HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: scott@asd.com (Scott Barman)
Subject: Re: Why bother to watch the World Series?
Organization: American Software Development Corp., West Babylon, NY
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:40:01 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.175240.14804@leland.Stanford.EDU> daveshao@leland.stanford.edu (David Shao) writes:
>Of all the major sports in the United States, major league baseball
>has the most illogical and capricious system of determining home
>field advantage in the playoffs.

It's very logical.  Last year, the NL East winner had the home field
advantage (the extra game), this year the NL West winner (Braves) have
it.  Next year, the NL East winner will have the extra game.

In the AL, The AL East winner has the extra game.  Next year, the AL
West winner will, and in 1994, the AL East winner will have it again.

It rotates from year to year.  There is no "reward" for winning more
games.  The playoffs have been doing this since they started it in 1969
and, with one exception, nobody has complained.

[The one exception was in 1986 when the Astros did not exercise their
 primary tennants rights in the Astrodome which caused a change in the
 schedule.  Instead of the Mets getting the extra game, the Astros did
 because they did not want to force the Oilers to reschedule a game. The
 Mets did protest to no avail.]

That being the case, what is so illogical or capricious about it?  It
is laid out for you in advance so how can it be questioned?

-- 
scott barman			| <This space intentionally left blank>
scott@asd.com			|
 (I can barely speak for myself, you expect me to speak for my employer??)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Expos logo
Organization: pubs
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:39:56 CDT


The thread about the A's logo has emboldened me to make this confession:
the Expos logo makes no sense to me (that squiggly thing, not the way
they write the word "expos").  Maybe it's a Rorschach test: the meaning
you find in it reveals something about you.  (I can almost make it seem
to spell "expos" and I can almost make it seem to form a capital M.)
Perhaps someone who is practiced in graphic iconography can explain it
for me.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: stanm@comm.mot.com (Stan Macasieb)
Subject: Re: Lead off walks....
Reply-To: stanm@comm.mot.com
Organization: Motorola
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:34:52 GMT

In article 5089@adobe.com, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>In article <lcifu4INNh9c@cronkite> andy@misha.Central.Sun.COM writes:
>>Watching the Sox/Twins game last night,  Hawk & Wimpy (the Sox Commentators/homers)
>>made a comment that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than say a leadoff
>>hit. Probably not as often as a leadoff homerun... :-)
>>
>>I assume that their comment was statistically baseless,  except for the 
>>inning where the leadoff walk happend to score in this game, however,
>>does a stat hound out in net.land have any info on this ?  
>
>I don't have exactly what they were talking about, though I assume they
>*really* meant that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than a leadoff
>*single*, not hit.  There's a very, very slight effect in the difference
>between a leadoff walk and a leadoff single.
>
>Effect of first event in inning, both leagues, 1984-1991
>
>
>Leadoff		Prob of >= 1 run	Avg. number of runs
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>single		.428			.855
>walk		.432			.865
>error		.441			.867
>out		.156			.255
>other		.742		       1.215
>

So, a leadoff walk is no better than a leadoff single when it 
comes to scoring runs, statwise. I think what most broadcasters tend
to believe is that, when a pitcher gives up the leadoff walk,
it is a sign that the pitcher is having some control problems. 
Unless it was a frozen rope, a leadoff single is not as much
of an indicator of the pitcher's performance at the moment.

If I read this correctly, the bottom line is that, when the leadoff
man gets on, the pitcher may be on his way to a trip to the showers.

Sometimes I think Hawk and Wimpy just can't wait to get home after
this season is over. In this case, it's their mouth that betrayed them.

******************************************************************************
--Stan Macasieb (stanm@comm.mot.com)              |  
--Motorola, Land Mobile Products Sector           |  Catch "Civil Wars" on
--Schaumburg, IL (just another suburb of Chicago) |  ABC tonight at 9:00 PM CDT
--------------------------------------------------|
~~The opinion expressed in this post is not       |  Mariel Hemingway bares
~~necessarily those of this corporation.          |  all on US network TV
~~Copyright 1992, all rights reserved.            |  And it's part of the plot!
******************************************************************************
From: andy@misha.Central.Sun.COM (Andy Knipp SE Andersen)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Lead off walks....
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:48:52 GMT
Reply-To: andy@misha.Central.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.152.10.9

Watching the Sox/Twins game last night,  Hawk & Wimpy (the Sox Commentators/homers)
made a comment that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than say a leadoff
hit. Probably not as often as a leadoff homerun... :-)

I assume that their comment was statistically baseless,  except for the 
inning where the leadoff walk happend to score in this game, however,
does a stat hound out in net.land have any info on this ?  


---
Andy Knipp                    |
Sun Microsystems              | The secret to success is sincerity,
Chicago Loop District         | once you can fake that,  you have it made.
andy@sunloop.central.sun.com  |
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Morris: more fuel for this debate
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:58:23 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis):
>In Sunday's game, Morris pitched 4+ innings and then had to sit 2 hours
>for a rain delay.  He had a 9-run lead at the time (but why penalize him
>for this??).  He returned to finish the 5th and then pitched the 6th, giving
>up 0 runs, 0 ERs, 3 hits and 1 walk.  Morris wins his 20th and he did it in
>New York.  His ERA is now 3.99.

It was a fine performance, but again goes to show that the people who say
that Morris is tough when he most needs to be tough, and relaxes when he has
a cushion, just don't know what they're talking about.  If there was ever a
time when Jack *could* have (even *should* have) let up, it was with a 9-run
lead in the rain...

-- 
       David Tate        |"Out of the dugout endlessly swinging,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | Out of the manager's throat, the sound fundamentals,
 Prof. of Story Problems | Out of the six-month season..."            
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR | 	Walt "Lefty" Whitman
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: popovich@cs.columbia.edu (Steve Popovich)
Subject: Re: Philly Mayor/Pro Sports/Income Tax ?
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 05:07:32 GMT

>Don't they ever learn?  In the early part of this century, the Phillies and
>Athletics were among the worst teams in baseball consistently.  Their
>problems were financial; any players who were good enough were able to
>bring a good amount when they were sold.  However, the cause of this was
>not stinginess, but the Pennsylvania Blue Laws which prohibited baseball
>on Sundays.

Why didn't the Pirates have this problem, then?  Or did they, and I
just never managed to learn about it when reading about their history?
They were also in Pennsylvania at the time (and still are :-),
although nearly 300 miles away from Philadelphia at the other end of
the state.
	-Steve
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Sheffield is NL MVP
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 22:28:59 GMT
Organization: Boo!  

In <1992Sep30.144756.1661@island.COM> fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:

>In article <1992Sep27.171110.20018@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>>In <17596@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> fzchen@othello.ucdavis.edu writes:
>>

>>  Who says OBP is more important than 
>>>SLG???!!!

>>Oh, about 100 years of baseball teams who increase their run production
>>more by gaining 5 points of OBP than by gaining 5 points of SLG.  

>For confirmation, see this year's Detroit and Baltimore teams.

>(through Sept 21)
>Baltimore .342 OBP, .402 SLG, 651 runs
>Detroit   .336 OBP, .407 SLG, 724 runs

Sigh.  Its Mike "I Can't See The Forest, I'm Too Near The Trees Again"
Fester.  Listen, Mike, when something is, on average, true through 100
years of baseball, there are going to be exceptions.  If you put together
a lineup as badly as Johnny Oates, does, no, you're not going to score as
many runs as you should (There may be other factors involved, of course).
We've also discussed here endlessly that Detroit's mix of homers and walks
is probably more valuable than a mix of greater variety which adds up to
the same OBP and SLG.  But that doesn't change that in most situations
OBP points are more valuable than SLG points.  You can come up with all the
exceptions you want, and it just doesn't matter.  Unless you want to go
back and study every team and player in baseball history, what you say
is just going to be ignored.  If you want to do a major project like
that and you come back with evidence that clashes with what similar
research has shown, then people will listen.  

Just because two liberal Sastachukans say they're going to vote for
Abraham Lincoln for President would not invalidate a study which
concluded that most liberal Sastachukans vote for someone who's still
alive.   Nor it would conflict with a study that concludes that
Conservative Laconsions are much more likely to vote for Lincoln
than the liberal Sastachukans.    

>Not to mention that at least one GM awarded a mutli-year, multi-million $$
>contract to a 28 year-old, injury-prone catcher with a career OPS of ~.670
>(Daulton). Or picked up a 29 year-old journeyman pitcher and decided to hand 
>him the ball every 4th or 5th game (Stewart). Yep, really stupid, those GMs.

Well, in the case of Daulton, it was a stupid move.  You're confusing
what the outcome was with how the move should be judged.   Good results
can come from bad decisions, and bad results from good decisions.  (Stewart
is a bit more complicated).

Again, Mike, finding exceptions doesn't have anything to do
with the rule.  In fact, if you couldn't find such exceptions, I'd be
more worried.  That would indicate something wrong, because systems just
don't work like that.  

Greg
From: taube@isa.de (Christian Taube)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: SCDN Manifesto
Date: 6 Oct 92 14:52:22 GMT
Organization: ISA GmbH, W-7000 Stuttgart 1, Germany

palmer2@sscl.uwo.ca (The Econoclast) writes:
>[nice argument deleted]
>But don't tell me I don't know how to enjoy baseball. I do. My way.

To each their own.  Thanks for telling us, seriously.  Sitting several
thousand miles away from the most interesting baseball action and not
having constant access to televised baseball, let alone any ballparks
at all, forces me to enjoy baseball any which way I can.  I've been to
a few games, from MLB to Single A, and loved them all; but being
forced to listen to AFN broadcasts most of the season and to visualize
everything that's going on makes me appreciate the value of stats.

Good argument.  Let the flames come in :-).

Christian


-- 
Christian Taube (taube@isa.de), ISA GmbH, 7000 Stuttgart 1, Germany
Any opinions expressed are mine, and mine only! Thought for today:
These are the scientists of the impulse engine "Enterprise."  Her 5-year
mission - to logically go where no shuttle has gone before.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: musjndx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Jonathan N. Deitch)
Subject: Re: Attendence figures
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 03:48:22 GMT

cs902060@ariel.yorku.ca (GEOFFREY E DIAS) writes:

>	I just read in the newspaper that the Skydome in Toronto had
>only 35,000 unsold seats in the entire season! I wonder how many stadiums
>had this figure for one game?

Well ... you can bet that it didn't happen in Atlanta this year ... finding
tickets period was quite interesting ... 3 million + -- Wow !

- Jonathan
From: hobbs@a.cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Gerald R Hobbs)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Lead off walks....
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:05:03 GMT


>>Watching the Sox/Twins game last night,  Hawk & Wimpy (the Sox Commentators/homers)
>>made a comment that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than say a leadoff
>hit. Probably not as often as a leadoff homerun... :-)
>>
>>I assume that their comment was statistically baseless,  except for the 
>>inning where the leadoff walk happend to score in this game, however,
>>does a stat hound out in net.land have any info on this ?  

>I don't have exactly what they were talking about, though I assume they
>*really* meant that a leadoff walk tends to score more often than a leadoff
>*single*, not hit.  There's a very, very slight effect in the difference
>between a leadoff walk and a leadoff single.

>Effect of first event in inning, both leagues, 1984-1991


>Leadoff		Prob of >= 1 run	Avg. number of runs
>-------------------------------------------------------------
>single		.428			.855
>walk		.432			.865
>error		.441			.867
>out		.156			.255
>other		.742		       1.215

[Responding to the initiators post but using Sherri's data to do so]

First, thanks to Sherri for the numbers because I sure didn't have
them. 

Looking at the single/walk/error part of the above I'm inclined to
think we are looking at noise. I guess one can argue that a walk
indicates a certain wildness on the pitcher's part, ergo more
scoring. Someone else can argue the a single suggests the pitcher
doesn't have good stuff, ergo more runs. The error part is
interesting though. Evidently the pitcher 1) threw strikes and
2) induced the batter to hit a playable ball so why should the 
scoring rates be higher? Well, two things come to mind. The error
may have been a more than one base error (of course a single can
be followed by by a same play error too). The other is that the 
sample size for the error line above is probably pretty small
and so the resulting estimate isn't very precise.

                                   Gerry





Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Elias/STATS projections
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 05:37:59 GMT

In article <92272.184124RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>re: stats 57 points off, elias 82 points off (or whatever).
>
>i wouldn't say "stats' predictions are better than elias' predictions,"
>i would say "stats' predictions and elias' predictions are both bullshit."

I dunno.  An average error of 57 points of OPS seems rather good to me.

>i tried this at the all-star break:  i only considered batting average,
>because i am lazy, and compared stats to elias.  i found they both bit the
>big wazoo.  i then made up my own idiotic prediction system, which was
>this: assume everyone is a perfectly average batter.

Post your results, please?  Besides, BA is hardly a worthwhile stat to
be measuring on.  OBP/SLG are more predictable.  Bill James compared
his predictions on R and RBI totals, and found that if he predicted
the PT properly, that he generally came close to the RBI totals.
Surprise! <sarcasm>  His predictions aren't as good as he thinks, but
they aren't bad either.

>i could be wrong, of course.

I'd be interested to see your numbers.  Did you do it on a spreadsheet?

Cheers,
-Valentine

-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@fish.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: AL:  CY YOUNG - Mike Mussina
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 05:24:06 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.115626.27381@europa.asd.contel.com> bulleri@chopin.eng.gtefsd.com (Chris Bulleri) writes:

>Well with all this talk about the CY Young starting up,
>has anyone ever thought of Mike Mussina of the Orioles.

Never considered it.  :)  (Check the .sig)

>Take a look at his record, era, and if you consider
>that if the bullpen hadn't blown about 5 leads for him
>this year he would have a most impressive record.  
>Right now he is 18 - 5 with about a 2.56 era, I think
>a little less after last nights 3-2 win.  Granted he

Mussina's ERA is third in the league, but his RA is second in the
league, way better than Clemens.

Okay, not *way* better.

	ERA	RA	IP	 BB/9	K/9
Clemens 2.41 -- 2.91 -- 246.6 -- 2.3 -- 7.6
Appier  2.46 -- 2.55 -- 208.3 -- 2.9 -- 6.5
Mussina 2.56 -- 2.64 -- 232   -- 1.8 -- 4.9
McDow'l 3.20 -- 3.31 -- 244.6 -- 2.6 -- 6.0

(Through 9/27)

But Mussina just pitched 9 innings, allowing 2 runs, which makes his
stats even better.

>won't get the 20 wins but although he doesn't strike
>out as many men as McDowell he also doesn't walk as many.

That's an understatement.  He doesn't walk as many as ANYONE.  Only
Chris Bosio has a smaller BB/9 ratio, and the difference is 1.7 to 1.8.

>Now he probably won't get it but he should get a least 
>a few votes considering what he has done.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions
niepornt@phoenix.    | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
   princeton.edu     | Roland Hemond: SIGN BARRY BONDS!!!!!!!!
Vote Clinton/Gore '92.   Four more months!	  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: Real-life rulebook trivia
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:43:19 GMT

Speaking of real-life rulebook situations...

In the top of the fifth at Yankee Stadium yesterday, Toronto had a 9-0
lead, and it was starting to rain heavily.

Alfredo Griffin at the plate with a 1-2 count.

Greg Cadaret bounces a pitch to the backstop.

Griffin swings and misses.

Mattingly receives the throw but doesn't try to tag the bag.

Ump calls Griffin out when he walks back to the dugout without trying to run.

(The game suffered a two-hour rain delay, Toronto went on to win 12-2.
Morris got his 20th win--obviously, having Jack on the mound encouraged the
Jays to pummel Sanderson.)
-- 
           .. . . .  .  .   .    .     .     .    .   .  .  . . . ..
          ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
         the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: Inevitable changes
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:12:22 GMT

In article <17700@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Didi Seven Huckabay) writes:
>How about this:
>
>	West          Midwest         South          East
>      California      Chicago         Atlanta      New York
>      Chicago (AL)    Cleveland       Houston      Toronto
>
>Geographically, it's not perfect

I'll say.  What, again, was the justification for putting Chicago and
Chicago in different divisions?

(And why doesn't Chicago (NL) get an (NL) designation?)

:)

>-- 
>* 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."   *

How do I sign up?
-- 
           .. . . .  .  .   .    .     .     .    .   .  .  . . . ..
          ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
         the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: barnes@cowboys.esd.sgi.com (Jim Barnes)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Braves
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:39:34 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

CONGRATULATIONS  ATLANTA BRAVES  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Date: 2 Oct 92 20:10:55 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <6947@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>In article <bhap-jg@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt "Some  
>Guy" Bose) writes:
>> In article <92275.012838RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>  
><RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:

>> >i just can't see how you can deny any of the following statements:

>> >   1) ballplayers are humans, not robots.

>> >   2) different humans react differently to pressure.  some react  
>well,
>> >      some react poorly.

>> >   3) there is a hell of a lot of pressure during the post-season.

>> >those three things, in my mind, at least, add up to "there are  
>choke
>> >players, and there are clutch players."

>> Okay, I agree with every point except number two. 

>You disagree with the second point (that some folks do better under
>pressure than others).  I can walk around my office an
>identify easily some people who want to hide under their desk
>when the pressure gets high and others who thrive on it and 
>do their best work in the final week before a deadline.
>Logically, this pressure must be present in baseball, also; the
>players are human, after all, and there's no reason to assume
>that some won't act better under pressure than others.

Logically, perhaps -- but "better than others" doesn't mean that 
anyone does really badly under pressure, *because* of the pressure.
After all, one doesn't get plucked off the street to play MLB; one 
goes through 15 years of training first, during which people who
are *really* poor under pressure get selected out.  The majors aren't
that much more intense than the College WS or the state high school
championships -- for the players involved.  In fact, based on some 
parents I've seen, Little League can have more real emotional pressure
than the seventh game of the Series or a tough bit of neurosurgery.

>Now, whether the effects of this pressure can ever be seen or
>proved given the small sample size of the true pressure
>situations is another issue. 

Excuse me, but what's a "true pressure situation?"  How do *you* know
when some player feels pressure? Ken made this mistake by assigning
point values to this or that; that's how *he* feels, not necessarily 
a player.

>I'm not sure that it can.  But the
>statement "differnt humans react ifferently to pressure.  some react 
>well, some react poorly" is certainly true.

Indeed.  And we must be very careful when applying it to what we know
of baseball players.  Especially careful to avoid prejudices and errors
of inference and overgeneralization.

Roger
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball