HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Sheffield is NL MVP
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 21:16:31 GMT

In article <17596@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> fzchen@othello.ucdavis.edu writes:

>This is why I quit sabremetrics.  Who says OBP is more important than 
>SLG???!!!  I think Caminiti vs. Pendleton is simple.  Poll the GM's and

Like, because studies show that a point of OBP is worth about 1.2 points of
SLG (or something like that)?

>managers of both leagues and ask who they would want on their team if
>either could be had at the same salary...Caminiti.  Not!

Hmmm.  A couple years ago, if you had asked the GMs whether if they wanted
Luis Polonia or Claudell Washington, I bet most of them would have said
Washington.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Torre!  Torre!  Torre!
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:42:50 GMT

In article <56369@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:
>Realistically the season comes down to one thing, not being able to beat
>the Pirates head to head. they beat us 15 out of 18. If we played .500
>against them, we would be right there in the race.

Not to pick on Russ, but I hear this sort of thing regularly: "If only they
had won more games against Team Y, who beat them 15 of 18" or "If only they
had played better against their own division (or the other division)".  I
don't really think this makes any sense.  I mean, teams are going to lose
50-100 games a season; it'd be unusual if those losses were evenly
distributed among all their opponents.   

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com



Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: aardvark@locus.com (Warren Usui)
Subject: Re: TORONTO BLUE JAYS CLINCHED THE AL EAST!!!!!
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992 23:18:33 GMT

In article <17932@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Frog Baseball Huckabay) writes:

>ANYTHING can happen.  It's a short series.  Don't EVER woof in a short
>series.  Billy Bates and Billy Hatcher might jump up and bite you.

I prefer Mickey Hatcher and Billy Hatcher.   Hatcher has got to be the
best clutch last name in baseball.

-- 
Warren Usui
aardvark@locus.com
uunet!lcc!aardvark

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: sjhodges@eos.ncsu.edu (STEVEN JAMES HODGES)
Subject: Re: PIRATES AGIAIN!!!
Originator: sjhodges@c00083-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: sjhodges@eos.ncsu.edu (STEVEN JAMES HODGES)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:37:46 GMT


	Well, I hate to disagree, but the Braves,I think, have the best chance
of winning the National League. Since they lost in the World Series last
year, they are more determined than ever to win it all this year.

	Braves: 1992 NL Champions and 1992 World Series Champions 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: colinm@prince.carleton.ca (Colin McFadyen)
Subject: FINALLY - Jays Do It!!
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 06:42:30 GMT

  T.O. finally did what was enivitable in the A.L. East..they won.
Congrats to Milwaukee, they certainly made it another year to remember.

  It wasn't without drama though.  Guzman pitched 8 shutout innings and
turned the ball over to Henke for the ninth.  Henke got the first batter
out on a grounder and then proceeded to load the bases for Rob Deer.
Henke walked in a Tiger run and Cito brought in Ward to get the final out.
Well Ward did it and the Jays celebrated at home in front of the home
crowd (as it should have been).

  Congrats T.O..  All the best against Oakland (they'll need it).

-- 
Colin McFadyen -- Carleton U. Computing and Communications Services
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA K1S 5B6                  
colinm@ccs.carleton.ca

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dfl@math.wayne.edu (David Frohardt-Lane)
Subject: Re: RC/MLV Study
Organization: Wayne State University Math Department, Detroit
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 17:56:53 GMT

In article <1992Oct4.170141.11358@leland.Stanford.EDU> claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:
>
>Not so fast.  I still think that MLV undervalues good hitters, especially ones
>who walk a lot and/or have a high OBP.  RC/Out might *overvalue* those players,
>but I don't think the books are closed on this one yet.

I think that RC/Out most certainly does overvalue walks for good
players, and probably undervalues them for bad players.  

RC/27 predicts how many runs a team of that player would score per game.
Walks would be more valuable in a lineup of 9 Frank Thomas's than they
would be in a lineup of 9 Scott Livingstone's, because Thomas is better
at driving in runners than Livingstone.  But in real life, a walk from
Livingstone is just as valuable as one from Thomas.

--
David Frohardt-Lane   dfl@math.wayne.edu 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Go Tigers, Lions, Pistons, Red Wings and Wolverines !!!!!!!!!!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Date: Sunday, 27 Sep 1992 22:55:49 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: 1904 world series, or lack thereof

i've been continuing playing with my franklin baseball encyclopedia.  one
of the features that it has is the result of all the world series.  so i
go to the first world series, 1903, and it says, "RED SOX (AL) DEFEATED
PIRATES (NL), 5-3".  i then hit the "next" key to bring it to 1904, and
it says, "GIANTS (NL) REFUSED TO PLAY RED SOX (NL)".

what's the scoop?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim)
Subject: 5 pairs of brothers
Organization: Fordham University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Distribution: usa
Keywords:  Dodgers
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 14:11:00 GMT
X-Posted-From: mary.fordham.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

With the appearance of Pedro Martinez pitching for the tragic 1992 Dodgers, 
there have now been five pairs of brothers on the team simultaneously in 
Dodger history:

Pedro & Ramon Martinez (1992-?)
Dave & Steve Sax (1982-83)
Larry & Norm Sherry (1959-62)
Lloyd & Paul Waner (1944)
Mack & Zack Wheat (1915-19)

Has any other team had six or more pairs?  
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kirsch@staff.tc.umn.edu (Dave Heart Condition Kirsch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Date: 2 Oct 92 14:15:19 GMT
Organization: Daves R Us (Irkutsk division)

In article <48202@shamash.cdc.com> jblixt@mips.COM (jon 'sells vowels in his
name' blixt) writes:
>First of all, I'm not saying Barry Bonds choked.

  OK, there I agree. 

>Is there such a thing called choking and does it occur?

  Here I also agree. There's no doubt choking occurs, but it's hard for Joe
'Couch Potato' Critic (JCPC) to play amateur pop psychologist and get things
right. We all want to believe that we know exactly what's going on in that
player's head, but we can't know for sure. For example, I'm pretty confident
that Manny Lee went into vapor-lock when Alan Trammell's "hit" went through
his legs at the end of the '87 season. In fairness to Manny, though, maybe he
just made a physical error and was playing for a hop that was never to be. 
We can label a player a 'choker' all we want, but it's pretty tough to prove.
The media will do it cuz it helps ratings/to sell papers. Labeling a whole
team 'chokers' is pretty far-fetched, considering you're talking about 25
guys as a whole, some who'll do well and some who won't do so well. Instead 
of pointing fingers, suck it up and get on with your life.

  Warning: Subjective SDCN diatribe follows. 

  I've been the goat several times in sporting events and the hero just as
many times. C'est la vie (or, was that Menage-a-Lundy?) Shit happens. For me,
the difference between 'success' and 'failure' usually came down to my
concentration level and how 'focused' I was. When I'd get too tense and get
out of my rhythm, or get too relaxed and too lackadaisical, the results
usually weren't too great. When I could find that happy medium and get 'in a 
zone', I usually did great. I couldn't tell you ahead of time which it was
going to be, but over time I've learned to control it better and better. I
suspect MLB players have been through this *so* much that for all of them 
it's just a matter of degree; they're all extremely focused, some are just
more focused than others. 

  There are times I'd swear that I can see so much of the whites in players'
eyes that it's like a deer being flashed by headlights (or Noel Steere
watching 'Sorority Babes in Heat'), but even then it doesn't mean they can't 
mean they can't succeed. It probably *does* mean they're nervous as hell.
I've succeeded in many of those situations in the past; if you can get that
nervous energy to work for you in a positive way (adrenaline), you're one
step ahead of the other guy. I'd rather be nervous with the adrenaline
flowing than relaxed with a resting pulse of 40. 
 
  Okay, enough parenthetical stuff. Back to the blood and guts SDCN wars. 

-- 
Dave Hung Like a Jim Acker Slider Kirsch            kirsch@epx.cis.umn.edu 
"Blue Jays - break my heart again in '92"    Roberto Hernandez throws peas  
"I believe virtually everything I read, and I think that is what makes me
   MORE of a selective human" - Joe Average, baseball fan and media puppet
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones)
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 23:18:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Corp. Kingston NY

In article <1992Sep25.133404.15999@meaddata.com> brad@meaddata.com (Brad Craig) writes:
>As was said in some other follow-ups to this post RoY is not
>necessarily the mostvaluable player to a team. I looked at the stats
>for both Lofton and Listach ...
>
>As of Baseball Weekly, Sept 23.
>
>		BA  OBA SA  OB+S G   AB  R  H   2B 3B HR RBI BB SO  SB CS
>Lofton		284 361 364 725  136 536 90 152 12 8  5  37  63 46  60 12
>Listach	302 361 366 727  137 533 89 161 19 6  1  45  49 109 53 15
>
>        GS  INN  PO  A   E  DP PCT RNG
>Lofton  130 1169 396 12  7  2  983 3.14
>Listach 133 1170 218 406 23 83 964 4.80
>
>Pretty even excpet for two, strike outs and errors. Lofton has only
>struck out 46 times as opposed to 109 times for Listach. Listach has

Of course, .727 OPS is 75 points above average for shortstops, while .727 is
.725 is 40 points above average for center fielders. That's a better measure
of how "even" they are. I do like Lofton's walk rate a lot better than
Listach's, and ow! those K's.

>23 erros to Loftons 7. I understand that Listach is a SS while Lofton
>is an OF so chances for errors might be greater in the infield. The

Might be? The latest McWeekly I have at work is from June, but it
shows five other shortstops with fewer errors than Listach, and his range
factor was dead-on average. Lofton, on the other hand, was the only
centerfielder with more than two errors (3). His range factor was above
average, though. The chances for errors are *much* greater at SS than
anywhere in the OF. Both appear to be slightly better than average players
at difficult defensive positions. Lofton appears to have better range,
Listach plays a slightly harder position. Call it a wash.

When you take position into account (i.e., compare both of them to an
average player at that position), it becomes pretty clear that Listach is
having a better year. I'd vote for him. On the other hand, if I were a GM I
think I'd rather have Lofton. Why? Lofton's numbers are more in line with
what you might expect from his minor league numbers. If I were a betting
man, I'd bet that Lofton will have another good year next year and that
Listach will fall victim to the "sophomore jinx" (i.e., settle back to his
real level of play).

   Mike Jones  |  AIX/ESA Development  |  mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com

Is he a dot, or is he a speck?
When he goes in the water does he get wet?
Or does the water get him instead?
Nobody knows, Particle Man.
	- They Might Be Giants
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:28:41 GMT

In article <1ack3lINNlbc@uwm.edu> paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger) writes:
>   
>   Yeah, that is what I'm saying (almost, but they have too much talent
>   to be that bad). The Brewers, as a team are hitting .24 points higher
>   than the Sox. You can attribute at least .15 of those points to the
>   running game. 

So take away those 15 points.  The Brewers *still* have a better OPS.
Not to mention better defense and better pitching.  To me, that equals
"better team".

>   I'm not talking out of my ass. Although a 20 game difference might be
>   a stretch, 15 definitely would not be.  

Even allowing that beating out infield singles is part of the "running
game", I still only see 80 extra hits (for a .015 difference in BA)
and ~100 extra net on the SB-2CS.  Comes to maybe 70 extra runs, or
about 7 extra games.

I'll give you 10 if you push.  But 20 is *way* off.

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
From: lisa@askinc.ASK.COM (Lisa Gunn)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: ALCS games 3,4,5 tickets available
Date: 5 Oct 92 22:23:30 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: ASK Computer Systems, Inc.


     In Oakland --obviously-- a pair available for each game
     Seat locations vary
     $  open
  
     If interested and would like more info (or to make an
     offer ;->) call 408-947-0369 eves or respond via e-mail
     to this account.

     thanks
Date: Monday, 5 Oct 1992 20:42:07 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: the wet dreams of a yankee fan...

yanks in '93, babe.  all the way.

dave cone, brien taylor, sam militelo, sounds like a pretty awesome top
three.  wickman might not be too bad either, and sanderson is an adequate
fifth.

the outfield cranks.  roberto kelly, danny tartabull, bernie williams,
gerald williams... (one of 'em dh, obviously).

jt snow and mattingly each getting some time at first.

bam bam at third.  hopefully the management will realize that charlie hayes
just plain bites.

nokes catching... maybe he'll have a decent year.

whoever out of {velarde,gallego,stankiewicz,pat kelly) is left after the
expansion draft doing that middle infield thang... not the best, by far,
but adequate, with the rest of the bats in the lineup.

showalter seems to be a fairly intelligent manager.  actually platoons, and
uses players on hot streaks where they will produce (e.g. stankiewicz
towards the beginning of the year, james in the middle of the year, and
velarde towards the end of the year).

and of course, frank howard is by far the coolest hitting coach imaginable.
i don't know how good he is at his job, but the guy is just so cool.

yanks in five over whatever nl team shows up at the world series.



Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: RC/27 for LFs
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 07:15:15 GMT

				RC/27	VALUE
Barry Bonds, Pittsburgh		12.66	97.1
Rickey Henderson, Oakland	8.08	41.8	; notice difference
Shane Mack, Minnesota		7.43	48.5
Brady Anderson, Baltimore	6.81	43.6
Bip Roberts, Cincinnati		6.74	35.2
Tim Raines, Chicago (AL)	6.45	33.2
Candy Maldonado, Toronto	6.22	26.9
Bernard Gilkey, St. Louis	6.10	19.3
Kevin McReynolds, Kansas City	6.09	21.1
Kevin Mitchell, Seattle		5.85	17.1
Moises Alou, Montreal		5.65	13.2	; Karros = 7.4
Kevin Reimer, Texas		5.28	15.7
Mel Hall, New York (AL)		5.12	15.3
AVERAGE				5.07
Ron Gant, Atlanta		5.04	13.8
Kevin Bass, New York (NL)	4.75	7.0
Luis Polonia, California	4.49	6.3
Mariano Duncan, Philadelphia	4.44	5.4
Eric Davis, Los Angeles		4.35	2.1
Jerald Clark, San Diego		4.30	2.8
Derrick May, Chicago (NL)	4.30	2.0
Luis Gonzalez, Houston		4.22	1.4
Greg Vaughn, Milwaukee		4.17	1.3
Dan Gladden, Detroit		4.11	0.5	; so yes, he's worth something
Chris James, San Francisco	4.02	-0.3
Billy Hatcher, Boston		3.97	-1.0
Mark Carreon, Detroit		3.47	-4.9

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
From: psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: PIRATES AGIAIN!!!
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:41:28 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Sep29.120100.22773@pdn.paradyne.com> oxley@pdn.paradyne.com (Don Oxley) writes:
>>CLINCHED 3rd STRAIGHT !!!!
>>
>>ANY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!
>>
>
>Yeah.  How come they can't win the NL Championship?

That's an easy one!  Those other teams had Bobby Bonilla taking up space
in the outfield and wasting a spot in the order.  Now that he's taking his
rightfully earned lumps in New York the Pirates will murdalate the Braves. 

>
>Sorry, couldn't resist!!!!  :-)  

Neither could I 8^)

PSG
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: NL ROY: More Fuel for Debate
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:01:42 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Sep30.090431.28508@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
> In article <1992Sep30.023825.1269@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>>
>>Well, I would consider Bonds worth 5/9ths a run a game more than
>>Pendleton (basically just subtract the higher RC/27 from the lower,
>>divide by 9 (unless Bonds can take up 2 batting slots :-)) and that
>>will be the player's *rough* advantage in runs/game).
> 
> If this is what the RC/27 numbers read, it is laughable!  Bonds is good,
> but he's not *that* good.

	Well, just for curiosity's sake, I took the latest RC/27 posts, and
figured a 'composite' RC/27 for the Astros listed (I know, should have done it
using the Pirates or Braves...). Basically, I divided each RC/27 by nine, then
added them to get a 'team total', which ended up at 3.86 (which excludes 
pitchers and bench players, which shouldn't add too much (well, except that
Casey or Raffy probably has better RC/27's than Cedeno...). Considering the 
Astros generally below-average offense, this number sounds about right for 
them. 

Brandon Cope

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: the mother of all statistical analyses.
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 14:03:46 GMT

In article <92276.190200RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>yeah gaj, you know it, i'm rolling in the big bucks.  anyway, does anyone
>else have them for a more modest price?

Let's see-- I *think* you're talking about on-line scoresheets.  

Of course, if you'd include a bit of the article you were responding to,
instead of making us all try to remember, it would help get you your
answers.  

But no matter -- if it *is* on-line scoresheets you want, Project Score-
Sheet is what you want.  Ask Sherri Nichols about it; she works with them.

Roger
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Lead off walks....
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:19:43 GMT

In article <lcifu4INNh9c@cronkite> andy@misha.Central.Sun.COM writes:
>Watching the Sox/Twins game last night,  Hawk & Wimpy (the Sox Commentators/homers)
>made a comment that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than say a leadoff
>hit. Probably not as often as a leadoff homerun... :-)
>
>I assume that their comment was statistically baseless,  except for the 
>inning where the leadoff walk happend to score in this game, however,
>does a stat hound out in net.land have any info on this ?  

Sherri posted something on this a few months ago.  It compared leadoff
walks to leadoff singles, and found a slight difference in the third
decimal place.  In other words, more mediocy.

Roger

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: NL ROY: More Fuel for Debate
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 19:37:10 GMT

In article <6479@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:
>
>Lineups, yes.  People, no.  If 9 Barry Bondses would score 12 runs per game,
>and 9 Terry Pendletons would score 7 runs per game, is Barry Bonds worth 5
>extra runs per game over Pendleton?  Of course not; Bonds's team doesn't even
>score 5 runs per game.  RC/27 multiplies Bonds's offensive advantage times
>itself, 9 times over.  What does that say about actual player values to real
>teams?  Nothing.  It is, at best, an index for ranking players by how much you
>might want to build an offense around them.

But where do I claim that Bonds is worth 5 runs a game over Pendleton?
Nowhere.  I claim that Bonds is worth 5 runs more to his team if both he
and Pendleton make 27 outs.

>MLV only uses BA, OBP, SLG, and PA.  Hardly rocket science.  Frankly, it's
>more accessible than the later versions of RC, given that you have to code
>both of them up at some point.

Hmmm.  These are the major problems with MLV, as I see it:

1.	(This is from my impression; if this is incorrect, please correct it.)
	Since you use OBP and SLG, MLV undervalues walks, since walks *do*
	move runners sometimes.

2.	MLV does not account for the effects of the running game or for a
	player who grounds into double-plays a lot.

3.	Since you use league averages to derive MLV's, it gives no indication
	of how much value a below average player might have.

4.	As a side effect, MLV is not well adapted to positional adjustments.
	You rectified this somewhat, by using singular positions for players,
	but still does not account for multi-positional players, such as
	Tony Phillips or even Mickey Tettleton, whose value will be overly
	high according to your adjusted MLV, since he spent a significant
	portion of the season as a DH.

5.	You use MLV/game as a rate of production, and this severely
	undervalues bench players.  Mike Sharperson, for example, might get
	only a plate appearance a game.  But he gets punished for playing in
	that game.

>All right, look at Bonds and Pendleton, then.  The point stands.  In fact,
>the point stands for any two players you care to name.  

The point does *not* stand because you claimed something that I never
claimed.
>
>>And I don't
>>think that MLV will be able to derive the Thomas effect in your example
>>correctly, either.
>
>Wanna bet?  (Why don't you think so?)

Show your work.

"MLV is a perfect stat." - John Stuart Mill

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball