HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Least Valuable Players (career)
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:41:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: YaleVM.167C4F8BB.CAVGEOE
Organization: Yale University

In article <204627@unix.cis.pitt.edu>
dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:
 
>
>Everyone loves to argue about MVP's, but I want to introduce a new concept:
>the LVP.  The LVP is the player who costs your team the most just by being
>in the lineup.  In order to avoid confusion (given that the very worst
>players never make it to the majors at all), we'll make this a cumulative
>stat, so that a true LVP is LVP by virtue of being pathetic for long periods
>of time.
>
>
>In _Total_Baseball_, Thorn and Palmer attempt to measure hitting, fielding,
>and baserunning in terms of runs above/below average for the team.  There is
>some question as to exactly how accurate the defensive numbers are (not very,
>is the consensus), but the offense and baserunning aren't too bad, and they'll
>do as a basis for gross comparison.
>
>Any guesses on The Champion?
>
     I thought T&P measured runs above/below the league average, not the
team average, but in any case...
     No flame intended, but I think it's nasty and misleading to determine
the LVP like this.  As Bill James has pointed out, if a player weren't the
best a team had available, the team wouldn't play him for very long.  The
guys on your list (deleted here) were certainly the best available to their
teams for a significant period of time -- I know Atlanta didn't have a SS
better than Ramirez in the early 80s.  So why blast them as "career LVPs"
because they were consistently below *league* average -- if they were
better than replacement value they had to be valuable to their teams.
Maybe a guy like Coleman would qualify because his stats fool his teams
as to his value, but still he's probably better than replacement value,
especially if he batted lower in the order.
     On a related note, anyone have a good idea on how to determine
replacement value?  Should it be general or team-specific?  Should it
depend on position (I would think so)?  As always, thoughts appreciated.
 
Jeff Caveney
From: durian3660@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mets Romp in '92 laffer
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:00:56 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Apr7.030451.1@wharton.upenn.edu>, chen70@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
> The NL East is all but clinched by the NY Mets.  They are so dominating
> that they will clinch the division by the All-Star Break-which won't even be
> a break for a lot of them, because they will all be playing in the  All
> Star game. STANDINGS  ARE AS FOLLOWS:
> STATISTICAL ACCURACY WITHIN 2 GAMES.
> METS  80-8*
> phils 30-58*  * Asterisk denotes pending joint action lawsuit against the Mets
> cards 29-59*    by other NL East teams for possible violation of Sherman
> expos 20-68*    Anti-trust statute Section 2.1 "No organization may act to
> bucs  15-73*    gain monopolistic control of the relevant player market"
> cubs  14-74*
>               ** Houston Astros voluntarily reclassify organization as AAA
> team after May series with Mets
> Signed:Rocco Stiffredi and A squared.

Rocco, 
    Wake up you were just having one of those Met fans always have.  Too bad it
couldn't be real.  As for the record of the Met team that isn't either hurt or
in jail at the end of the season, well I will just say "Hey maybe next year"
Well I think the Cardinals took care of Saberhagen's chance at the Cy Young in
the two innings he started on Tues.  What's his ERA now, well around 40.
Keep hoping though, you will finish better than the Cubs and Phillies.
                                                
                                               Cards in '92
                                                Tom Durian
                                                durian3660@iscsvax.uni.edu
From: p_emond@pavo.concordia.ca (Patrick Emond)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: expos champs?
Date: 7 Apr 92 23:25:00 GMT

Organization: Concordia University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

 The expos are the sleeper team in the East for sure. Philly is out of it, too    
 many question marks. St. Louis--Have fun with Galarraga and his 160+ Ks.    
 If the Cubs get some solid pitching (not a new Sutcliffe, but something close),  
 they could take it with their lineup. The Mets--Pitching, definitely. Lineup's 
 been stronger. Chemistry-always a problem at Shea. Bucs without Bonilla are      
 still strong.
       The Expos--Calderon,Grissom and Walker are a solid defensive OF
 and should combine for 60 HR and 120 steals easily, Walker on the verge of big
 bucks if he puts up 1991 post-break stats. The infield is a sieve defensively
  I'll admit, but Wallach is due for  a .300-25-90 year, Owen is solid if dull,
  Deshields should improve from last year, and Barberie (BUY HIM NOW in your  
  Rotisserie) has been hot since last spring. Carter and Fletcher are a fair    
 pair of catchers, if the Kid's knees can handle 80 games. The starters could
 surprise a few people. Martinez (El Perfecto) is good for 15 wins, pencil Nab-
 holz for 12, 15 if he plays the Mets a lot. Hill can throw smoke, Gardner sort
 of got that no-hitter, and Haney should do OK. The bullpen--Landrum and Wette-
 land are the best two relievers in a while at the Big O. 

  My Picks:

  PIT (93-69), MTL (87-75), NYM (85-77), CHI (81-81), PHI (74-88), STL (70-92)

  Patrick Emond--Concordia University--Montreal, Canada.
From: lsmith@cs.umn.edu (Lance "Cogsworth" Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Glove errors v. throwing errors
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:12:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr7.201222.12320
Distribution: na
Organization: The Little Squids of the Poor

In article <1992Apr7.140336.1@vaxr.sscl.uwo.ca> palmer2@vaxr.sscl.uwo.ca (The Econoclast) writes:
>
>Glove errors on batted balls? hardly worth worrying about. But
>throwing errors may be costly and should be distinguished from the
>former.

Although this may be in a step in the right direction (the right direction
being the elimination of errors) it still has its problems.

It remains subjective. Unless I throw a ball out of the Metrodome trying to 
get the runner at first, Bill James is still going to say its Hrbek's 
fault. There can be disagreement over whose error it really is on some plays.
If my catcher isn't paying attention and my throw to the plate goes to 
the wall, who do we charge an error to?

We can still argue about what is an error and what isn't. If I'm an
outfielder and I throw accurately to third, but the ball hits the base runner,
should that be an error? At the moment it is. If the umpire gets in the
way of my throw, is it an error? Again I think officially it must be 
called an error.

You could also argue that its unfair to those with inferior teammates. If
I have to throw to Cecil Fielder at first I may have more errors than 
if I were throwing to a first baseman that could cover up my mistakes.
A good infielder might hide the poor play of a bad teammate.

It still punishes those that can get to a ball. The glorified tree stump
(or Carney Lansford) we put at third will still not make a throwing error
because he won't throw. A young, Joe Morgan-like second baseman who gets to
more balls and then occasionally throws wild could have plenty of errors
while having a great range factor (and defensive value).

As the late Ian Faith said, "For everything that goes wrong, ten things
go right!" Instead of worrying about the occasional miscue, it would be 
better to develop a means of measuring a fielders defensive contributions
to the team. It's sorta like we stopped talking about Babe Ruth's
slugging average (Look! I didn't say slugging percentage!) and started
talking only about the number of times he struck out. 
-- 
 Lance "Row 31 Seat 31" Smith | "We nine, we happy nine, we team of brothers
      (lsmith@cs.umn.edu)     | For he to-day that spits tobacco with me
   Stat-drunk computer nerd   | Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile
     -- and proud of it.      | This game shall improve his average."   Hrbek V
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: The Eck could start a game, too (was Re: Oakland A's Dream Team)
Keywords: Eckersley, Red Sox, late 70s
Date: 11 Apr 92 00:17:43 GMT
Organization: A Slightly Warmer Place Than Dave Kirsch's Winter Wonderland


In <1316@cogsci.ucsd.EDU> king@cogsci.ucsd.EDU (Jonathan King) writes:

>I have to admit, at first I thought Gary was probably stretching the point,
>but then I looked it up, and here's what I found:

>The Eck '87-91

>games  IP   hits  BB   SO  runs

>295   395.2  284  44  398   106

>This is ludicrously good pitching, no matter how you slice it.  I
>don't have data on inherited runners, but you wouldn't think that very
>many could have scored given this performance.

I have inherited runners data for '89 to '91
'89 9 of 24 scored (37.5%)
'90 4 of 29 scored (13.8%)
'91 9 of 30 scored (29.0%)   (MLB average is about 32%)

Good, but not great, numbers.

Of course, if you look just at his '90 numbers, you're clearly looking at
the greatest single year ever by a reliever.

>Actually, I'd say he was better than that, and could have been truly
>great if he had not been used so much when he was young.  He was
>facing over 30 batters a game at the age of 22, and *then* Don Zimmer
>got his hands on him.  But despite pitching in Fenway in the
>offensively-supercharged late 70s, he managed to put up ERAs under
>3.00 two straight years before the work and the park caught up with
>him. 

From what Eck himself has said, I think it was more his personal problems
(along with some injuries caused by the work) that caught up with him.

Greg  



-- 
  spira@panix.com       "The one-O delivery to Fisk.  He swings.  Long drive,  
 cmcl2!panix!spira      left field!  If it stays fair, it's gone!  Home Run!"  
158-17 Riverside Dr.                     Ned Martin, 10/22/75   
Whitestone NY 11357          (Insert your favorite baseball moment here)
From: kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: ALL-Troublemaker Team :)
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:06:06 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <carl.703190739@warper.jhuapl.edu>, carl@warper.jhuapl.edu (Carl Lamy) writes:
> Hey, how come everyone's forgetting the popular Mr. Sabo. Nobody beats
> people up as well as he does!


And let's not forget the FINE job of sliding into first base he does.  :)

Ken
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Cardinal Fans Caravan
Organization: Bradley University
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 92 06:30:16 GMT

>>And you can't count me among the net Cardinals fans!

Did I really type that?!?  Eeep!

That should be CAN!

Colour me a Cards fan in Cubs country....
-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
        "Go on and pollute the land -- clean air will be sold in cans
  Did you hear the master plan? One nation under Disneyland!"-Peter Schilling
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Re: Interleague-play, anyone??
Organization: Yale University
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 92 17:35:58 EDT

In article <92097.151845ALWHC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
ALWHC@CUNYVM.BITNET writes:
 
>
>In the latest Sports Illustrated baseball issue, there is an interesting
>article on ways to improve the game. One of the suggestions was interleague
>play. IMHO, it may not be a bad idea. For one thing it would put an end to
 
>The only thing about it is that it might take away from the World Series.
>I would just like to throw this idea out to everyone. Is it a good idea or a
>bad one?
>
     Just my $.02, but I don't like it at all.  Part of the mystique
of the World Series is the clash of champions of two different leagues
which haven't met during the regular season.  If you want to see them
play more often, we could always go back to the two-a-year All-Star
games a la 1959-1961, I believe, or just play more frequent exhibition
games on off days during the season.  The key is making sure no inter-
league games count in the standings until the World Series.
 
Jeff Caveney
From: v083qpkr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Jeffrey C Toth)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Chili Davis
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:47:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I'd like to know about the condition of Chili Davis and why he didn't play on
opening day.

Thanks

Jeff
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: gdilger@infinet.UUCP (George Dilger II)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: 1957 ebbits field ticket stub
Keywords: 1957 ebbits field ticket stub
Date: 9 Apr 92 14:24:16 GMT
Organization: Infinet, Inc.

Is a ticket stub from ebbits field dated august 7, 1957 worth
anything? It's in fair condition. I have an offer of $75.00 and
don't know if I should take it. I'm not a big baseball paraphernalia
fan.

I also have a ticket stub from the fifth game of the 1969 national
league playoffs. This is the game the mets clinched the division
against the braves.

Are baseball game ticket stubs worth anything other then sentimental
value?

Anyone with advise or information please send e-mail.

Thanks
From: seth@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (peter.r.clark..jr)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Phillys injuries
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:47:50 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <maj1.702929039@Ra.MsState.Edu>, maj1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mark "Beren" Jamison) writes:
> >In article <1992Apr10.154521.3857@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> seth@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (peter.r.clark..jr) writes:
> >>Offense wins games, defense wins championships.
> 
> >Funny; I always thought winning games won championships.  Didn't know that
> >they awarded the championship to the team that gave up the fewest runs.  
> 
> >> Pitching is part of defense.
> >>I'll take a team with great defense over a team with great offense any day.
> >>So no, offense isn't 1/2 the game. More like 1/3.
> 
> Wait now by that assumption you take Sid Bream over Frank Thomas at 1b
> in fact based on what you just said, you are telling me that a team
> composed of
> 
> Sid Bream
> Ozzie Guillen
> Jose Lind
> Terry Pendleton
> Benito Santiago
> Sammy Sosa
> Lance Johnson
> Alex Cole
> 
> Who all are listed as as good if not great defensive players would
> beat 2/3 of the time the following team
> Frank Thomas
> Steve Sax
> You can name a SS, Heck I'll take Alfredo Griffin 
> Wade Boggs
> Hector Villanueva
> Jose Canseco
> Keith Mitchell
> George Bell
> 
> Who all have been calssified as have merely adequate defense some even poor..
> And guess who'd probabbly win more than 60% of the games..
> Defense is important but highly overated..
> The whole point of baseball is to Score more runs than your openent in any given
> game, not to keep you opponent from scoring.. Mind you if you do the latter
> you'll either win or be stuck forever playing the same game, but the former
> is much more likely..

You ignored the fact that I said that pitching is part of defense. Who
are my pitchers? Let me point out, though, that I didn't say that offense
was totally irrelevent. Give me a lineup of average offense with great
defense (defense including pitching) against the lineup of average defense
(including pitching) and great offense, and yes, I would take the team
with defense every time. Add Roger Clemens, Jack Morris, etc. to my
lineup and, oh Danny Cox, I dunno, Bruce Ruffin, etc. to your lineup
there and now which team do you want? Let me have Mitch Williams and
Rob Dibble as closers, you can have Todd Frohwirth (I'm drawing a
blank on mediocre pitchers around the league, so forgive me for using
all Phillies castoffs...you know they're bad if they're Phillies castoffs
from the last couple of years :-). Still happy with your lineup?

I'll be honest, I'm not a big fan of stats, so I don't have tons of
data to support my claim. But in my opinion, a general rule in sports -
ALL SPORTS - is that defense is much more important than offense. If
we were to go back over the years, I would be very surprised if
baseball teams that had the ability to score lots of runs were winning
more, or even as many, championships when going up against teams with
superior defenses. I'm quite sure that I could support this claim in
hockey and football as well.

pete clark jr.
att!hos1cad!seth
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hayosh@mot.com (Tom Hayosh)
Subject: Hawkeroo on Seaver
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, Schaumburg, IL
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 20:09:41 GMT

I have a tough time deciding whether Harry Caray or Hawk Harrelson
irritates me more, unless I happen to be watching one of them.  Then,
without question, the one I'm watching is worse.

Hawkeroo had gem on Friday night's White Sox game.  He claimed that
Tom Seaver would get a 2-0 count on a batter on purpose so that the
batter would be overanxious on the third pitch.  Hawk said it was
beautiful to watch.  I think it would have been more convincing if the
Sox had Pee-Wee Herman claiming that whenever Seaver got behind on
on a hitter 2-0, "He meant to do that!"

Tom Hayosh     hayosh@mot.com
Go Tigers!
Congratulations Hal Newhouser!!!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: CAVGEOE@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Re: Most Popular Athletes List
Organization: Yale University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 15:04:26 EDT

In article <UdvZgNO00WBN0=jgpz@andrew.cmu.edu>
King-Han Yao <ky0l+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
 
>
>On 16-Apr-92 in Most Popular Athletes List
>user Nelson Lu@leland.stanfor writes:
>>New Jersey	Lawrence Taylor	(F)		Derrick Coleman	(K)
>>New Orleans	Shaquille O'Neal (K)		Dalton Hilliard	(F)
>>New York City	Patrick Ewing	(K)		Dwight Gooden	(B)
>
>Ewing is not #1 in NY.
>
>My opinions would be:
>
>Mattingly, Taylor.
>
     In a couple of years I agree a Taylor will be at the top of the
list but not *Lawrence* Taylor.
 
Jeff
From: riff@coos.dartmouth.edu (Christopher P. Riff)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Apr 9:Cubx-Phillies boxscore
Date: 11 Apr 92 18:35:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.1992Apr11.183550.5443
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

CHICAGO       AB  R  H  RBI   PHILADELPHIA     AB  R  H  RBI
Dunston ss     4  0  1   0    Amaro cf-rf       3  0  0   0
Sosa cf        4  0  1   0    Duncan ss         4  1  1   0
Sandberg 2b    4  0  0   0    Hollins 3b        2  2  1   1
Dawson rf      4  0  0   0    Kruk 1b           4  2  2   1
Grace 1b       2  1  1   0    Murphy rf         4  2  2   3
Wilkins c      3  0  0   0     Peguero cf       0  0  0   0
Dw Smith lf    3  0  0   0    Daulton c         4  0  0   0
Scott 3b       2  0  0   0    Chamberlain lf    4  0  2   1
Morgan p       2  0  1   1    Morandini 2b      3  0  0   0
 Assenmacher p 0  0  0   0    Cox p             2  0  0   0
 Scanlan p     0  0  0   0     Lindeman ph      1  0  1   1 
 Walker ph     1  0  0   0     Jones p          0  0  0   0
 Patterson p   0  0  0   0     Batiste ph       1  0  0   0
                               Williams p       0  0  0   0

TOTALS        29  1  4   1    TOTALS           32  7  9   7

CHICAGO       000 010 000 - 1 4 0 
PHILADELPHIA  000 204 10x - 7 9 0
LOB-Chicago 3,Philadelphia 5. 2B-Chamberlain 2(2). HR-Hollins(2)
off Scanlan,Murphy(1) off Morgan. SB-Sosa(1). DP-Chicago 1,
Philadelphia 2.

CHICAGO       IP  H  R  ER  BB  SO  NP
Morgan(L0-1)  5   6  6   6   2   7  76
Assenmacher   .2  1  0   0   0   2  21
Scanlan      1.1  2  1   1   0   1  20
Patterson     1   0  0   0   1   0  22
PHILADELPHIA
Cox(W1-0)     6   4  1   1   1   3  81
Jones         2   0  0   0   1   0  16
Williams      1   0  0   0   0   1  14
From: rdale@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Robert Dale)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: New no no rule...
Date: 16 Apr 92 03:43:01 GMT
Organization: Purdue University, W Lafayette IN

In article <15APR199221493659@summa.tamu.edu> fwt4290@summa.tamu.edu (TSAO, FREDDIE WEI) writes:
>Look at it this way..teams play
>half of their teams at home, and the probabilities of getting a no-hitter are
>low enough, this stupid rule just cut that probability by half...How would
>you feel if you pitched a no-hitter and not have it called as one just because
>you helped the team win?

Stop and rethink your strategy there... Whenever a pitcher is at home he
is guaranteed of pitching 9 innings, whether winning or losing.  The only
time he wouldn't is when he's on the road and losing...

Rob
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: clmn@ellis.uchicago.edu (Bill Coleman)
Subject: Re: Biased announcers
Reply-To: clmn@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Department of Economics
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 18:58:28 GMT

In article <19920409131457SASCHO@mvs.sas.com> SASCHO <SASCHO@mvs.sas.com> writes:
>I think all announcers for the independent stations are biased towards
>the home team. That is their purpose in life, to cover the home team.
>Harry Caray is biased and Skip Caray and the Braves crew are biased.
>I think the difference is what you mentioned: Harrelson and Paciorek
>are obnoxious. Harry Caray is a lovable obnoxious, and Skip Caray
>barely has a pulse (don't get me wrong, I enjoy him.), so he is far
>from obnoxious. Hawk and Paciorek just grate on me a little more,
>although I enjoy their games because of their insight and experience.
> 

Speaking of the Hawk's experience...

I don't have a TV, so I seldom catch Hawk & Wimp's act.  I would like to
know whether Harrelson ever comments on-air about his brilliant decision
to fire Tony LaRussa and replace him with Jim Fregosi.

-- 
Bill Coleman
From: MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Sox beat Phillies at RFK
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:33:51 GMT
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering

In article <1992Apr6.023714.14273@Princeton.EDU>
roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:
 
>In article <1992Apr6.021244.8150@wam.umd.edu> warrior@wam.umd.edu writes:
>>After seeing this game, even with 8th row behind the plate seats, I have
>>come to the conclusion that RFK is a terrible place to see a ballgame.
>>Granted two days ago i saw the Mets/O's at Camden Yards, I still think RFK
>>is the worst of the eight pro stadiums I've been to.
>>	Just my .02
>
>Well, as one who grew up going to ballgames there, fuck
>you^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H let me point one thing out!  8-)
>
>The stadium *used* to be convertible; i.e., the lower-deck seating could
>be moved to make a baseball or a football stadium.  I believe they
>haven't done this in recent years, there being too few baseballgames
>in any season to make it worthwhile.
>
>Or DID they convert it?
>
>Roger
 
I recently moved from the DC area, and I believe they did move the
seats in 1991 for two exhibitions, to show the park off as a baseball
stadium.  This was before tehy lost out in the expansion derby.
 
I think they had a hell of a time moving the seats, though.  The
mechanism had not been used for so long that it was all rusted and
frozen.
 
Jim McMaster
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: cubsfan@camelot.bradley.edu (Michael Silverman)
Subject: Re: Interleague-play, anyone??
Organization: Bradley University
Date:  9 Apr 92 19:07:53 GMT

Oh, yes interleague play! I can't *wait* for the thrilling Mariners-Reds
and Braves-Angels series. That's why we need interleague play, so all
the cool geographic series can be played, like Royals-Dodgers.

(heavy sarcasm)
From: glb50263@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Gary L. Blickhan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Oakland A's Dream Team
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:04:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: ux1.1992Apr8.210451.4356
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:

>RP	Dennis Eckersley
>RP	Rollie Fingers

>No problem here.


Dennis Eckersley doesn't deserve to be listed with (no less above) Fingers.

Fingers was awesome!!!  He was on their great teams from 1973-1975, or 
whenever.  The Eck was the goat of the 1988 Series, and he didn't do
anything in 1990.  Championships and saves are important.
The Eck just doesn't compare.  He spent his time being a mediocre starter
on the Cubs staff.

Gary Blickhan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball