HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: psycho@brtpa25.bnr.ca (Paul Jezioranski)
Subject: Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Reply-To: psycho@brtpa25.bnr.ca (Paul Jezioranski)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 1992 16:18:08 GMT

Three anti-Fielders pummeling me at one time =8^) I'll respond to Ted,
since he's the guy I've been dealing with most....

In article <1992Sep2.135350.13730@midway.uchicago.edu>,
thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
> In article <1992Sep02.131254.23869@brtph560.bnr.ca>
psycho@brtpa25.bnr.ca (Paul Jezioranski) writes: 
> >
> >	1) You indicate each performers RBI vs. RISP, but there's no 
> >	   quantification of the pitching quality. How do I know that the
> >	   avg. ERA of the pitchers Fielder faced in these situations wasn't
> >	   a half point lower than those Canseco faced.
> 
> How do we know it's not a half point higher?  

	Exactly my point; we dont know, and it's pertinent info. We can't 
	just "assume" the ERA difference is negligible like one fellow suggested
	anymore than we can conclude that with 700 ML ball players, the 
	difference between seventh best and best is negligible.

> And if you start adding
> run-scoring ability in with run-driving-in ability, the number is much larger
> than seven.  And if you start adding in defensive ability, the number is
> larger yet. 

	You're right about defense and running ability, but I was solely 
	arguing RBI ability.

> >	2) You've got to be in the lineup to get RBIs. Fielder is in more often
> >	   than Canseco.
> 
> But less often than Ripken.  And this season, Fielder's hardly been a model
> of durability.

	True, but again, who's currently leading in RBIs? Unless my Sunday
	paper had a typo, Fielder was the only ML player currently with more
	than 100 RBI.

> >
> >	3) Maybe six teams had better RBI men than the Tigers, but they have 
> >	   led the league in runs scored the past two or three years. That's
> >	   what really counts.
> >
> 
> But that's as much because of Whitaker, Phillips, and Tettleton (all better
> players than Fielder).  And the difference between Detroit's home stadium
> and Oakland's -- Oakland scored more runs on the road last year than did
> the Tigers.  As did Milwaukee and Texas.

	I think you're dreaming if you think any of those three players could
	outperform Fielder at the plate; even with three Rickey Hendersons
	batting in front of them. 

	The point about Tiger Stadium is good and true. Do you have the stats
	on opponents' runs scored at Tiger Stadium?

> 
> It's winning games that counts -- and in terms of winning games, 
> Fielder wasn't even the most valuable player on his team, much less the AL.

	I disagree, but I guess that's axiomatic. Anyway, one other person 
	mentioned that the Tigers did not lead the league in runs last year.
	The Tigers currently lead the AL in runs scored, as they did in 1991
	I'm not sure about 1990. Perhaps someone could post the numbers??


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Jezioranski			|	What, me worry??
psycho@bnr.ca				|
Bell-Northern Research, Inc. RTP, NC	|
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: CY, MVP, ROY
Keywords: eat more moose
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:01:28 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake fester@island.COM (Mike Fester):

>In article <1992Aug31.144544.6526@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:

>>  Frank isn't recognized by the writers - who figure anyone who walks that
>>  much must be hurting his team by not hitting HR's instead!!
>
>Actually, I believe the writers would recognize him if his team was in the
>pennant chase, a point you made just above.

I'm not sure; I keep hearing weird comments like "Lance Johnson is probably
this team's MVP this year" about the ChiSox.

I would moderate the claim about Thomas and the media, though.  I don't think
they go so far as to say that all those walks are *hurting* the team (although
Boston writers did say that about Ted Williams, frequently).  It's more a
question of Frank not having the raw HR and RBI totals to make the mediots
sit up and take notice.

>Nor do you appear to pay much attention to the voting. Schmidt, Williams,
>Gehrig, Ruth, Foxx, Greenberg, Allen, Killebrew, R Henderson, Murphy, Morgan,
>Mays, etc, are all examples of people who do/did well in the MVP voting and
>had a tendency to get a lot of walks. Doesn't appear to be any such 
>"high BB total - no MVP recognition" connection. 

But almost all of these are examples of people who were actually better than
the mediots realized.  They simply *also* had dominating raw totals in a few
of the glamor categories (HR, RBI, SB, AVG).  It's impossible not to notice 
leading the league in HR while batting .300 and driving in 120, or stealing
50 bases, etc.

Look at the players who got very little respect:  Jimmy Wynn, Toby Harrah,
Bobby Grich, Reggie Smith...

>I believe Bonds also did
>all right in both departments, and Boggs, while he never won an award, is
>usually among the top vote-getters. 

Exactly.  Boggs in '87 had about as dominating a season as you can have, and
yet didn't win.


-- 
      David M. Tate      | From my dugout sleep I fell into the Game
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | And I crouched in the circle while my insides froze
 Randall 'Chico' Jarrell | One out from death, one hit from dreamt-of glory
"Death of a Pinch Hitter"| I woke to 'Strike One!' and the nightmare sliders...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: Perry@mte.ncsu.edu (Bill Perry)
Subject: Re: Blue Jay Callups
Organization: Mat. Sci. & Eng., NCSU
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:58:48 GMT

In article <BtwEE1.7Ms@cs.dal.ca> niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma) writes:
>  The Jays have called up Turner Ward (OF), Al Leiter (LHP) and Eddie Zosky
>from their farm club in Syracuse. What a boring set of callups!
>
>					Gord Niguma
>					(fav player : John Olerud)
>
>
	Yea, but Leiter finally made it up!  Gosh, and they only traded for him 3-4
years ago.  Does anybody know if this guy will ever ammount to any good? 
Because the Jays sure could have used Jesse Barfield the last few years.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu (Robert Lopez)
Subject: CY, MVP, ROY
Keywords: eat more moose
Organization: The Hosequarium South
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:39:40 GMT


I see the following still in the race...comments/suggestions
welcomed.   go flame someone else.

American League
---------------

Cy Young
1. Strong candidates: McDowell, Clemens, Morris(?!?), Eck
2. Fading: Brown, Mussina
3. Next Year: Nagy, Appier
***Note: What's up with Melido Perez this year?  Too bad the Yanks
         are so dismal.
 
MVP
I need suggestions here.  I'm personally gonna stick with Eck.
McGwire was falling off, then got hurt.

ROY
1. Strong: Listach, Lofton
2. Fading: Fleming
3. Next Year: now that wouldn't make any sense, would it?

National League
---------------

Cy Young
1. Tom Glavine
2. That's it

MVP
1. Strong: Sheffield, McGriff
2. Dark Horses (asbestos suit time): Bonds, Pendleton
3. Next Year: Daulton.  The Phillies can be just as crappy without him.

ROY
Help again...Karros is a candidate.  There are others, but I can't
seem to pull names right now.  Cianfrocco is fading/has faded.

I'm interested in hearing people opine away.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
Robert E. L\'{o}pez       |       Internet:
Texas LoanSTAR Program    |       rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu
The Hosequarium South     |       rlopez@cs.tamu.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
                 Texas A&M University 
                   boohoo.onyou.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: curve@netcom.com (My Name is Your Fate)
Subject: Re: Blockbuster trade
Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 21:35:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Keywords: Canseco, Sierra, Witt, Russel

In article <> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <> subhas@ring7.rutgers.edu (Subhasish Roy Choudhury) writes:
>I've been pondering this one for the last half hour.  First, Sierra
>and Russell are both free agents.  Canseco isn't a free agent, but he
>is in the middle of a *very* hefty contract.  Or is it so big in
>today's market?  How much is he getting?  I don't think it is quite $5
>million per year.  How long is he signed for?

I think he's getting $5mil on the nose?  In any case, Sierra was
wanting 5 mil per year, so no real change in Texas' payroll.  From
what I hear tho, Canseco may request to be traded after this season
(dunno how that's supposed to work), so it's almost a trade of
free agents...

>Texas gives up two free agents and a flaky pitcher for a superstar
>player at a reasonable salary.  I think they made a good deal.
>They'll have to put up with Canseco's antics, but that's a small price
>to pay for his popularity and his bat.

Apparently they were getting tired of Sierra's antics, so big change
there either...

>But what will Oakland look like next year?  Their free agents include
>Ruben Sierra, Mike Moore, Dave Stewart, Jeff Russell, Mark McGwire,
>Ron Darling, Terry Steinbach, Harold Baines, Rick Honeycutt, Gene
>Nelson, Willie Wilson, Kelly Downs, Carney Lansford, Randy Ready,
>Jamie Quirk, and Rich Gossage.
>
>That's 16 players from the 25 man roster.  Two thirds of the team!
>It'll be a fun winter in Oakland!

Going from 14 to 16 free agents is not that big a jump.  Actually, I
figure there's no way they'll resign Russell, so from 14 to 15.  Also,
I figure the following players won't be back: Gossage, Downs, Nelson,
and (hopefully) Honeycutt.  So we're only talking 11 free agents
they'll probably want to deal with it (maybe 10, Ready being a question
mark), with only three of them really in a position to demand huge
contracts: McGwire, Sierra, and perhaps Steinbach.

At the beginning of the season, Lansford said (referring to the number
of free agents) that Oakland was looking at the end of an era.  With
this trade, it looks like Carney's statement has come true, though perhaps
not quite in the way he was thinking of.


>Cheers,
>-Valentine


Curve@netcom.com	|  What is the difference between apathy and ignorance?
			|  I don't know, and I don't care!

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tjs@earth.wustl.edu (tom sullivan)
Subject: Re: Clearing Waivers
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis MO
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:36:20 GMT

In article <30AUG199218124058@oppy.mit.edu> kettler@oppy.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.) writes:
>In article <BttCF0.8qo@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, dwarner@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (david j w writes...
>>In article <la25c0INN9p2@mizar.usc.edu> pcaster@mizar.usc.edu (Dodger) writes:
>>>Can someone please answer this question?
>>>
>>>How is it possible that Cone cleared waivers when just two
>>>weeks ago, Bobby Ojeda DID NOT clear waivers.
>>>

....some stuff deleted in here....
>
>As for Cone, I remember hearing that when waivers was placed on Cone, Guzman 
>was still healthy. Hence, the Brewers GM and the Orioles GM had no reason to 
>believe that Gillick would pull off that deal. Also, they were surprised that 
>Minnesota didn't claim Cone since the A's could also have traded for him as 
>easily as the Blue Jays did.
>


Yesterday morning on KMOX, they asked Cardinal GM Dal Maxvill about
players clearing waivers. Dal said that the Cardinals had waivers on
all of the 25 active players and received them around July 29th. He
indicated that other teams had received waivers on almost all of their
players and only 3 or 4 players had been claimed. Those that were
claimed were rumored to be involved in trades. Seems to me that
clearing waivers is really pretty easy. Seems to me that a contender
would want to claim any of Ozzie Smith, Bob Tewksbury, or Tom
Pagnozzi, to name a few of our players.


tom


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hymowitz@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Hymie!)
Subject: Re: Home Run Rule: Lind's Hit in Dodger-Pirate Game
Organization: Creative Sensualities dept, Jacquie's House of Underwear
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 20:47:27 GMT

thornley@nano.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:
>In article <1992Aug25.235451.823702@locus.com> aardvark@locus.com (Warren Usui) writes:
>>What would be the ruling if the outfielder intentionally knocked the ball
>>out of the park?  For example, let's say I'm playing right field and there
>>is a guy on first.  Someone hits a line drive over my head that bounces up
>>against the wall.  Can I hold the runner at first to third by throwing
>>the ball in the stands?  I'm sure that there has got to be some ruling
>>for this or else it would happen more often.

>The difference between "deflected" and "thrown" is important here; if
>everybody has advanced a base when the ball is thrown into the stands,
>everybody gets two bases from where they were at the time of the throw,
>while they get two bases from their starting base if the ball is deflected.

if the ump judges the ball to be intentionally thrown into the field,
could this be judged as interference?  in this case, a runner from first,
especially a fast one, could be awarded home plate for the interference.

just a thought...

--hymie
hymowitz@cs.jhu.edu                                         hymie@jhuvms.bitnet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't do what ten people tell me to do.  So I guess I'll remain the same.
--Otis Redding
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Canseco in postseason
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:04:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.37691

In article <1992Sep4.193816.7192@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>, gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gidi Avrahami) writes:
> kthompso@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Kevin Thompson) writes:
> >[...] Canseco has absolutely sucked
> >in two of the 3 World Series he's played in -- and the 3rd one doesn't count,
> >it was against Giants pitching :).  
> 
> Yes -- but no more than the rest of the A's.  Canseco hit a grand slam
> against the Dodgers in 88 (off the white-hot Hershiser, I believe?)


t'was Belcher..  


> >Seriously, remember how bad he was
> >against the Dodgers in '88?  One HR in game 1 or 2, then *nothing*.  I think
> >he's .065 or something for the '88 and '90 series combined.  
> 
> >[...]  people do seem to forget how much Canseco sucked in his World
> >Series career (sorry, I don't remember ALCS stats).


I wouldn't hold those WS stats against Canseco. Almost every Oakland
player were responsible for those bad WS performances. Oak ran into
some great pitching with LA and Cincy. I would rather have a guy
played well all year and sucked in the WS as opposed to a Mark Lemke
anyday.




_______________________________________________________
| Prashanth                    |                      |
| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@raman.ucsd.edu |
#######################################################
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hymowitz@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Hymie!)
Subject: Re: Sold out???
Organization: Creative Sensualities dept, Jacquie's House of Underwear
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 05:53:49 GMT

gt4925b@prism.gatech.EDU (Jason Woodward) writes:
>In <2227@h.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu> Gerry Hobbs writes:
>
> >The Braves announced that Tuesday's game was not sold out after
> >XX consecutive sell outs. On a couple occassions the announcers have
> >gone to great pains to explain that the game really was sold out
> >even though 33,000 or so showed up, citing inclement weather as
[...]
> >It is easy to believe the Braves are playing a little game here.
> >Make everyone think that tickets are hard to get so they'll buy them
> >up. Has anyone been to one of the "sell outs" and purchased a ticket
> >right before the game?
>
> Notice that the "paid attendance" is always announced.  The Braves
>have a program with Atlanta area schools for straight A students
>to attend games - free.  Sometimes this is 4000-5000 students at
>a game.  

isn't that the other leagus?

i mean, the nl reports attendance based on turnstile clicks, while the
al reports paid-for tickets.  the phrase 'paid attendance' is
just sorta used.

>downs on scalping (even selling for face value or less will earn
>you a trip to jail).  No-shows don't count in the paid attendance.

that's pretty strict.  is that even legal?

>The stadium holds ~52000.  Subtract 4000 students, 4000 no-shows,
>and a couple of thousand more promotional "free" tickets.  Now
>the low 40's could be a sellout.
>
>I've been to several sellouts this year and seen people purchasing
>tickets - from scalpers for 4 to 10 times the face value.  If any
>tickets were available at the box office, people wouldn't pay
>scalpers the high prices.

and [in the case of the orioles] if large companies werent' buying
tickets en masse for the *express* *purpose* of scalping them,
they'd be available at the box office.  a lot of these places work
out of metro-(snicker)-area post office boxes, since baltimore city
is the only municipality in maryland to outlaw scalping.

--hymie
hymowitz@cs.jhu.edu                                         hymie@jhuvms.bitnet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Life is just the sum total of the mail we receive, plus about a third of
the news we read.
--me, on a day when the newsfeed was down and i received no mail
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu (Robert Lopez)
Subject: Re: roy NL
Keywords: eat more moose knuckles
Organization: The Hosequarium South
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:47:16 GMT

In article <4edU0c30BwxdAFpM4B@transarc.com>, Ken_Ziolkowski@transarc.com writes:
|> 
|>   NL Rookie of the Year?
|> 
|>   How 'bout Tim Wakefield of the Pirates?
|> 
|>   He won last night and is now 5-1, with a
|> 2.03 ERA in, I think, 7 starts.
|> 

nope.  un unh.  no way.  A pitcher isn't going to get it unless there
aren't any dominant, popular, everyday guys.  There are.  Besides,
Wakefield didn't come up until pretty late.  ROY is for the year, not
for the second half.

I still like Karros.  then Sanders.  then Alou.

That other Alou oughta get MOY, even though he hasn't been there
the full season, though.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
Robert E. L\'{o}pez       |       Internet:
Texas LoanSTAR Program    |       rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu
The Hosequarium South     |       rlopez@cs.tamu.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
                 Texas A&M University 
                   boohoo.onyou.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
From: kettler@mitme5.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: NL Schedule 1993
Date: 2 Sep 92 22:07:00 GMT
Organization: MIT Lab for Nuclear Science
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <Btypvy.EJt@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, rstimets@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
 (robert and writes...
>This is awful.  How can it be that the Chicago Cubs can bully the rest of
>the league for its own interests, despite the interests of all the other teams?
>For the longest time now I've felt realignment was the right thing to do, 
>but because it would seem to be an Inconvenience to Cub fans to have to stay
>up an extra hour 8 times a year to watch the team, it won't happen.
>Now these same guys are trying to stir up the pot to hopefully get Vincent
>to resign, and with luck get someone who won't try to take an active stance
>in realignment.  To this I applaud Vincent for saying he has no intention
>of resigning.
> 
This is somewhat harsh. After all, I never heard a consensus taken as to what 
Cubs fans would think about the move. It was the Tribune which was concerned 
that millions they rake in televising Cubs games on WGN next year would 
not be as great as the tens of millions they get this year since there would be 
such a drastic increase in the number of games on the west coast. d::-) 

In fact, the average Cubs fan might actually welcome the move since then it 
would make it much easier for the team to win a division since Atlanta, 
Cincinnati, Pittsburgh and Montreal which are the best teams in the NL would be 
in the same division while Chicago would only have to fight St. Louis and San 
Diego for an NL West title. Consequently, the Cubs as a team might then have a 
better chance of finally making it to a World Series since they would not have 
to worry about Steve Garvey, who is retired, or Will Clark, who would be in the 
same division that the Cubs won.

					Sincerely yours,

					Thomas R. Kettler "Expos Fanatic"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: bk713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Kimon Zachary)
Subject: Ron Gant: What the hell is wrong?
Reply-To: bk713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Kimon Zachary)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 06:24:38 GMT



Any information concerning the pathetic play of Mr. Ron Gant would be
greatly appreciated.

Does he stand to lose playing time to Sanders/Nixon (especially since the
Braves want Sanders to stay)?

Is he hurt?

He is on my fantasy league team and I am considering unloading him.

e-mail replies preferred.  Thanks.

bk713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu

-- 
Kimon Zachary			"I stand by all the misstatements that
JHU School of Med.			I've made." --Dan Quayle
Baltimore, MD		
Sign seen at the Republican Convention: Reagan '96
From: hambric@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Stephen Hambric)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Regarding the proposed Fielder FAQ
Date: 3 Sep 92 12:00:58 GMT
Reply-To: hambric@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Stephen Hambric)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.sport.baseball, kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee") writes:

->>We non-statheads are the Ying to your Yang.  Without our (allegedly)
->>outrageous and statistically incorrect observations, the discussions
->>in this newsgroup would be a lot less lively.

->Hey, Steve, remind me to explain to you the concept of a "joke" sometime.

Once you figure it out for yourself, please do.  ;-)

Steve Hambric (hambric@oasys.dt.navy.mil)