HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed)
Subject: Ten Best Peaks (was Sandberg)
Organization: Holos Software, Inc.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 14:11:43 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.213038.14499@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes:

>Morgan had one of the 10 best peaks ever.

Sounds like an interesting topic for off-season arguments.  Okay, as a Red and
especially in 1975-76 Joe Morgan was incredible.  Who else makes the top ten? 
To qualify, we need someone who had a peak well above what one would expect
when looking at the rest of the career, and a peak that didn't consist of
a single great year.  (Of course these guidelines, like evrything else on
the net, are arguable.)

To start it off, here are a couple of gimmes:
Mantle and Kofax.

At the other extreme is Henry Aaron, who somehow hit 755 homers but never
hit 50 in a single season.
-- 
Len Reed
Holos Software, Inc.
Voice: (404) 496-1358
UUCP: ...!gatech!holos0!lbr
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: YANKEE REFLECTIONS ANYONE???
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:57:47 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

jpollock@eagle.wesleyan.edu said:

>Watching all the games, I noticed that Kelly (along
>with Mattingly, who is most certainly NOT an impatient batter by anyone's
>standards) was swinging at many more bad pitches than he had the previous year

Just a nit:  Don Mattingly certainly _is_ an impatient hitter by my
standards.  I imagine that at least Gary Huckabay has similar standards,
and perhaps a few more netters...

-- 
       David Tate        |"Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | That sends the screaming liner over it 
 Prof. of Story Problems | And spills the bleacher-dwellers from their seats."
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR |  	"Fenway Wall", Robert Frost
From: CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CZ94)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Playoffs
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:04:34 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <1993Jan20.192545.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> pjtier01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:
>
>As for the playoff debate, while it would be untraditional to have non-pennant
>winners in the playoffs, it is also untraditional to have just 14.28% of the
>teams in the playoffs, which is how it will be this year.  In the 70's, it was
>16.66% and 20% before that.  With expansion to 30 teams and an increase to 8
>playoff teams, that's just 26.6% which is close to the levels of the old days,
>the numbers of which I do not have.  Also, as has been mentioned, future
>expansion would lower the percentage further.  There is no reason to fear a
>domino effect.  Also note that 26.6% is still lower than the NFL (35.7%), the
>NBA (59.2%), and the NHL (66.7%).  Hey stats folks, numbers don't lie.
>

How are you defining "traditional"?

From 1903 to 1960, there were 16 MLB teams, and 2 made the post-season
(12.5 %).  From 1962 to 1968, there were 20 teams, and again 2 made
the post-season (10 %).  I know this will seem incredible to many
of you, but before 1969, there were no divisions, and no LCS.

Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: arrow@netcom.com (Les Arrow)
Subject: Re: Bill James help
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:38:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.180826.11986@ncsu.edu> hmn@boggs.cc.ncsu.edu (Harry Nicholos) writes:
>|> Subject: Bill James help
>|> 
>|> I was looking through my books and I realized that sometime in the
>|> last 4 moves I have lost the 86 & 87 Baseball Abstracts by Bill James. 
>|> I _liked_ them old books.
>|> 
>|> Is anyone willing to sell  the 86 or 87 Baseball abstracts or knows
>|> where one is in a used book store?
>|> Condition is unimportant as long as I can read them and they don't
>|> have pages missing.
>|> fall apart.  These are for reading, not collecting.
>|> 
>|> 87 was the last year wasn't it?
>|> 
>
>

Try this place is Los Angeles. When I lived down there, many a time did
I happen in this place for an old Sports Illustrated, fantasy baseball book
or just fun reading. I remember they did have several copies of older 
abstracts.

The owner is very cool and probably would arrange to send you the titles
you want.

Sportbooks
Los Angeles, Ca.
310-652-9979

--Les
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Hall of Fame voting (read - Disgusted)
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:24:41 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu:
>roger lustig disputes a bunch of reasons why nolan ryan shouldn't be
>in the hall of fame.  

I can't tell if you're saying he was for or against, but either way I don't
think this is right.  As I recall, Roger was arguing against the proposition
that Nolan Ryan was "one of the greatest pitchers of all time".  HOF was a
side issue.

>at the end, however, responding to something like,
>"if we had a hall of REALLY greats, i'd put him in anyway!", roger says
>something like, "i don't see why, unless this hall has about 25 pitchers."
>wait a minute here.  if you think nolan ryan is among the 25 best pitchers
>of all time, don't you think he should be elected to the hall of fame?

Maybe.  Depends on how big you want your Hall to be.  I certainly don't think
that the 25th-greatest 3rd baseman of all time should go in.  (Who would that
be?  Doug DeCinces, maybe?)  Since pitching is at least 40% of the game,
though, one would think that you'd have a few more pitchers than third 
sackers...

I certainly wouldn't call the 25th-best pitcher ever "one of the greatest of
all time".  Chances are he wasn't even the greatest of his own time or league.


>
>bob vesterman.


-- 
       David Tate        |"Something there is that doesn't love a wall,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | That sends the screaming liner over it 
 Prof. of Story Problems | And spills the bleacher-dwellers from their seats."
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR |  	"Fenway Wall", Robert Frost
From: kim@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Tae Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: WANTED: 2 BRAVES TIX
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:03:42 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA

Hello everyone!!!
   I was just wonderring if anyone knew how I could get my hands on some
tix for a Braves game.  Any number I can call????  I'd like to get a pair
for a sat game if possible...know of any for sale??  Please drop me a line
if you know of any info that can help me out...
Thank ya' much!
Raj
kim@csugrad.cs.vt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,soc.women,soc.men
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Women Sports Reporters
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:17:31 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.032855.22345@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
>Here's the long version - in case there still is a disagreement on the
>facts.  Next come the interpretations.
>
>
>1)  Wyche had been fined in 2 previous incidents dealing with
>reporters - once for punching one, and another for not allowing reporters
>access to the players after a loss.
>
>2)  The comission's inflexible rules were that all reporters were to
>be allowed access to the locker room.

Nope, we don't agree here.  It is my recollection that an interview room is
sufficient, and that the Cowboys (under Landry) had done so.  This is
mentioned in Roger Angell's article on the subject of women in the locker
room.  I don't have the reference handy here, though it has appeared in
this thread.

>3)  Wyche did not allow a female reporter in the locker room.  He apparently
>offered to allow her to interview the players in another area (this 
>come from other net.posters - you have not specifically agreed that this
>occured as far as I know.) 

I agree with this.  

>My concern was that There does not seem to be any room in these policies for
>players to have privacy in the locker room.  This bothers me.  Hence my
>comments on the rigidity and inflexibility of 'the commission'.  I don't
>think reporters have any basic right to be in a players locker rooms, and
>I think the Comission was far too inflexible in this matter.

Once again, there is no Commission.  That's not a memory of mine, that's a
fact.  There is a Commissioner, and there are owners of football teams. 

>Though I haven't mentioned it specifically, my futher concern is broader
>than the rights of professional atheletes.  Perhaps unsurprisingly, I have
>heard of similar lack of concern for privacy of atheletes in a less prominent
>and less well paid position than professional ones from random intrusion from
>members of the opposite sex.

Do you have any specific examples? 

>We also seem to have disagreed on whether some players have a generic
>'bad attitude towards women' (whatever that is).

No, we didn't really discuss that at all. 

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dmeister@mansci1.UWaterloo.ca (Darren Meister)
Subject: Re: 1993 MLB WS odds
Organization: University of Waterloo
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 13:29:39 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.132431.24404@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> marwood@csri.toronto.edu (Simon J. Marwood) writes:
>
>
Just thought that I would convert these to divisions (assuming that the
lower the odds, the higher that team is expected to place in the divsion).
I might be interesting to have this as the Las Vegas entry in the annual
pick the divisions contest.

AL East				AL West
Toronto				Chicago
Milwaukee			Oakland
Baltimore			Minnesota
New York			Texas
Cleveland			Kansas City
Boston				Seattle
Detroit				California

NL East				NL West
Montreal			Atlanta
NY Mets				Cincinnati
St. Louis			San Diego	
Chicago				Los Angeles
Pittsburgh			Houston
Philadelphia			San Francisco
Florida				Colorado


-- 
Darren Meister                                    dmeister@mansci1.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: bz832@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wesley R. Kemmerlin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Braves Prospects
Date: 22 Jan 1993 20:56:54 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu




Article 162304 of rec.sport.baseball:
From: bz832@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wesley R. Kemmerlin)
>Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Braves Prospects
Date: 20 Jan 1993 00:39:25 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Does anyone have any defensive statistics on Braves prospects?
Here is the 1992 Minor League offensive statistics on them:

POS. BATS PLAYER          LEVEL BA   HIT HR RBI 2B 3B SB

OF   L    Tony Tarasco    AA    .286 140 15 54  22  2 33
2B   B    Ramon Caraballo AAA   .281 114  2 40  20  3 19
                          AA    .312  29  1  8   4  4 10
                          TOTAL .287 143  3 48  24  7 29
OF   R    Mike Kelly      AA    .229 108 25 71  18  4 22
OF   B    Melvin Nieves   AA    .283  99 18 76  23  5  6
                          A     .302  32  8 32   9  1  4
                          TOTAL .287 131 26 108 32  6 10
1B   L    Ryan Klesko     AAA   .251 105 17 59  22  2  3
C    R    Javy Lopez      AA    .321 142 16 60  28  3  7
SS   B    Chipper Jones   AA    .346  92  9 42  17 11 14
                          A     .277  73  4 31  22  1 10
                          TOTAL .311 165 13 73  39 12 24
3B   R    Jose Oliva      AA    .270 120 16 75  28  6  4

Looks like a great future lineup to join Braves already great
pitching staff. Plenty of speed, power, and high BA.
-- 
WESLEY
-- 
WESLEY
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Sandberg (was Re: Ty Griffen)
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:10:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.122112.13976@bsu-ucs> 00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
>In article <2272@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:
>> Thus spake 00bjgood@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu:

>>>There was talk of moving Ryno back to third when Griffen got
>>>to the majors. He was thought to be THAT good. Well anyway Ryno became more
>>>than just a former MVP, he bacame the premier second baseman in history 

>> Hee hee.

>> Do they really believe this in Chicago?  Talk about parochialism...

>So who do you think was better? And please don't say Joe Morgan. Maybe if you
>go back before 1950 you could make a case. Although I admit I should have said,
>one of the premier second basemen in history.

Why *not* say Joe Morgan?  Sandberg dreams of having a bat like that.  
Clearly he's the better fielder, but equally clearly, he's miles behind
Joe at the plate.  

Before 1950 (which *does* qualify as baseball history) there are Hornsby
(another so-so fielder but one of the greatest bats in the game) and
Eddie Collins.            

Roger
From: Timothy.J.Young@dartmouth.edu (Timothy J. Young)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Those Silly Jints
Date: 28 Jan 93 21:16:48 GMT
 <1k3gcsINN395@rave.larc.nasa.gov> <2717@blue.cis.pitt.edu>  
 <57768@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <57768@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>
rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:

> In article <2717@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes:
> >
> >Well, the San Fransisco Giants have just announced that Willie McGee will
> >bat leadoff, and Barry Bonds will bat fifth.
> >
> ><insert derisive yet rude noise here>
> >
> >Clearly, SF felt that it was important to make sure that McGee not only got
> >more PAs than Bonds, but that Bonds didn't take PAs away from Matt Williams
> >or Will Clark.
> 
> Its worse than that. Dusty Baker not only announced he would leadoff McGee
> and hit Bonds 5th, he announced that he would like to reinsert Matt Williams
> into the cleanup spot(where he has proven to be terrible, Matt just can't
> hit there for whatever reasons he can't). He then intimated that he is 
> also leaning towards reinserting Billy Swift in the starting rotation because
> he thinks he has a good enough bullpen with Rod Beck, but needs more starters.
> 
> Any predictions on how many starts Swift gets before his shoulder starts to
> hurt?
> 
> How long before Williams asks out of the cleanup spot?

The Giants don't have enough of either pitchers or hitters. They don't
have a real leadoff hitter (McGee's AVG is good but his OBA usually
isn't.)  If you bat Bonds fifth there's no one to drive him in, and
he'd have Matt Williams (an out machine) in front of him. Reverse that
and you'd have Williams as the guy who leads off the second inning
most. Unless Williams improves, they've got a four man offense (Clark,
Bonds, McGee, Thompson), and it ain't enough. If Williams gets better
you can bat him fourth, because Bonds leading off the second isn't a
bad idea. The problem is that Bonds is going to be getting tons of
intentional walks.

What they should have done is to lead off with a guy like Mike Felder,
bat McGee second, Clark third, Bonds fourth, Thompson fifth, and
Williams sixth. This way Thompson can bat behind Bonds (better than
whoever else it was they planned on putting behind him - whoever was in
LF,SS, or C) who had a '92 OBA of .456, a fact most people forget when
they label him "RBI man". There's less pressure on Williams, less
intentional walks for Clark and Bonds, a better role for Thompson, and
so on. 

On to the pitching. Why would Swift not be in the rotation?  They need
him there ; that's where the Giants never seem to have enough people.
Their bullpen may be OK but SF is short on starters.

If Clark or Bonds should ever get hurt seriously, this team could down
there with the Rockies. 

-Tim Young, Dartmouth College, Class of '96
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth
College, its students, or anyone else.
"Not everyone can carry the weight of the world..."- R.E.M.
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Date: 25 Jan 93 15:01:43 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago

In article <2467@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:
>Thought experiment:  suppose everybody else's starting 9 suddenly got much
>much better, but yours didn't, and the talent not currently in the majors 
>stayed the same.  Clearly, your players are suddenly much less valuable than
>they used to be, because they will win many fewer games than they used to.
>But replacement level HAS NOT CHANGED; average level has.

They're not less valuable, just less successful.  Replacement value
measures value, while average value measures relative expected success.

Thought experiment: Dave posits that "value" is measured by average value.
Therefore, an "average" starting pitcher, 200 innings pitched, 12-12 W-L, 
3.70 ERA, is worthless.  But this is clearly false.  By definition, such 
a pitcher would be wanted by at least seven of the fourteen NL teams, because
he would be better than *their* average pitcher; 5-6 others would be very
happy replacing their #5 pitcher with Joe Average.  I daresay that well over
half of the last twenty World Series champions would want Joe Average
on their team.  Joe Average has some positive value.  The value of Joe's
contribution is his contribution minus the opportunity cost of using Joe
Average.  The "contribution" may be zero, because he's "average."  But the
opportunity cost of using an average player isn't the opportunity to use
another average player -- it's the chance of using a player who is *below*
average -- the "replacement level" player.  There aren't Joe Averages
around for the pickings.  Talent in baseball is off the right end of the
curve, and the average player is still at a narrow level of the curve.

Thought experiment: Barry Bonds gets hit by a bus.  Is a team with Greg
Vaughn in LF any better off now that he's become "above average"?  How much
more would a team be willing to pay for Vaughn, given that he's above
average, whereas before he was below average?
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Expos/Brewers Trade
Date: 22 Jan 1993 15:35:07 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

   Milwaukee just gave up infielder Charlie Montoyo and 1B Oreste Marrero
   for OF Todd Samples and P Ron Gerstein. Anyone have info on these guys?
   About all I know is that Marrero played at Beloit (or was it El Paso)
   with two of his brothers on the same team. 

   Any info would be appreciated,

   --salty
From: silber@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: AVERAGE/GOOD values...
Date: 21 Jan 93 20:25:25 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Sci - University of Illinois



>   What are the AVERAGE avg/obp/slg values for each position?
>That is, what are the values that are adequate?  And, as a
>followup, what are the values that are GOOD, or well above
>average?  

The Baseball 'Thang posts the averages. They seem consistent
across the leagues, so the presence of a dominating hitter
at a position in one league doesn't give rise to a totally
skewed perspective. (The biggest difference that I noticed
was about 20-30 points, tops.) In terms of what one consideres
adequate, that depends upon whether one considers the average
adaquate, or if one wants to go with some sort of mean.
It makes sense, for instance, when determining what an
"adaquate" 1st-baseman is to throw out the Andres Gallaragas
of the world, since it is clear that the only reason he has
a job is that he has pictures of Maxwell and several overendowed
cocktail waitresses. One might also throw out the top one or two
players at a position as well, if they are considerably above
their nearest competitors. (For instance, in the AL, there were
only about two or three leftr-fielders (Henderson, Mack) more
than a little above average last year.)

.
-- 
ami silberman - janitor of lunacy
	silber@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dietz@parody.Data-IO.COM (Kent Dietz)
Subject: Where is G-Man Playing? (Gaetti question)
Organization: Data I/O Corporation
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:55:29 GMT

I noticed yesterday that Gaetti is not on the list of "Free Agents Not Yet
Signed" list for California.  Has he signed with someone?  Does anyone
know the story.  I've been expecting to see him sign a "minor league contract
with major league incentives" with the Twins, ala Bert Blyleven.

From what I have heard, the Twins are looking for 3B help -- seemed a perfectly
warped solution.

Kent Dietz
Twins in '93  (USA Today Baseball Weekly, Dec 30, 1992)
From: wynblatt@sbgrad5.cs.sunysb.edu (Michael Wynblatt)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: i want.
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:44:08 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook

In article <1993Jan26.170253.2399@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
>In article <93025.170947RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>>i want many things.  specifically, though, i want a baseball encyclopedia
>>with the following characteristics:
>>     3) cross-indexed so that joe dude's 1938 stats appear in at least
>>        two places: under joe dude's career entry, and under the 1938
>>        (hitter/batter/whatever joe was) section
>
>The only encyclopedia which has Joe Dude's 1938 stats in a 1938 section is
>the _Sports Encyclopedia: Baseball_, by Neft and Cohen, but SE:B wouldn't
>have the 1938 stats under Joe Dude's career entry.  A combination of SE:B
>and TB II will give you this.
>
Macmillan's 1990 has complete stats under the player's name, and *some*
stats listed by team by year.  So Joe Dude is listed under Dude, Joe, as
well as under 1950 Boston Bombers, 1951 Boston Bombers, etc.  Statistics
under the team are only partial, and only for players who had (as I recall)
	100 PA, 10 HR, 100 IP or 10 decisions (including saves).

>>     7) none of this cheesy ignoring when a batter pitches, or a pitcher
>>        bats
>
>Most sources will contain pitching records for non-pitchers, but the only
>source I'm aware of (though I don't own it, sad to say) that contains
>pitcher batting records is the original edition of the Big Mac, published
>in 1969.  
Macmillan's 1990 has both, but only AB,H,HR,AVG for pitchers, unless they
played at least one game in the field (in their career!).

>Sherri Nichols
>snichols@adobe.com
>
Michael
From: drew.carley@canrem.com (drew carley)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: schofield to the jays
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:34:16 GMT
Reply-To: "drew carley" <drew.carley@canrem.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Canada Remote Systems


DM>Gee, if I were a Jays fan, and thank god, I'm not, I'd be worrying about
DM>their third and fourth starters, too.  And maybe their second starter.
   PUH...LEASE!The only pitcher that wasn't in the starting rotation
   last year when the Jays became the best team IN THE WORLD is Dave
   Stewart(not a bad addition don'tcha know)As far as Lee is concerned
   he was playing so far above his head offensively last year he was
   suffering from permanent nosebleeds.Schofield will certainly be a
   welcome and settling addition to the left side of the infield.
   I too thank God that you are not a Jays fan!BTW who do you like?

Drew Carley,Toronto Canada
---
 ~ DeLuxe} 1.25 #2177 ~ Silly Rabbit;Tricks are for Hookers
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Xref: sparky rec.sport.baseball:38465 soc.women:23101 soc.men:23331