmy Key and the developments of Sterling Hitchcock,
>Sam Millitello and Bob Wickman, the Yankees look like they have as good a
>shot as anybody at winning the AL East.

Agreed.  Great looking pitching.

>True, they won't score a whole bunch of runs, but they do have O'Neill,
>Boggs, and Tartabull (one of the best hitters in baseball).  Nokes is a
>pretty good hitter for a catcher.

I don't see O'Neill as a big improvement over Kelly, if at all, but they've 
got an okay offense.  

One key is that they have about 73 middle infielders.  (Pat Kelly,
Stanciewicz, Gallego, Owen, Velarde, Silvestri, and probably 8 or 10
others) Are they going to use this surplus to their advantage, by picking 
the best of the lot, and then having depth if someone gets hurt, or are they 
going to do what they've done in the past, which is play around with them, 
never giving anyone a job, and as soon as someone slumps, replacing him?

Nokes is not really that good offensively -- power, but putrid OBP, even
for a catcher, and he's bad defensively, I understand.

>As I see it the AL East race will be between Baltimore and New York.  I
>think the Orioles may have over-achieved last year (particularly
>Devereaux and Anderson).  On the other hand, they have a young pitching
>staff (McDonald and Rhodes should be getting bettter), and they'll have
>Hoiles for the whole year.

Unfortunately, Johnny "Oh?"tes seems to have decided on using David
Segui full time at first base, which will be perfect if the Orioles are
trying to finish fourth.

>Toronto has lost enough that they won't contend, IMHO.

Yeah.  I mean, I think people are looking at their reputation rather
than their performance.  Their pitching may be worst in the division,
aside from Detroit.  Guzman is great (fragile?), but Stewart/Morris/
Stottlemyer/fill-in doesn't scare anyone.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | "We don't need anymore [sic] wretched refuse.  It's 
niepornt@phoenix.    |  time to send the Statue of Liberty somewhere else"
   princeton.edu     |      -- Jack "Not a bigot" Schmidling, 1/7/93
Baltimore Orioles 93 |
Xref: sparky rec.sport.baseball:38419 soc.women:23086 soc.men:23304
From: gwangung@byron.u.washington.edu (Roger Tang)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: Women Sports Reporters
Date: 26 Jan 1993 16:34:14 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: byron.u.washington.edu

In article <1993Jan26.001040.17179@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>>The one who fined Wyche $30,000.  Dunno the official title.
>Wyche would have been fined by the NFL Commissioner, not by a Commission.
>And you have yet to establish that Wyche was fined by the Commissioner for
>banning all reporters from the locker room, while providing access to the
>players in another fashion.

	He was not. He was fined for banning a female reporter from the locker
room while allowing male reporters in, ON THE SAME DAY that the Commissioner
held a special news conference to point out the NFL's equal access policy,
to repudiate the New England Patriots' incident and to highlight THE SAME
FEMALE REPORTER that Wyche banned from the locker room.

	Tagliabue merely said "No" to Wyche's plan. I don't agree with this
latter action, but surely Mr. Wyche wasn't expecting to get away with just
a scolding after pulling what he did....

-- 
	"I got into theatre originally to pick up girls. Unfortunately, all I
found were women..."
e-mail:  gwangung@u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall)
Subject: Re: Ten Best Peaks (was Sandberg)
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: Hi, I'm Matt, and I'm...a Boston Red Sox fan
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:46:19 GMT

randomly...

Hal Newhouser (HOF)
Hack Wilson (HOF)
Vada Pinson
Tony Armas (short peak)
Thurman Munson
Greg Nettles (twin peaks?)
Vida Blue (first three years)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: exby@spot.Colorado.EDU (Doc Exby)
Subject: White Sox schedule online?
Keywords: white sox
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:15:35 GMT


Does anyone have a copy of the 1993 White Sox schedule 
online anywhere?  any text format would be fine I guess.
thanks

also a belated birthday wish to Ozzie (jan 20th) !

go go sox
::j
From: ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu (Gary Prisoner Huckabay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Sandberg (was Re: Ty Griffen)
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:21:16 GMT
Organization: Blood and Monocles (A Sam Spade Mr. Peanut Mystery.)

In article <1993Jan22.122112.13976@bsu-ucs> 00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
(Regarding Ryno being the best 2B in history)

>So who do you think was better? And please don't say Joe Morgan. Maybe if you
>go back before 1950 you could make a case. Although I admit I should have said,
>one of the premier second basemen in history.

Why the HELL shouldn't I say Joe Morgan?

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

Morgan's career spanned 20 years, and his OBP/SLG lifetime, including
his decline (which we have yet to see in Sandberg) is .395/.427.
And don't forget 689 SB, and only 162 CS.

Morgan posted a .400 OBP 8 times.  Morgan played his first 7 years
in a HORRIBLE hitter's park, the Astrodome.  Sandberg has played his
entire career in a hitter's dream park.  Morgan drew 80+ walks in *16*
seasons.  Morgan hit for average and power, walked a ton, stole bases like
a fiend, and played superlative defense.

Over 20 years.

Sandberg's a fine player.  But for him to be better than Morgan, he'd
have to post some .500 OBP years for about the next 5 years.  Sandberg
trails Morgan in career OBP by about *50* points.  Sandberg's slugging
edge is about *30* points, and he's played in an era of more offense,
and a hitter's palace.

I like Morgan for the best 2B ever, actually, even over Hornsby or Collins.

-- 
*    Gary Huckabay    * "If money....if love was in...your life....it's run    *
* "Where the HELL is  *  out...got to realize it's time...Confusion...delusion *
*   the new Living    *  alive in destitution...if it could only be different..**   Colour album?!?"  *  if only you could run away from it." - J. Gaskill.    *
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: sandoval@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: AVERAGE/GOOD values...
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:22:27 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.225611.6859@adobe.com>, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
> In article <1993Jan21.115544.1@stsci.edu> sandoval@stsci.edu writes:
>>   What are the AVERAGE avg/obp/slg values for each position?
>>That is, what are the values that are adequate?  And, as a
>>followup, what are the values that are GOOD, or well above
>>average?  
> 
> My reference which has this is at home right now, but as a start, I can
> tell you that league averages for OBA and SLG are usually around .320/.380
> in the NL and .330/.400 in the AL.  But I really posted to tell you a
> reference which has this sort of thing: _The Great American Baseball Stat
> Book_, by Gary Gillette.  He published one last year, and I believe he'll
> be publishing one this year, too.  It's paperback, and under $20, I
> believe.  

  Thanks for the info on the book.  I'll be out shopping this weekend, so
now I have something specific to look for.  Any other suggestions for 
someone who wants to catch up with these stats???

    John

> 
> (I make no money off this book, but I do have an interest in seeing it
> continue: I get my raw play-by-play data from Gillette, and as long as the
> book sells, he'll have enough money to keep collecting it, which means I'll
> be able to continue doing DA stuff).  
> 
> Sherri Nichols
> snichols@adobe.com
> 
> 
> 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: prm@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (paul.r.mount)
Subject: Where will Hickory (NC) Crawdads play?
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 09:27:17 GMT

Hickory NC has been granted a minor league (A?) baseball team;
with the great (?) name chosen to be the Crawdads.
Last I heard (over Christmas) they didn't have a place to play
yet.  anyone with newer info (and anyone see a Crawdads hat yet?)


(and to think other cities build it, and they don't come.)

PS to Baltimore fans, thanks for Orsulak, you have Baines
coming home, we have Parsippany Joe, quietly a decent player,
coming home to the Mets for a song!
From: rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Those Silly Jints
Date: 28 Jan 93 17:35:29 GMT
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

In article <2717@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes:
>
>Well, the San Fransisco Giants have just announced that Willie McGee will
>bat leadoff, and Barry Bonds will bat fifth.
>
><insert derisive yet rude noise here>
>
>Clearly, SF felt that it was important to make sure that McGee not only got
>more PAs than Bonds, but that Bonds didn't take PAs away from Matt Williams
>or Will Clark.

Its worse than that. Dusty Baker not only announced he would leadoff McGee
and hit Bonds 5th, he announced that he would like to reinsert Matt Williams
into the cleanup spot(where he has proven to be terrible, Matt just can't
hit there for whatever reasons he can't). He then intimated that he is 
also leaning towards reinserting Billy Swift in the starting rotation because
he thinks he has a good enough bullpen with Rod Beck, but needs more starters.

Any predictions on how many starts Swift gets before his shoulder starts to
hurt?

How long before Williams asks out of the cleanup spot?




Russ Smith
*******************************************************************************
"History proves again and again how nature exposes the folly of man"

                    "Godzilla"- Blue Oyster Cult
********************************************************************************