HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Worrell to the Dodgers!!!!
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 19:06:10 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: ?  

In <b0#ry=q@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:

>In article <1992Dec12.014034.26071@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>
>This is true.  If I remember correctly, the reports were not that Offerman's 
>stats were better when he batted leadoff, but that Butler's were phenomenal.
>I won't make any judgements about whether or not this means anything; I don't
>think there's enough evidence either way...

Yes, Butler's stats were phenomenal in the second spot.  I really doubt
that means anything though, unless Butler was able to take unbelivably
great advantage of the hole when Offerman reached first.

>>And I have no idea what makes you think he's a potentially great
>>leadoff hitter.  It's possible he could be a decent one.  But I 
>>wouldn't expect him to ever maintain an OBP over .370, and he is
>>a menace to his own team on the basepaths.

>Why do you think that?  Offerman walks fairly well...about 14% of his plate
>appearances over his minor league career, and 11% in his year and a half in
>the majors so far...he's a career .310 hitter in the minors, and hit .260 last
>season as a 23 year old.  Why don't you think he can hit .285?  That would get
>him to about .370...

Well, yes, I think it's quite possible he could get to .370.  Just not
higher than that.

Hey, all I'm saying is that there's nothing which makes him look like
a candidate to become a GREAT leadoff man.

>As for him being a "menace" on the basepaths, I think that's a bit strong.  
>I don't think he'll be much more than a break even stealer, but he'll be better
>than, say, Harold Reynolds...

Well, yes, he'll probably improve a bit, but he's not ever going to be
able to contribute a lot on the bases.

>Overall, he's a decent leadoff hitter *now*.  Of course, one thing I have 
>noticed is the decision of many people here to define "average" as "mediocre",
>rather than "decent".  Offerman won't ever be the *best* leadoff man in the
>NL, but I think a .290/.370/.370 season is at *least* "decent".  Offensively,
>that's what he'll be doing in two or three years...

You're not really disagreeing with me, Kurt.

Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: umeitzen@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Steven Eitzen)
Subject: Re: Stats and an FTP site: please read
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:42:58 GMT

In <wall-101292154310@elvis.swarthmore.edu> wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall) writes:

>OK, folks. I've finally got an ftp site set up. If the traffic is moderate
>and nothing goes wrong, there's no reason it can't be a semi-permanent net
>archive for stats, the FAQ, etc.

>Could somebody please send me the '92 final stats in ASCII? I will stick
>them in the ftp archive and then release access instructions. There's no
>point now since all I have are the '92 stats up to the All-Star break,
>which I'm sure are less than fascinating.

>Any other suggestions for intial items to post (bibliographies, off-season
>transactions, rotisserie rules, etc) will be gladly taken. 

>_ matt

>wall@cc.swarthmore.edu

'Scuze me, but where is this supposed ftp site?
-- 
Steve Eitzen                                    | "For every action, 
Vice-President - U of M Campus Computing Assoc. |  there is an equal 
Internet: -Unix: umeitzen@ccu.umanitoba.ca      |  and opposite campus 
          -TSO:  #eitzen@ccm.umanitoba.ca       |  Rent-a-cop."
From: akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: chickenman in New York
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:40:17 GMT
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore

While Boggs is nearing the end of his career (the New York Times said he
wants to finsihed his career with whichever team he signed with), it is
nice to think that he could follow in the footsteps of Babe Ruth and
Sparky Lyle. Boston let him go without much of a fight and I'd love to see
him have a formerly typical great year and kill his former team and now
divison rivals. Although Boggs did give alot to Boston, (World Series in
'86 and ALCS in '88), I'd love to see him give some of their crap back.
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Maynard Ex Ante
Date: 20 Dec 92 04:40:29 GMT
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

In article <1992Dec18.185902.7434@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Ted "'Wildcat' Schrodinger was the best man in the batter's box" Frank
				            ^
					who may have been


-- 
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: dave@snitor.sni.ca (Dave Till)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: Cito Gaston Appreciation Society
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:17:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.031414.6295@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>Huh?  What does the success or failure of the Blue Jays have to do
>with this?  Cito is a stupid manager whether or not the Blue Jays have
>a good team.  Of course he does manage to keep the team happy, even if
>he has no idea of how to make out a lineup card or pinch hit.  I guess
>brains isn't everything...

I risk sounding like a broken record, but I must again point out that a
manager's job consists of more than setting the lineup and ordering up fancy
in-game strategies.

I claim that the hardest part of the manager's job is actually *managing*
his players:  making sure that no conflicts break out which affect the
team's performance, and ensuring that everyone is happy with his role
and giving their best on the field.

Cito Gaston is not particularly good at making out the lineup card or at
selecting in-game strategies.  (This, presumably, is why Gene Tenace
is his "bench coach":  Gino can provide input when it's time to make
decisions of this sort.)  He probably wouldn't be a good manager for an
expansion team, or a team consisting mostly of young players.  However,
there is no manager in baseball better at creating a winning atmosphere, and
Cito's teams have all won or come close to it.

Look at the record:

1989:  took a team that started 12-24 under Jimy One-M and went 77-49 with it.
The Jays were in last in June, and went on to win the division.

1990:  finished 2 games out of first, and were in contention right until
the final weekend.

1991:  won the division again.

1992:  won the whole thing.

Had Earl Weaver or Tony LaRussa done this, the mediots would be singing
his praises in three-part harmony.

Sure, the Jays put a great team on the field, and it's a lot easier to win
when you've got the horses.  But baseball is filled with organizations who
have top-flight talent but don't know how to utilize it; as a Red Sox fan,
you will have seen this close up.  (Was Plantier traded because of conflicts
with Butch Hobson?  If so, Hobson should be dropped onto the Massachusetts
Turnpike from a great height.)

I'll take Cito, thank you very much.

--Dave "got any third basemen you're not using?" Till
  e-mail address:  dave@silver.sni.ca or dave@snitor.uucp
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kirsch@staff.tc.umn.edu (Dave 'Almost Cursed the Jays' Kirsch)
Subject: Holy Mother of God! (was: Re: Lou Gorman is a moron)
Organization: Li'l Carlos and the Hormones
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:04:51 GMT

In article <92336.161132IO20738@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> <IO20738@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:
>Red Sox general manager Lou Gorman is a fool.  He must
>sit at home every night trying to think of how he can
>ruin the Red Sox even more.
 
  I hate to sound repetitive, but 

  Holy Mother of God! What has Lou Gorman been smoking? 

  Heard a day or two ago the Red Sox sent Phil Plantier to San Diego for Jose 
Melendez. ESPN mentioned it almost as an 'Oh by the way' type sidenote, and 
I suspect it won't get much attention nationally. On the other hand, r.s.bb
will probably become a collection of wailing souls. I really like Jose
Melendez, and he looked like closer material in relief last year. That doesn't
make him worth a 23-year old Phil Plantier. Melendez is 27, and Seattle
literally gave him to San Diego a couple years ago. (If memory serves, the
Padres picked him off the waiver wire or made a minor deal for him.) Is this 
what has become of Phil Plantier's value?  

  Even if I *were* a Red Sox fan before, this would make me wanna hurl and
just plain give up. I'd defect to the West Mifflin Monkeys.  

>  What kind of drugs is Lou on? 

  Probably the same stuff he decided to lend to Gillick right before Joe
Carter was about to sign with the Royals. Gillick got sky-high, and thought 
it would be a gas to spend some of Labatts' dough in a big way. Feh. At least
they signed Molitor, which IMHO was a good signing even if he is 35. I'd
rather have Molly than Winfield at this point. This finally gives the Jays a 
*real* leadoff hitter (either Alomar *or* Molitor), which means Cito will
promptly insert him in the #3, 4 or 5 hole and hit Devo leadoff once again. 

  Sigh. 

-- 
Dave Hung Like a Jim Acker Slider Kirsch             kirsch@staff.tc.umn.edu 
Toronto Blue Jays - 1992 World Champions!      New .. quotes out of context!
".. you'd probably be teaching me how to get it up .."  - Jason Abner Miller 
".. Italian for suppository..which was genuinely hard for me .." - R. Lustig 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose)
Subject: Re: I will, forever, truly hate the Toronto Blue Jays
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 02:58:24 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Dec11.164832.19666@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.061757.15283@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>In <1992Dec10.202727.21312@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>
>>Actually, I believe the Blue Jays offered a start to Eichhorn for
>>this purpose, and Eichhorn turned it down, saying that if felt
>>Clemens deserved the ERA title a lot more anyway.
>
>wow! i'd love to know if this is true.
>if it is, it must be one of the most classy things i've heard a 
>major leaguer do in a long time. never mind other ML players,
>can you imagine *anyone* passing up a place in the record book
>to play out the rest of one's career in relative 
>obscurity? i can't honestly say i would.

How selfish.  The team wants one of the best pitchers in the AL ERA-wise to
start a game, and the man REFUSES!?!?!?!  The guy has no thought to what's best 
for the team, thinking more about satisfying his own putrid inferiority complex
than what's best for the team.  I wonder how his teammates felt knowing that
their best pitcher *refused* to pitch, allowing his team to finish one game out
of third, dooming his team to the lower division.  What a selfish bastard.  I'd
trade him, or release him...

Just presenting an alternate viewpoint.  If this is true, it shows a minor
league attitude.  Considering his carrer for the next few years after that, one
wonders if that attitude wasn't justifiable.  As he so amply proved, he didn't
deserve to be ranked ahead of Clemens...

-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Walks: not that sexy.
"Halt!  Based on conclusive dental evidence that truly bites, I arrest you 
 hereby for the murdering of the dead Belzic Tascar.  I am obliged to warn you 
 that my weapons are registered as offensive fronds!!"- R.M.Allen, "Monkey See"
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Date: 17 Dec 1992 13:56:37 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec16.222334.13983@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca>  
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
> In <1992Dec16.214836.4510@u.washington.edu>  
sgs@stein.u.washington.edu (Steven Smith) writes:
> 
> >In article <1992Dec16.210013.10713@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca>  
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
> >>
> >>Can you prove to me that in '92 the Jays would have won without  
Griffin?
> >>(or Gaston or any other member of the team).  No you can't and  
until you can
> >>prove it you cannot tell me that any member of the team was more  
important
> >>than any other if importance is defined as being necessary to  
winning the WS. 
> 
> >What I'd like to know, Roger, is do you apply this same  
"reasoning" to
> >other aspects of your life?  Do you honestly believe that your  
cigarette
> >lighter was of equal importance to your drive train in getting you  
to
> 
> the functions or purposes of a cigarette lighter and the drive  
train are
> not the same.  the cigarette lighter makes no claim that it  
contributes
> to my safe arrival.  A better comparison is the tiny jet in my  
carburetor 
> and the drive shaft.  I wouldn't have made it without either.
> 
> >work today? And throwing the lighter out and driving home doesn't  
prove
> >anything about how the car worked this morning, as far as I can  
tell from
> >your rules. Wouldn't any discussion about whether your car would  
have run 
> >this morning without the lighter intact be nothing more than "idle 
> >speculation?" 
> 

No, a better analogy might be gasoline.  You drove home today,
say, with Texaco unleaded regular. It would be unwarranted 
speculation to assume that you would have made it home OK if
you had Mobile Premium in the car instead.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mattingly discussion, take 2.
Date: 18 Dec 1992 20:25:17 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <949@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)  
writes:
> Don't bother.  The same people who use real live defensive stats to  
evaluate
> players also tend to think that batting average with RISP is not  
much more
> useful that hat size and date of birth in evaluating players, since  
it's 
> just noise in the overall batting levels.  (Of course, most of us  
also find
> *any* batting average to be mostly irrelevant; OBP and SLG tell you  
more.)

Why say "don't bother" before looking at the evidence?  I agree
with you that all the stats I've seen to date show that
BA with RISP is basically noise, fluctuating from season to season,
with a small number of chances in the first place, and therefore
not reliable.  But I still think that SOME players might bat
better in some situations in other.  What if someone comes back
with statistics that say that Joe X (or Don M) hit significantly
better with runners in scoring position over a large number of
at-bats. For example, if a player, over a 12 year career, hits
50 points higher with RISP, that probably says that player does
respond well in such situations. (Now, I haven't seen any
stats that show anyone doing this over that period of time,
but if someone showed them to me I'd guess they'd be significant.)

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Date: 18 Dec 92 16:07:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken

One thing I totally forgot.

If the Jays play Darnell Coles, at third, full time, people will be
 shocked at how well he hits.

Coles can flat out play, and never received consistent opportunities.
 He played well from time to time, and for various reasons, never
 was allowed to continue playing.
- bob gaj
From: deitch@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG (David Deitch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves land Maddox !!
Date: 13 Dec 92 17:36:13 GMT
Organization: Galaxy Information System (GIS) Atlanta, Ga

Dateline Fri, 11/Dec92 06:58.
In , Amit Likhyani of al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu  wrote to All at 1:133/411,

 AL> It still has not registered.  The Braves have Glavine, 
 AL> Maddux, Smoltz, and Avery with Pete Smith as the #5 
 AL> starter.  That really is unbelievable.  At some point, 
 AL> they are going to be paying $20 million to their top 4 
 AL> guys.  It must be nice to own a superstation.

     Actually, much of the money comes throough WCW...

 AL> You have to give the Braves credit.  This is almost unfair.  

     Heh heh heh...

          David Deitch, (GIS) Atlanta



--  
----------------------------------------------------------
               __
              /  \             User: David Deitch
             /|oo \            Via FidoNet node: 1:133/411.0
            (_|  /_)
             _`@/_ \    _     FidoNet <==> UUCP Gateway
            |     | \   \\    FidoNet Net 133, Atl96
            | (*) |  \_  ))
  ______    |__U__| /  \//     David Deitch, Administrator
 / FIDO \    _//|| _\   /     Galaxy Information System
(________)  (_/(_|(____/ (jm)   (GIS) Atlanta            

UUCP: wittsend!gisatl!deitch
INTERNET: deitch@gisatl.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Brian Dorsett
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:15:48 GMT

In article <18DEC199212052600@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu> doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller) writes:

>	Dorsett probably sucks.
>	But, 2 years ago, what did all you guys say about that 33 year-old
>castoff, retread, and nobody, Skeeter Barnes?

There is always a minute chance.  How many Barnes-types can you name?

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
From: jpalmer@uwovax.uwo.ca (The Econoclast)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball finances query
Date: 17 Dec 92 19:24:07 GMT
Organization: University of Western Ont, London

In article <kbanaian.113.0@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu>, kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian) writes:

> Thought I'd bring out the numbers here.  These data were printed in the 7/2/
> 92 issue of _Financial World_.  They are for the 1991 season.
> 	Gate	Media	Stad.	Total	Player	Oper.	Oper.
> Team	Rec.	Rev.	Rev.	Rev.	Costs	Exp.	Inc.
> NYY    $19.4   $61.0   $ 7.4   $90.0   $29.8   $59.6   $30.4
> LA	26.6	32.5	18.0	79.3	36.0	72.0	 7.3
> NYM	22.9	50.0	16.0	91.1	35.2	70.4	20.7
> Tor	44.5	30.0	12.0	88.7	29.7	62.4	26.3
> Bos	24.5	40.5	14.3	81.5	35.4	70.8	10.7
> Bal	19.0	24.4	 5.0	50.6	15.8	39.5	11.1
> CWS	27.5	25.7	19.3	78.0	18.0	60.0	18.0
> StL	19.9	25.0	12.0	59.1	23.2	46.4	12.7
> ChC	22.8	27.5	12.0	64.5	29.0	58.0	 6.5
> Tex	19.0	25.5	14.0	61.5	20.7	47.6	13.9
> KC	16.9	20.5	14.0	53.6	30.4	60.8	-7.2
> Phi	15.2	23.2	 7.6	48.2	21.7	43.4	 4.8
> Oak	25.7	27.0	10.0	64.9	39.2	66.6	-1.7
> Cal	19.0	27.9	 5.0	54.1	34.3	61.7	-7.6
> SF	15.5	26.2	 5.0	48.9	33.3	53.3	-4.4
> Cin	17.1	24.4	 5.3	49.0	27.1	48.8	 0.2
> SD	15.6	23.1	 7.5	48.4	24.4	48.8	-0.4
> Hou	10.6	25.2	 8.0	46.0	12.1	31.5	14.5
> Pit	16.2	21.9	 5.5	45.8	24.9	49.8	-4.0
> Det	15.6	28.8	 5.0	51.6	31.1	54.4	-2.8
> Atl	15.4	18.9	 3.8	40.3	20.4	40.8	-0.5
                ^^^^

> Min	18.2	20.5	 3.2	44.1	24.1	48.2	-4.1
> Sea	15.5	22.0	 5.0	44.7	17.4	41.8	 2.9
> Cle	 9.5	23.7	 6.6	42.0	19.5	46.8	-4.8
> Mil	14.2	19.4 	 3.0	38.8	26.4	50.2   -11.4
> Mtl	10.7	23.5	 3.0	39.4	21.8	43.6	-4.2

	I see that the 1991 Braves reported lower media revenues than
any other team, including the pathetic small market teams of
Milwaukee, Minnesota, and Seattle. I wonder if Ted Turner is hiding
just a few dollars of the Braves profits in his TBS numbers. This
number suggests that TBS is paying only about 3.4m for the right to
broadcast all those games. 

	And Seattle reported a profit for 1991?

-- 
 Regards,
  John Palmer    London, Ontario       Voice: (519) 661-3533     FAX: 661-3666
  reply to jpalmer@uwovax.uwo.ca       The Economics Institute for Journalists
  ============================================================================
  The New Economics: Overlapping Generalizations & Rationalized Expectorations
From: v102q46b@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (David A Collins)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Who are these new Pirates ?
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:18:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <826@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes...
>In article <BzByJ3.Du4@acsu.buffalo.edu> v085f2wd@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Theodore J Kury) writes:
>>
>>Since the Pirates seem to be missing a cleanup hitter, these players all
>>hit 4th in this many games for the Bisons:
>>
>>Brian Dorsett        104
>>Dave Clark            23
>>Jose Tolentino         5
>>Tom Prince             2
>>Don Slaught            2
>>Jeff King              1   
> 
>Just for the record, Brian Dorsett is no longer a Pirate.  I'm not sure
>of the circumstances surrounding his departure (and I'm pretty disgusted
>that he's gone) but I'm nearly 100% sure I saw that the Marlins had signed 
>him last week.

Dorsett signed with the Reds I believe and could see some action at catcher
or 1B versus lefties.

> 
>PSG
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: vince@paradyne.com (Vince Ciletti)
Subject: Re: Looking for San Fran Giants info./new owners?
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:38:41 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.183014.17445@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>In <Dec.8.09.02.06.1992.572@pilot.njin.net> gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes:
>
>
[ other stuff deleted]
>> what's the vote required for their purchase to be approved?  
>> i still think the sale to tampa was fine and good, and can't imagine
>> baseball's anti-trust rules standing up after tampa gets through
>> suing (Justly, i feel) major league baseball.
>
>No, I think the antitrust exemption will stand up just fine to Tampa's
>lawsuits.  The ability to keep a team in its home market is one of
>the justifications for the exemption.  And the courts are never going to
>eliminate it anyway; only the Congress might.
                               ^^^^^^^^

They just started those hearings yesterday (12/10).  The chairman of the
Anti-trust committee (Mettzenbaum (sp?) from Ohio) said that is exactly
<the Anti-trust exemption> what they are going after.  As for keeping a
team in their *home* market, are you forgetting where the Giants came from?
IMHO, the "high-exalted order of the Fraternity of Major League Baseball"
can kiss that exemption goodbye.  Only time will tell...

Vince

"Baseball is conscious of re-cycling - they have used Tampa Bay again" - a
quote from the ESPN Sportscenter intro the night baseball rejected St.
Pete's offer to buy the Giants.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Baseball Weekly Loses It
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:55:46 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

The latest issue of the USA Today Baseball Weely is proof that, even
for a paper that specializes in baseball, the writers often don't
know what the hell they're talking about.  Proof of this is the
ratings they gave to teams on how well they fared during the
off season.  For the American League, ratings ranged from +3.4 to
-4.4.  And guess who got the +3.4 -- Boston!!

Well, lets see, they're rebuilding, so they aquired a 38-year old
with bad knees and got rid of one of their best young prospects.
Yeah, right. Maybe the writers just mixed up their positive and
negative signs.

Oh, well. They did get one thing right. The lowest rating for
any team was Pittsburgh, at a -7.2.

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball