HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: R.S.BB FAQ V1.22 (9/25/92)
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:35:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.120420.14230@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>
>Well, Roger, we *know* what you can see.  And in your case, the brown stuff
>is your own.  Take a look around.  Try *not* spewing the usual insults,
>and if you must, try naming names.  Try telling us *which* of the statheads 
>don't go to games.

Okay, I confess!  I don't go to very many games.  :-( I only made it
to one game in Fenway, three in Camden Yards, and three in Elmira
(NY-Penn league affiliate of the Red Sox).  The last is low-A ball,
but it's only 45 minutes away from Ithaca.

>As for posting prominence, yes, Roger, you're prominent, too.

He'll be thrilled to hear that, I'm sure. :-)

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
From: kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Date: 30 Sep 92 20:04:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: odin.1992Sep30.200436.5092
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Sep30.121425.1596@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.055359.308@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep29.223917.682@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep29.005602.528@odin.corp.sgi.com> kubey@sgi.com (Ken Kubey) writes:
>>>>How bad will Barry Bonds choke in the 1992 NLCS?
>
>>>>My predicions:  BA: .220  R: 3  HR: 1  RBI: 3  SB: 2 
>
>>>Looks like a long series if Bonds is going to get 50 AB (and that doesn't
>>>even include walks...)
>
>>Sorry, make that .222  (4 for 18)  
>
>How many walks in there?  Assuming a close Series, that could be nine
>walks, i.e., an OBP of .480something.  That plus two singles, a double,
>and a homer gives an SLG of .444, an OPS of .9something, and a rather odd
>definition of "choke."

Geez, and I thought Ted was picking nits when he noted that a .220 BA
requires some multiple of 50 at bats.  Maybe Bonds will go 6 for 27 --
that would be .222 also.  Maybe he'll go 4 for 18 and the Braves will
win in 4 or 5 games.  I was simply trying to predict that Bonds will hit
somewhere around .220 (or worse) in the NLCS and that his team will lose
*again* in large part due to his not living up to his MVPish numbers.

>>>>Extra Disclaimer:  I have nothing against the Pirates, their fans, 
>>>>or Mr. Bonds.  I just happen to believe in clutch hitters and 
>>>>choke hitters and I believe that Mr. Bonds will choke again.
>
>You haven't shown that he choked before.  What's that "Again"?  Is every
>poor performance a choke?  Or does good opposition pitching sometimes
>have something to do with it?  Or even luck, on occasion?

If you don't like the word "choke" how about "will bat *way* below his
season averages AGAIN".  

>Actually, that's his first *four* Series.  In 1972 he got his ring by
>sitting on the bench, injured.

For the record, Jackson injured himself scoring a critical run in 1972.

>Now, as to your question, why wouldn't 0-for-20 in a win be a choke?

Because no one remembers the bad things as long as you win.

>Come back when you can *define* choke.

I don't think it's easy to put into numbers and statistics.
If you really want me to, I'll make and attempt to put it into that form
and will post it.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name:       Ken Kubey  or  QB   |  Reading, editing or printing of this text
Address:    kubey@sgi.com       |  without the express written consent of
Disclaimer: the usual           |  Major League Baseball is prohibited.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 27 Sep 1992 16:14:59 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,
Subject: bob uecker.

                ab   ba hr rbi  h 2b 3b  r sb
1962 mil (nl)   64 .250  1  8  16  2  0  5  0
1963 mil (nl)   16 .250  0  0   4  2  0  3  0
1964 stl (nl)  106 .198  1  6  21  1  0  8  0
1965 stl (nl)  145 .228  2 10  33  7  0 17  0
1966 phi (nl)  207 .208  7 30  43  6  0 15  0
1967 phi (nl)   35 .171  0  7   6  2  0  3  0
1967 atl (nl)  158 .146  3 13  23  2  0 14  0
career totals  731 .200 14 74 146 22  0 65  0

sorry i don't have walks or caught stealing.  somehow i get the feeling they
wouldn't help bob's stats all that much anyway.

how about that 1966 career year?
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Thursday, 1 Oct 1992 12:43:55 EDT
From: Wayne Barber <BARBER@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cy Young?
 <1992Sep30.152408.13146@cs.rose-hulman.edu>
 <1992Oct1.012542.7469@cs.wayne.edu>

In article <1992Oct1.012542.7469@cs.wayne.edu>, dfl@math.wayne.edu (David
Frohardt-Lane) says:
>>The american league would probably have to be Roger Clemens again.  Same
>>story.
>
>I agree with you here.  Did anyone see Baseball Weekly's article making
>their choices for the award winnners?  They had Jack McDowell as the AL
>Cy Young winner!!  The article noted that his ERA was a bit high, but
>that he was a good compromise choice (I don't understand this).  They
>were also crazy in picking Eckersley for MVP.
>
The article quoted Dave Stewart (an impartial observer on Roger Clemens)
that Roger should not win because the Red Sox are in last place.  Thus,
while Jack McDowell is a worse pitcher, his team's offense was better
and he won 20 games.

This is utter nonsense.  Clemens is consistently at or near the top of
every meaningful statistical category for starting pitchers and no AL
starter is consistently higher than him.  For my money, the meaningful
statistics are:
1. Lowest in ERA
2. Most strikeouts
3. Fewest walksper inning

If anything, the fact that the Red Sox are in last should count in his
favor.  His run support has been negligible and he has still won 18
games.  If the bullpen had not blown a couple of saves, he would have
been over 20 easily.
--------------------------------------
Wayne Barber - Data Support Specialist
University of Maine System
INTERNET: Barber@Maine.Maine.Edu
Organization: Senior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Date: Thu,  1 Oct 1992 00:09:56 -0400 
From: Amit Likhyani <al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: PIRATES AGIAIN!!!

Excerpts from netnews.rec.sport.baseball: 30-Sep-92 Re: PIRATES
AGIAIN!!! by Paul S Galvanek@pitt.edu 
> That's an easy one!  Those other teams had Bobby Bonilla taking up space
> in the outfield and wasting a spot in the order.  Now that he's taking his
> rightfully earned lumps in New York the Pirates will murdalate the Braves. 

I was waiting for that.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: "mike walker" <mike.walker@canrem.com>
Subject: gruber (re: carter vs
Reply-To: "mike walker" <mike.walker@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: rec
Date: 27 Sep 92 02:43:38 EST


In message-ID: <1992Sep24.215248.14740@r-node.gts.org> you replied to
something dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (DR. Dave) wrote:
'
>Gruber sucks.  Need I say more?

>He is a rally killer.  He is an automatic out.  He is a perpetual strike-out
>victim.  He misses a lot of ground balls.  He no longer hussles.

>He sucks.

Basically, I agree, esp. about Cast Iron Gruber's offense. I know
there's been a big debate here about whether there's such a thing as
"clutch hiting, but Grubby is Mr. Choke in my book. He had one good
year (1990), and is now reverting to his career average (and true
potential. The guy is an offensive liability at a position where a
team should get some run production. Yes, he sucks!

Since his last injury, however, his "D" has improved greatly. He only
throws away one or two routine ones per week and rarely is eaten up by
hard grounders. He no longer is caught once or twice every game
standing back on the grass in a bunting situation. He actually gets
over to the stands before foul pops do. As I reread this it sounds
like sarcasm, but seriously, his defense is greatly improved. At first
I thought it was just in comparison to eff Kent who was brutal at 3rd
(hey, he's a second baseman/SS; how would you like to learn to play
the hot corner in the bigs in a pennaent race?). But overall Gruber's
defense is not enought to justify his staying on this team; he sucks!
---
  DeLuxe 1.12 #165  Aunt Em; Hate you & Kansas, took the dog.. Dorothy
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: The Superlatives (thanks!)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 21:22:49 GMT

In article <ahn-041092145930@branford-college-node.net.yale.edu> ahn@pop.cis.yale.edu (Eugene R. Ahn) writes:

>> Best rookie hitter: Eric Karros
>
>I hear what you're all saying. But in my opinion, Karros WORKED as a
>cleanup hitter, and Reggie seemed to choke in key situations. Karros did
>well with men-in-scoring-position (I believe it's something safely above
>.300). Did you know that at some point in the recent past, Karros had the
>most RBI's in the NL,  2nd only to Pendleton?
>
>Reggie struck out a scary number of times (90 in only 356 AB at one point),
>and doesn't work as a leadoff or 2nd batter despite his speed. I believe he
>had a weak average with men in scoring position, and I do know, most of his
>home runs were in non-crucial situations and with one or none on. So that's
>why Karros got this, and Reggie got...

But Karros strikes out way too many times too.  Besides, the fact that Sanders
lacks RBIs is more of an indication of where he bats (#2) than his slugging
ability, which appears to be far better than Karros'.
>
>> Most promising rookie hitter: Reggie Sanders
>He has the potential to surpass Karros in every category.  

He should have, this season, already, if he had not been benched (foolish) at
times for the immortal Dave Martinez.

>Woops. Forgot about Hojo. But he was injured, moved to a new position, and
>probably would have redeemed himself somewhat if he played in the 2nd half.
>I guess Matty just has a lot of things on his mind that are more important
>than baseball.

But HoJo, despite injuries and all, had a *much* better season than Williams,
who had a thoroughly horrendous season.  HoJo was merely below average;
Williams was near the bottom.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: gerry@macadam.mpce.mq.edu.au (Gerry Myerson)
Subject: Re: Avoiding the cellar
Originator: gerry@macadam.mpce.mq.edu.au
Organization: School of MPCE, Macquarie University, Australia.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 00:20:51 GMT



In article <1OCT199210093525@mary.fordham.edu>, nissim@mary.fordham.edu (Leonard J. Nissim) writes:

[...]
>      Their have been only nine streaks, I believe, where a major league team 
> has avoided the cellar for 40 or more consecutive years.  The three longest 
> such streaks have all ended in the 1990's:
[...]
>                                                                     Length of
>     Team           In cellar    Streak NOT in cellar   In cellar     streak 
> ----------------   ---------    --------------------   ---------    ---------
> Bklyn/LA Dodgers    1905        1906 to 1991            1992        86 years 
> St.L. Cardinals     1918        1919 to 1989            1990        71 years
> Boston Red Sox      1932        1933 to 1991            1992        59 years
> NY Yankees          1912        1913 to 1965            1966        53 years
> Cleveland Indians   1914        1915 to 1966            1967        52 years

I think you'll find the Indians didn't hit bottom until 1969, moving them 
one notch over the Yankees.

> Detroit Tigers       **         1901 to 1951            1952        51 years
> Chicago Cubs         **         1876 to 1924            1925        49 years
> Cinc. Reds          1937        1938 to 1981            1982        44 years
> Bos/Mil/Atl Braves  1935        1936 to 1975            1976        40 years 
[...]
> Leonard Nissim, notorious Dodger fanatic     (nissim@mary.fordham.edu)  

Gerry Myerson, notorious nitpicker
From: paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: post
Date: 2 Oct 1992 02:07:06 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Oct1.143027.2162@bvc.edu> mikef@bvc.edu writes:
>
>You have to admire the drive he's had the last couple weeks, highlighted by 
>a 4-4 night to reach the milestone.  All of this with a shoulder injury 
>that could have ended his season.
   
   It has been a joy watching him over the years. Of course I'll probably
   remember the pine-tar incident more than anything else (did he get
   screwed or what!). It's neat that he and Yount, two guys who have spent
   their whole careers in one town, both made it in the same year.

>I'm looking for a discussion whether this means he'll retire or not.  Any 
>guesses?  I think he's done and will join Rush Limbaugh on t.v.

   I can't see him playing again after the season is over. He'd probably
   make a hell of a hitting coach though.

   --salty
From: mmartin@wpi.WPI.EDU (Matthew Wayne Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Randy Johnson
Date: 28 Sep 1992 17:36:36 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu

	While watching the Red Sox game yesterday, Sean McDonough mentioned,
as they were going off the air, that Randy Johnson had 18 K's through 7
innings.  How many did he end up with?  Did he break Clemens' record?
Date: Tuesday, 29 Sep 1992 13:34:41 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: much to my chagrin...

much to my chagrin, all of this morris-bashing has caused me to come to
the defense of jack morris.

jack is not a bad pitcher.  jack has had a reasonably long career, and
has been average to good in virtually every season.  he also pitches many
innings.  someone who you can count on year in and year out to pitch a
lot of innings and not give up too many runs in the process is a valuable
player to have on your team.  of course, his value would be much higher
if there were no such thing as free agency, but there is such a thing.

bash the people who think jack morris is god's incarnation as a pitcher;
don't bash jack morris.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 06:57:57 GMT

In article <1ab569INNf0k@uwm.edu> paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger) writes:
>    
>    Generally, the Brewers baserunning has been very agressive and very smart
>    with the exception of Dante Bichette. Now maybe it hasn't won 20 games
>    directly, but indirectly there have been several. And if you take all of
>    Milwaukee's offensive attributes and keep them the same except for the
>    baserunning part, and trade that for Boston's baserunning ability, then
>    yeah, I think they'd be about 20 games worse.

Sorry, you are still talking out your ass on this one.  (Not to put it
too bluntly or anything.)  The Brewers are only 20 games ahead of the
Red Sox, so you are essentially saying that if the Brewers didn't run
the bases like they have, that they would turn *into* the Red Sox.

Guess that means that their pitching staff would have allowed ~70 more
runs (mostly unearned), huh?  And despite the fact that hitting to the
opposite field and such is considered "giving yourself up" (i.e. it
can be expected to lower your chance of getting a hit), the Brewers
would lose some 25 points of BA if they stopped these baserunning
plays.

No, I simply don't see how their baserunning has given the Brewers a
*far* better defense, much better BA/SLG, and significantly better OBP
than the Red Sox.  They've done that with their bats, not with their
legs.  Twenty games is what?  ~200 runs???  Over 1/4 of the Brewers
runs?  They would *not* score 200 fewer runs if they stopped running
the bases!!!

-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
From: zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Didi Seven Huckabay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Better than Runs
Summary: Come again?
Keywords: LundySoft, a wholly own subsidiary of KirschCo.
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:29:13 GMT
Organization: Lance Blankenship Appreciation Society (BB Division)

Thomas Hyer writes:
>In seriousness:
>
>  It is considered axiomatic here that pure Runs (however
>measured) are the single meaningful parameter of offensive
>preformance.  I don't think this is the case.

Then, pray tell, what is?  If you can't tell how good a team's offense
by how many runs are scored, what DO you use to measure it?
Considering the stat of team runs is the ONLY one that actually enters
into the decision of who wins the ball game, they seem to be of
PARAMOUNT importance to me.

>  Bunched runs are not worth _quite_ as much as single runs,
>because they _intrinsically_ tend to come in games you'll
>win anyway.

Oxygen isn't worth as much to your body as trace elements, as oxygen
is -intrinsically- taken into the body by healthy people.

>This is less important in the higher-scoring
>Apostatic League, but still an important effect.

Tripe.  Rubbish.  Garbage.  Drivel.  Offal.  Doggerel.

>  One can calculate (by Monte Carlo) the (league-dependent)
>value of an n-run inning, given the distribution of runs
>scored per inning in the league. 

If EVER there was a post for Roger Lustig to respond to, this is it.
Roger, I hope you're out there and reading this.  I'll make sure to
forward this to you in mail so you see a copy of it.

>If anyone has this data,
>I'll be glad to run such a Monte Carlo.  Then we can start
>worrying about how to incorporate the results into evaluation
>of players.

What, pray tell, are you hoping to find?  That it's more valuable to
score 5 runs in an inning than to score 1?  I have news.  It is.

If what you are proposing to find is whether it's better to score 5
runs in one inning or 1 run in five innings, well, then best of luck
to you.  It'll be a cute study.

>Thomas Hyer             _____________________   Sometimes you're the
>                       / Half the time, even \         windshield;
>-S--L----A------C-----<  _I_ don't share my / \   sometimes
>                       \    opinions.      /     you're the
>                        -------------------     bug.
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

One hopes that this is one of them.

Dr. Dave, it may well be time for that "StatHead Manifesto."  I'll
call my buddy Friedrich, and give him your phone number.  You can
reach him by FAX at 1-900-NAUGHTY.


-- 
* Gary Huckabay * "We need MORE people in the league.  8 isn't going to *
* "Gurgle. Eep."*  cut it.  It's a blast.  Why would someone NOT want   *
* "Acck.  Unh." *  to play?" "Perhaps because you and Chu always pull   *
* "Jose. Igg."  * rabbits out of your hat at the draft." "Ha.  Fear."   *
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Morris: more fuel for this debate
Date: 4 Oct 92 16:35:34 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <BvKnKz.J9L@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> mlstocku@zeno13.math.UWaterloo.ca () writes:
>  The Blue Jays won the division about an hour ago! 
>
> My opinion of Morris is this, and having watched just about every game
>he's pitched this year, and going to games in person in which he's pitched
>I think my opinion is valid.
> He has the uncanny ability to bear down in big games. No question about it, Morris _is_ the big game pitcher. I know it sounds corny, but it is entirley true.

>Morris receives all of this run support comparitively to say Key, purely because
>of his gamemanshipon the mound. Players respond to this atmosphere he creates
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>when he is pitching. I believe he really should be considered for the Cy Young
>award this year. His era, when it has really counted, has been miniscule.
>/Michael Stockus
>
>
>P.S. Jays win against Oakland in five.
>      Braves win against Pirates in seven.
>      Jays win against Braves in five.


If this is true, he should have had above-average run support
throughout his career. Can anyone check that?

Also, as others have said before: You have 162 games, and they are all
equally important. They don't actually get more important in Sept. A
game you win between April and August is a game you don't have to make
up in September. 

Also, last week he LOST a game in the playoff stretch. 

Look, I LIKE Morris. I think he's been one of the top 5 pitchers of the
last decade. And I posted some numbers recently showing he had pitched
better than his ERA. But he is still not in my top 10 for flat out
pitching performance this year; I can't put him ahead of Clemens,
Appier, Mussina, Nagy, Perez, Navarro. None of them have won as many,
but none have had his run support. The Toronto pitcher I would put on 
a Cy Young ballot (and did, in fact, for RSBB awards) is Guzman.

Clay D.
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: RC/27 for RFs
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 05:02:07 GMT

				RC/27	VALUE
Danny Tartabull, New York (AL)	8.22	45.0
Larry Walker, Montreal		7.65	48.1
Rob Deer, Detroit		6.69	27.0
Tony Gwynn, San Diego		6.22	31.1
Tom Brunansky, Boston		6.02	24.8
Andre Dawson, Chicago (NL)	5.96	27.7
David Justice, Atlanta		5.93	26.0
Jose Canseco, Oakland		5.91	24.0
Bobby Bonilla, New York (NL)	5.78	23.2
Daryl Hamilton, Milwaukee	5.75	21.2
Ruben Sierra, Texas		5.74	27.5
Felix Jose, St. Louis		5.72	23.0
Joe Carter, Toronto		5.56	27.2	; MVP?  MVP?
Paul O'Neill, Cincinnati	5.43	19.2
Joe Orsulak, Baltimore		5.33	13.7
Jay Buhner, Seattle		5.16	18.1
Mark Whiten, Cleveland		5.10	16.0
Dante Bichette, Milwaukee	5.06	11.6
AVERAGE				4.89
Willie McGee, San Francisco	4.80	11.1
Pedro Munoz, Minnesota		4.37	5.0
Phil Plantier, Boston		4.25	3.4
Eric Anthony, Houston		4.18	3.3
Jim Eisenreich, Kansas City	4.00	0.9
Dan Pasqua, Chicago (AL)	3.93	0.3
Von Hayes, California		3.71	-1.6

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