HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:35:35 GMT
Organization: NSSL

In article <1992Sep02.131254.23869@brtph560.bnr.ca> psycho@brtpa25.bnr.ca (Paul Jezioranski) writes:
[deletions]
>
>I won't argue the numbers but, as always, statistics are quite misleading:

Which is precisely what everyone is saying about Fielder's raw RBI numbers.
Knowing the context in which something was done helps avoid being misled.

>
>	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.

Given that the players involved are essentially everyday players, it seems it
would extraordinary for there to be a big difference in the pitchers the 
players faced.  (Even factoring in that Fielder didn't face Tiger pitchers
and Canseco, for example, didn't face Athletic pitchers.)  In the absence of
compelling evidence to the contrary, the assumption that the pitching 
quality was about the same facing each batter is about all that you can make.

>
>	2) You've got to be in the lineup to get RBIs. Fielder is in more often
>	   than Canseco.
>
>	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.

Other than the fact that the Tigers have not led the league in runs scored 
either of the past two years, I'll agree with the statement you made about what 
counts.  Cecil Fielder's ability to drive in runs is not necessarily related
to that.  A big reason that the Tigers scored so many runs is that people like
Whitaker and Phillips are getting on base in front of him.  To attribute the 
good offense of the Tigers to Fielder's RBI ability is disingenuous at best and
ignores the contributions of everyone else to the team _and_ to Fielder's RBIs.

Harold
-- 
Harold Brooks                    hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu
National Severe Storms Laboratory/CIMMS (Norman, OK)
Andres Galarraga (Through 1 September)  .239 BA  .374 SLG  .277 OBA
28 H from .300  5 H from .250  8 HBP  9 BB    
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: steph@cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson)
Subject: Re: Collusion or Sanity?
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:58:07 GMT

In <1992Sep2.214245.9298@odin.corp.sgi.com> luigi@bullpen.csd.sgi.com (Randy Palermo) writes:
[snip]

>With the failures of the Dodgers and Mets, could the owners finally be 
>coming to the realization that you cannot Buy a pennant? 
No.

>With the uncertainties of the new TV contract looming, will the owners 
>be willing to shell out the kind of money that they have in the past?
Yes

>Will the large number of quality free agents available this year dilute
>the market and actually send salaries down?
Yes

>Could all of this lead to further collusion charges or will the owners
>be viewed as adding some sanity to the process?
Try another lockout.  The owners will never add sanity to the process.
(They have so little to spare :->)

--
Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Gigabit Study Group 

  "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not 
   overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Orioles get Craig Lefferts
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:33:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.37535
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

In article <1992Sep1.053913.7362@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bk713@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Kimon Zachary) writes:

>In the shadows of the BIG trade, the O's obtained Craig Lefferts for a
>minor leaguer (forgot who, sorry) and a PTBNL.

Erik Schullstrom, 23 year old RHP.
1990 pitched 32 innings in A ball, 29 H, 13 BB, 17 ER, 29K
1991, 86 IP in A, 13 in AA; 81H, 48 (!) BB, 82K, 33 ER.

don't have this year's stats handy.  Seems to be a decent prospect.

>Wonder if Lefferts will go to the pen.  He might be wearing thin as a 
>starter.

I think he's only good for 6 IP now as a starter.



-- 
Dave DeMers			 ddemers@UCSD   demers@cs.ucsd.edu
Computer Science & Engineering	C-014		demers%cs@ucsd.bitnet
UC San Diego					...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114	(619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt Bose "of Biscayzee")
Subject: Re: J. Gonzales All-time HR King
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 19:27:35 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Sep2.150419.29270@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> timlin@spot.Colorado.EDU (Michael Timlin) writes:
>jrp@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John Pessetto) writes:
>
>>   I made some guesses about how Juan Gonzalez would finish this season and 
>>feed this year and his previous years back into the Brock2 program written by
>>David Grabiner.  According to this, he should pass Babe Ruth as the all-time
>>homerun hitter.  Also, it looks like he has a chance to pass Maris in the 
>>single season homerun record( Of course this happens when he's 27 years old).
>>Anyway, it was interesting to look at.
>
>>[stats deleted]
>
>Did you ever hear of Hank Aaron?  Most people consider him to be the HR
>king since he hit 755 to Ruth's 714. :)  According to the post JG would
>pass him too. (761)
>

Yeah, well, Aaron played mostly in the NL, which isn't a real major league,
cause they don't have the DH.

(Oh, please, y'all don't think I'm being SERIOUS, do you???????)  :)

-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) - kbos@carina.unm.edu - I'm not the AntiChrist
I AM the AntiWoofer. - Junior Stathead{tm} - I'm a shutmouthed, selfless idiot!!
Latest Attempted Compiler of the R.S.BB FAQ - Now Accepting Submissions...(hint)
Have you hugged a Dan Gladden fan today? - Dave Rossing : .531/54/214 at Denver!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks)
Subject: Re: OH! Sherri won't like this. (Re: Sierra to be traded?)
Organization: NSSL
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:09:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug25.214540.4104@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>In <5143@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes:
>
[Sierra for Garcia rumor deleted]
>
>>This not a matter of getting something of equal for Sierra, that's simply
>>not going to happen at this point in the season and it is a choice between
>>getting something or getting nothing.
>
>
>Paul, it just isn't true that the Rangers get nothing if they don't trade
>Sierra and let him leave as a free agent.  In all probability, they will
>receive 2 first round picks in next year's amateur draft.  So the real
>question is whether Carlos Garcia is worth more than 2 draft picks.  I 
>don't know the answer, but its certainly not inconceivable that the 2
>draft picks might, in the long run, be more valuable.

Something that complicates the issue for the Rangers even more is their
shortstop situation.  There's no one on the major league roster you'd 
want to start '93 with.  Larry Hanlon (25 years old) just came up to OKC 
after the Juan Bell trade.  Hanlon appears to be a good fielder, but I
have doubts if he'll ever hit, although he's shown some patience at the
plate.  Chuck Jackson has ended up playing a lot at short towards the end
of the year.  I don't know of anyone further down the system who's showing
any promise.  (When you borrow a player from another organization for 
your AAA team, you've got a serious problem.)  The Rangers could feel 
desperate enough at short to not want to wait on the long-term draft
choices come through.

Harold
-- 
Harold Brooks                    hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu
National Severe Storms Laboratory/CIMMS (Norman, OK)
Andres Galarraga (Through 25 August)  .235 BA  .367 SLG  .277 OBA
27 H away from .300  8 HBP  9 BB    
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics (was Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:12:28 GMT

In <1992Sep3.231135.16962@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:

>Why is it that the people who purport to *least* believe in statistics
>are so ready to bet the bank on the least significant ones?  Roger,
>you are the *real* stat freak on this net!  You worship the church of
>RBIs, the altar of short batting streaks, and the temple of pitcher's
>Win-Loss records.  Those are *statistics*.  And not only that, they
>are statistics that fall somewhere between "Lies" and "Damn Lies".

Naw...I don't really "bank" on any statistics.  Years ago I used to 
participate in a sport where I saw people (even myself) rise to a level
of accomplishment beyond what they would normally be thought capable of.
This did not happen often of course.  When it did we called it Zen.  
Baseball hitters talk about the ball being as big as a beachball.  This
is the true essence of sport (for me anyway).  The statistics measure the
ordinary.  Many of us could care less about keeping track of the ordinary.
We watch sports for the extraordinary event, the exceptional moment.
For me, Reggie Jackson is probably the greatest player I ever saw because
he did rise to the occasion (when he wasn't consuming outs) and deliver
the drama that makes sport so exciting.  Jack Morris IS a great pitcher.
If the stats tell us different then it could be that the stats are not
telling us the whole story...If Detroit is down 4-1 in the bottom of the
ninth of the seventh game with 2 out and the bases loaded who the hell 
do you want to see at the plate?  And if Cecil was to deliver?  Well
some may call it luck but I think that life is sweeter than that.  I
would give that man the MVP just for that one moment.  Casey lives.

rm

 

-- 
roger maynard                    
91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum)
Subject: Re: Hideous Red Sox Offensive Stats
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:42:23 GMT

In article <5532@transfer.stratus.com>, dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber) writes:
|> Before a recent game, the TV announcer put up a set of offensive stats
|> for the Red Sux which showed them dead last in every offensive category
|> except for home runs, in which they were 13th.

  That's not true! They're FIRST in the majors with SEVEN Grand Slams!!

-Ron

|> Dan S.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: john@sequent.com (John Vander Borght)
Subject: Re: Dodgers Find a Team they can Beat
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Distribution: sqnt
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:20:28 GMT

pcaster@mizar.usc.edu (Dodger) writes:

>Coupled with the Cubs win in San Diego tonight, the Bucs
>loss moved the Cubs to just 6 1/2 games back of first place,
>clearly within reach.  Notice how the Cubs are pennant contenders
>whenever the Chicago weather in summer is unusually cold?

This explains why the term "When hell freezes over" comes to mind whenever
I think of the Cubs winning a World Series. (-:

Go Dodgers! 

On second thought ...

Wait till next year.

John Vander Borght
john@sequent.com
-- 
"Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty!"
John Vander Borght
john@sequent.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: savoy@hg.uleth.ca (Jim Savoy)
Subject: Re: Fighting & Baldwin(pens)
Reply-To: savoy@hg.uleth.ca
Organization: University of Lethbridge
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:53:24 GMT


> Pravin Devineni Ratnam <pr0i+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>I think Howard Baldwin is wrong in attacking fighting in the NHL at
>those committee meetings.. He could campaign for reducing fighting by
>proposing to introduce a few new minor deterrances.But I don't think
>it's worthwhile to campaign for virtually total elimination of fighting. 

But the violent nature of the game is a bi-product of the.... hey wait a 
minute... Baldwin? Pens? This isn't baseball. Get out of here, you nut you!

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

 Mr. Neutron: This is a nice area.
 Mr. Entrail: It's like a bloody graveyard. I hate it.
 Mr. Neutron: It's handy for the shops and convenient for the West End.
 Mr. Entrail: If you like going to the West End. I think it's a stinking dump.
From: rinehart@aramis.rutgers.edu (Mark J. Rinehart)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball and Billions
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:45:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Aug24.152629.22215@informix.com> barrym@informix.com (Barry Mednick) writes:

> Andrew Zimbalist's new book "Baseball and Billions" was reviewed by the
> local litter-liner.  Zimbalist proposes a federal sports commission to
> control baseball and expansion to 40 teams by the year 2000.  He argues
> that the quality of play would drop for a few years but would still 
> be better than it was in the 1960's.  Zimbalist believes the current 
> owner monopoly is bad for the game, that commercialization, greed, and 
> poor management lead to disruption and debasement.  He points out that
> team revenues average $60 million a year, and players' annual salaries
> exceed $1 million.  The reviewer liked the book.
> It's not hard to find situations where the fans have gotten shafted:
> franchise movement, World Series games starting at 5:00 PM, 3 hour rain
> delays, and minimal broadcast of games on free TV.  What do you think?
> Is it time to wrest control of the game from the owners?
> -----------------------

Sweet Jesus help us.......the last thing in the world we need is the
fed getting into this act more than they already are. Good God, we
have a national debt that is threatening to pull us right under,
thanks to those spineless wimps in the Congress. There's already far
too much government interference in the private sector. And what the
hell is this *owner monopoly*? Far as I know, all the 26 current teams
have different ownerships. Commercialization is what capitalism is all
about. Greed and poor management can never be controlled by a federal
government that itself is greedy and poorly managed. And fans get
shafted because they ask to be shafted. They go to the games, and pay
the prices and buy the crap that these franchises sell. The fans get
what they ask for. How is that shafting? I'm always leary of people
whose methods of solving problems is to bring in the fed everytime.
Some things, yes, the fed should be involved. This is not one of those
things. I am not saying the owners aren't pretty sleazy in their own
rite. But we don't need anymore of Big Brother butting into the
private lives (personal or business) of the citizens of this country.



Mark
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: AL Cy Young update
Date: 26 Aug 92 03:32:00 GMT
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853


A lot of the also-rans were starting today.  Appier lost.  Wegman got
a ND.  Tapani lost.  Nagy and Fleming are still pitching (against each
other).  But the big news (as I promised you)...  Eckersley blew his
second save of the season, and earned his first loss since last
September.  The A's are now 52-1 in games where he pitches.

The A's were up by one.  Parrett allowed an opposite-field double to
Scott Cooper, then struck out Tony Pena.  Then the Eck came in.  Wade
Boggs, the pinch hitter for Valentin, was intentionally walked (at
which point Rivera came in to pinch run).  And Billy Hatcher came
through with the *second* opposite-field-down-the-line double of the
inning, scoring both runners.

The Sox made it interesting in the top of the ninth, though.
Quantrill got the first two, but then walked Browne and hung a pitch
to Canseco.  Canseco drilled it off the wall on a line, too hard for
Browne to have any chance of scoring.  Fossas came in to face Baines,
Randy Ready pinch-hit for Baines, and Fossas gave him the intentional
pass.  Reardon vs. Steinbach with the bases loaded.  Hit a very slow
roller to short which Rivera *almost* bobbled, but a strong throw and
a nice scoop by Vaughn got him.  Quantrill win, Reardon save.

Hm.  This looks more like an update of the Red Sox game than of the Cy
Young race.  Well, no other significant action today.  I don't think
Brown/Morris/McDowell/Clemens pitch until Thursday.

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Clemens may not win his 4th CY, but he still rules!	tedward@cs.cornell.edu
From: v120qldp@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (PATRICK FERREL)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: What is slugging percentage?
Date: 3 Sep 92 22:04:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Sep3.111800.801@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes... 
>> To calculate slugging pct:
>> 
>>     (1*singles+2*doubles+3*triples+4*HRs)/# of AB
>> 
>>      The more extra-base hits, the higher the SLG.
> 
>	Don't sacrifice flies count in here as 0-base hits?


I like to think of it as Total Bases/At-Bats.

Singles - 1 Total Base
Doubles - 2 Total Bases
Triples - 3 Total Bases
Homers  - 4 Total Bases


Sacrifices don't count as At-Bats.  Likewise walks, HBPs, and catcher's
interference don't count either.  

However, fielder's choices are counted against the batter because a fielder's
choice is an At-Bat, but no total bases are awarded.


Patrick A. Ferrel - ferrel@acsu.buffalo.edu  | WWIVnet 1@7659 | Disaster Area
v120qldp@ubvms.buffalo.edu | WWIVLink pending | IceNET 1@7659 | (716)683-6657
From: lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Managing in the AL
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:16:46 GMT
Organization: Holos Software, Inc.

In article <1684E89E9.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com writes:
>Regardless of whether the DH makes AL managing "easier" or not, I like
>the rule, because it leads to more offense.  There is not a guaranteed
>out in the number nine spot.

Whether to juggle the lineup and when to replace the pitcher is not
a big part of manager, IMO.  We as fans concentrate on the moves a
manager makes during a game as if they're playing some chess
match.  I think that what a manager does during the off-season
and before each game is more important than lineup juggling.
Putting together a coaching staff, manager a good-sized group of
spoiled babies, judging talent: these are more difficult and more important
than deciding when to hit-and-run.

Example: I think Bobby Cox is an excellent manager on balance.  But he
drives me crazy *during* the games because I so seldom agree with
his in-game strategies.  But on balance it doesn't mean much compared
to how he's been able to set and keep his pitching rotation the last
couple of years.

-Len
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kettler@ahab.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.)
Subject: Re: A first on rsb?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: MIT Lab for Nuclear Science
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 06:02:00 GMT

>>>> A sportswriter friend of mine [...]
>>>
>>>I can't recall anyone on rsb admitting to having a sportswriter as a friend...
> 
Well, if Heather having a sportswriter came as a shock, then sit down before 
you read this. My sister's boyfriend is a sports photographer/journalist. It 
is also likely that in a few years, he will be my brother-in-law. 

				Sincerely yours,

				Thomas R. Kettler "Expos Fanatic"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gidi Avrahami)
Subject: Re: Canseco in postseason (was Re: A's Lineup!)
Organization: Brotherhood Of Breath
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 19:38:16 GMT

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?)
but it was erased by Gibson's homer off Eckersley.  And I don't see
anybody quoting the horrendous WS stats of Stewart, McGwire, Steinbach
or anyone else.  (I don't know how bad they are -- but they must be,
because the A's as a team sucked so bad in the 88 and 90 series.)

An interesting trivia, by the way, is that nine different A's have
homered off the Giants in the 89 series -- but McGwire wasn't one of
them!

>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.  

Like I said, I don't believe that McGwire, Hendu and Rickey did much
better -- nor did those "hard working, dependable, clubhouse leader
types" (Steinbach and Lansford).  I'd be happy to see the stats,
though.

>[...]  people do seem to forget how much Canseco sucked in his World
>Series career (sorry, I don't remember ALCS stats).

Well, I remember several homers in Fenway and SkyDome, a stolen base
or two in the 88 ALCS, etc.  But again, I'm willing to stand corrected
if somebody posts the stats.


--Gidi
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Lies, Damn Lies, & Statistics (was Re: The Monthly Cecil Fielder Thread
Date: 3 Sep 92 13:33:06 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Sep03.105123.10657@brtph560.bnr.ca> psycho@brtpa25.bnr.ca (Paul Jezioranski) writes:
>> 
>> Leave us with PAs, SLG, OBP and I'll let you eliminate all the rest.
>> 
>> Is that simple enough for you?
>
>Sure. Simply idiotic. An example:
>
>	Rudy Fafoofnik: 680 Plate appearances, 1.000 SLG, 1.000 OBP
>	
>......	but he scored zero runs because he hit 680 two out singles and the guy
>	behind him struck out 680 times.


I would think this would indicate even to you how worthless "runs" and
"RBIs" were, rather than PA, OBA, and SLG.  Or is it fafoofnick's fault
that he always comes up with the bases empty and gets left on base?
Are you saying that you wouldn't prefer to have Fafoofnick on your
team over any other DH (leaving aside the question of where he plays
defense?)  because the guy behind him was 0 for 680? 

C'mon, which player would you ever replace Fafoofnick with?

>Sure you can draw a "likely" conclusion from just those three stats, but
>you can draw a better conclusion from what the player himself did.
>Singles, doubles, triples, homers, runs scored, walks, at bats, and RBI
>give a better than "likely" conclusion of the player's value to the
>team, and you can calculate your three numbers from these stats. My
>contention is that adding external dependencies (such as who and how
>many were in scoring position, who was pitching, etc) only complicates
>things and leads people to draw errant conclusions like "if Jose was in
>his place, he'd have 5000 RBI". But I guess that's most of the
>attraction of all these stats. 

You've just made a convincing case for *not* using RBIs.  It's
situation dependent, and has nothing to do with what the player does,
but rather what his teammates do (or don't) do.
-- 
           .........................................................
          ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
         the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
         here i sit looking for a warming smile in a house of cold wit