HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Death To Live Arms Huckabay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Jays' player changes and 1993
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:13:17 GMT
Organization: Pity That Stupidity Is'nt Painful, Inc.

Jay "Fire and Brimstone" Chu writes:
>>Joe Carter - they may try to resign Joe for the team and his leadership. 
>>There's nothing to indicate that he's washed up or anything, but they may 
>>only want to siign him for a couple of years, which gives other teams the 
>>opportunity to up the ante.
>
>They have to resign him, as mentioned by Pat Gillick.  This is their
>first and utmost priority.  And not "may try to resign Joe" like you mentioned.

Then Pat Gillick is either a fool, or hates Dave Kirsch.  I know that
Dave would just LOVE to see Joe Carter in a Jays uniform for four
years at $5 Million a year.  Isn't that right, Dave?  Dave Till has
mentioned to me in email that he think Joe Carter is the Key to Jays
dynasty.  Or is that Die-Nastily?

>>Manny Lee - Manny is history. They will finally give Eddie Zosky the chance 
>>to prove himself, with Griffen subbing from time to time.

>Griffen is also a free agent, didn't you know?  I doubt that the Jays will
>resign him.  Now, Manuel Lee was, and I quote, the best shortstop in
>the American League this season.  Why would you give up on him?  The guy is
>only 27 years old and just learned to play his game as good as anybody.

What game is that?  Lee was a plus this year, but not by THAT much,
and he was (wait for it) *27* years old.  And posted a .345 OBP.  Look
for .320 next year.  Acceptable for two more years, at most.

>>Jimmy Key - History. Jimmy will command too much, based on his World 
>>Se4ries appearence. A good pitcher but therre are lots like him in MLB (
>>finese lefties).
>
>Yeah?  Are there "lots like him" in the MLB?  From what I heard, there is
>only a LIMITED number of lefties in the game.

There's plenty of lefties, but most of them aren't as good, or as
reliable, as Key.  I don't know that I'd resign him, though.  He
reminds me of Bob Welch '90 - A great guy to have on the club for a
small price and a short time, but market forces dictate that those two
things just aren't possible.

>Sorry to get in your case, but since your post is being read by people
>all over the world, just want to get the facts straight by a person
>who has the closest perspective of the Jays --- a Torontonian.

Puh-leese.  Since when is physical proximity the be-all and end-all of
perspective?  If you think Joe Carter is a must sign, then I'd say
your proximity is hindering your judgment, not helping it.

Looking at mountains with a microscope is usually of limited value.
(Gee, I hope this sentence ends up in Lundy's .sig.)



-- 
*   Gary Huckabay    * "Bobby Valentine?  Bobby F$#%ing Valentine?  S%^t,  *
*  "Lower imbecile   *  Gary, *I* could manage the Mariners better than    *
*   tolerance than   *  him, and I don't even bring the baggage of Tom     *
*   Sherri Nichols." *  House with me.   Arrrgh." - A. Nonymous Netster.   *
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: 5 truly unbreakable records.
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:31:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.182140.1452@asd.com> scott@asd.com (Scott Barman) writes:
>In article <92309.122328RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>>enough of this "no one will ever hit 800 dingers" crap.  here are five
>>*real* unbreakable records, by any decent definition of "unbreakable":
>>
>>1) lifetime batting average.  1.000.  many people.
>>2) lifetime era.  0.00.  many people.
>>3) single season slugging average.  4.000.  bill lefebvre, 1938;
>>   buster narum, 1963.
>>4) lifetime winning percentage.  1.000.  many people.
>>5) coolest.  steve balboni.
>
>6) Number of putouts in an inning: 3.  many people.
>7) Number of assists in an inning: 3.  many people.
    
This one is breakable. I don't know if it has been done, but it is
possible to get 4+ assists in one inning. If shortstop throws a ball to
the first baseman, which he drops, the 1B is charged with an error and
the SS is credited with an assist. Combine that with three normal 6-3
plays, and you have a 4 assist inning.

In the same vein, of course, as 4 strikeouts in one inning, which I
beleive is the record.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mattingly, what a fine fielder (was: Hardly not etc.)
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:47:39 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Distribution: na

In article <1992Nov05.005627.159157@zeus.calpoly.edu>  
jplee@zeus.calpoly.edu (Jason Lee) writes:
> In article <1992Nov4.213201.1157@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com  
(Sherri Nichols) writes:
> >So, how many balls have you seen Mark McGwire field?  Ten?  Fifty?   
Would
> >you make a judgement about whether Mark McGwire was a good hitter  
based on
> >watching him hit in 10 at bats?  50 at bats?  Or would you look at  
the
> >stats?  
> 
> What difference does it make?  He said he *feels* that Mattingly is  
as
> good as McGwire.  Arguing about it is the whole fun of it.  When I
> joined a fantasy league, I found that the most fun I had was  
arguing
> about players and their relative worth.  I learned a lot by  
listening to
> other people's opinion. 
> 

There are two responses to this. First: we are arguing about their
relative worth.  So I guess this is fun.

More to the point though, are all "feelings" created equal?
(I'm not sure why you empahsized "feels," by the way.)  I've 
seen Luis Rivera have some real good games at shortstop. (He's
also had some real bad ones there, but I'll ignore those for
now.)  Is it reasonable based on that to say that I feel that
Luis Rivera is as good as Ozzie Smith?  Or, lets take a
recent example: Borders had a great world series. Is it
reasonable for me to say that I feel he is as good a hitter
as Barry Bonds? He certainly was good in those games
I watched.  

You have to judge players based on a reasonable number of games.
A dozen isn't enough. The only way to do this is stats. (Oh,
you can go to all your team's games and say that you think
one of their players is good and make a reasonable case for
it, but you still can't do an effective job comparing him
to another play, who you've only seen ten times or less.)

I've found this (and previous debates) on defense to be rather
interesting, because it is the last place in baseball where
many baseball people still try to judge the "best at XXX" just by 
watching them, not by any coherent statistical basis. We may
debate which stats make someone the "best power hitter" or
"best hitter"  (OPS vs. BA vs. SLG vs. OBP vs. all sorts of
other things). But on defenese for too long it's come down
to "I watched him and he looked good."  I'll be interested 
to see if baseball as a whole (and not just isolated pockets
of stat fans) adopt some kind of better defensive stat in the
near future.

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Yankees protected list
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:47:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.170129.22484@osf.org> ron@osf.org (Ron Birnbaum) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.091438.4421@Princeton.EDU>, you write:

>|> As to 3b/ss, remember that they can only lose one player in the draft.

>  Huh?? Why is that - did they pay off the new teams to only take 1 of their
>players? All the other teams can lose up to 3 players!!

Sorry, this is unclear, and I knew it after I wrote it.  (Especially
after all that mail filled my mailbox.)  No, what I *mean* is that they
only lose one player, then they get to protect more.

So as long as you own more than 1 shortstop somewhere in your system, it
doesn't matter whether you protect them.  You lose one, *then* you
protect the other.

>|> The Yankees have too many 1b/dh type players.
>|> Tartabull/Maas/Snow/Mattingly.

>  Mattingly can still play 1st - but Mass and Snow probably never will. Trade
>'em both! Danny is much more valuable than the other guys in that group.

I can't imagine Maas and Snow both not being better than Mattingly next year.
But that's true.  Tartabull is better than the other 3 put together.

>|> Tartabull can play of, but then one of Williams/Williams/O'Neill has to sit.
>|> Not that that is a bad idea, with Gerald Williams.

>  Yep. I'd platoon Danny with O'Neill - with Danny DHing lots of times when he
>isn't playing right! With Barry Bonds in left and Bernie in center - they'd be
>in good shape in the OF. 

Wait -- do you mean:
LF: Bonds
CF: Bernie
RF: O'Neill/Tartabull
DH: Tartabull/someone

If so, I mostly agree, though I don't know why you don't leave Tartabull
as full time DH and play O'Neill+someone (Gerald Williams?) full time in
RF.

>|> But that still leaves someone out, and if they sign Bonds that leaves
>|> someone else out.

>  It's good to have a deep bench you know!

It's not that deep, because they're protecting all the wrong players, 
as far as I can tell.

Why not Bam Bam?  Why Mattingly?

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
niepornt@phoenix.    |------------------------------------ 
   princeton.edu     | "I still believe in a place called Hope."
Clinton/Gore '92.  Don't stop thinking about tomorrow.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jlundy@bilbo.encore.com (Joe Lundy)
Subject: Re: Unofficial Protected Lists from San Jose Mercury
Organization: Encore Computer Corp.
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:42:00 GMT

Joe,

I'm definitely looking forward to this draft.  The two teams have an
unprecedented chance to get competitive real quickly.  I don't know if they
are going to choose guys like Tartabull with huge contracts, but the amount
of prospects and players with potential are going to make this thing real
interesting.  I move to make Tuesday (draft day) a state holiday...

-- Joe
From: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: John Valentin
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:53:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: engage.1992Nov9.165341.7212
Reply-To: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


< case, any time a player hits better in the majors than in the minors,
< you *know* it is a fluke.  

I won't argue that statement. But, would you be willing to tell that to
Jim Rice and Fred Lynn (the "Gold Dust Twins" of 1975)?  ;-) ;-)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: The value of speed (was Re: bonds in atlanta in 1993)
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:28:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.191105.4998@cs.tulane.edu> eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes:
>
>	A zeroth approximation of this is to turn certain singles into doubles
>and others into outs and then refigure batting average, slugging and on base
>percentage.
>
>	For Nixon this works out as follows;
>
>Nixon ('91)
>	.294/.348/.346
>
>	Thats 134 hits, 39 walks, and 158 total bases in 456 at bats.
>
>	Assuming that each SB converts a single into a double adds 41 bases.
>	Assuming that each caught stealing converts a single into an out
>		removes 18 hits and 18 total bases.
>
>	That gives 116 hits, 39 walks, and 181 total bases in 456 at bats.
>
>	This means Nixon was effectively a .254/.313/.397 hitter.  Hardly
>an effective leadoff man and worthless when compared to Blauser's .262/.354/
>458.
>
>(btw, I realzie that this method has loads of problems.  It does give a 
>reasonable measure in terms that are easy to compare with other players)

Since stolen bases don't move other runners, if any, on the bases, adding
it to SLG doesn't seem right...

What Bill James does in his RC formula is to add .52 for each stolen base
to the slugging component, and take away 1 for each caught stealing from
the on base component.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rfd2001@andy.bgsu.edu (Ryan Dickey)
Subject: Re: 5 most BREAKABLE records
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: BGSU
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 03:25:21 GMT

In article <1575.2afa9231@atlas.nafb.trw.com>, dsimon@atlas.nafb.trw.com
wrote:
> 
> Okay, I've heard enough about the 419 record which will never be broken.
> What I'm interested in is what are the most BREAKABLE records?


Without a doubt, the SALARY record (it's broken every #@&*! year!)


RRRRR  Y     Y   AAAAA   N    N 
R   R   Y   Y    A   A   NN   N                                            
         
RRRRR    Y Y     AAAAA   N N  N                                            
                 
R R       Y      A   A   N  N N                                            
         
R  R      Y      A   A   N   NN                                            
          
R   R     Y      A   A   N    N                                            
            
                                                                           
    
RYAN DICKEY @ BOWLING GREEN ST U                                           
      
rfd2001@andy.bgsu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: cs902060@ariel.yorku.ca (GEOFFREY E DIAS)
Subject: The NL Sched
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:50:21 GMT

	Is it a 13-12 format like the AL or the proposed 20-6?
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Florida awaits the Giants!
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:09:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.000354.21747@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>
>The problem is that, over the years, baseball has been so afraid of losing
>their antitrust exemption that they haven't really done anything to take
>advantage of that exemption.  The only thing that the antitrust exemption
>has really provided baseball with in recent years is an ability to prevent
>franchise movement.

...and to severly limit the number of teams.  The anti-trust exemption
would probably permit MLB to stomp on any rival leagues that might
otherwise arise.

-Valentine
From: harder@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: 1990 stats needed
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:58:12 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Does anyone have 1990 individual player statistics in a readily
e-mailable file (similar to the 1992 and 1991 ones posted recently
and last year)?  I would greatly appreciate any help on this.

Joe Harder

Harder@Wharton.Upenn.edu

Organization: Senior, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:44:03 -0500 
From: Amit Likhyani <al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: rumor: Jay Bell for Derek Bell + a prospect
	<BxM80E.MBG@acsu.buffalo.edu>

Excerpts from netnews.rec.sport.baseball: 12-Nov-92 Re: rumor: Jay Bell
for Der.. Theodore J Kury@ubvmsb.c (2338)

> Can we say Moises Alou and Wes Chamberlain ? Thank you Larry !

Chamberlain is a stiff.  He is a talent that was not evaluated, but he
is no real loss in the long run.

Alou is a loss, but Zane Smith was the difference in winning the
division in 1990.


> Will Pennyfeather looks pretty good, and so does Al Martin

I may be a little harsh on Pennyfeather.  He tore up AA Carolina.  He
was a wideout at Syracuse, so he is a good athlete.  I base my
observations on Martin on 2 ab's against Wetteland which is totally
unfair.  I have to see some more.  They have a guy named Keith(mitchell)
(frank) Thomas.  If he was not so old(24 at class A), he would be a
great prospect.  His numbers were really good.
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Transaction List
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:13:43 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

gotribe@cbnewse.cb.att.com (richard.g.barry) writes:
: In article <1992Nov10.154232.1404@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, msn@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (matthew.s.nelson) writes:
: > Update: 11/10/92
: > 
: > Calendar:
: > Nov 9:   Expansion draft protected rosters due
: 
: 
: When are these lists going to be made public??

Never, if Major League Baseball has it's way.  The lists are given
only to league officials and officials from the expansion teams,
and MLB has threatened to impose a $250,000 fine on any team that
leaks.  The reason fro this, I suppose, is to avoid arbitration
problems and unfair trading advantages.  
So, my question is: Where are all these lists coming from?  We've
got the Rangers so far, and the Yanks and the Twins... are these
educated guesses by sportswriters, or has the process sprung leaks
already?
Bill Anderson:
From: tom@ssd.csd.harris.com (Tom Horsley)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Giants Will Stay!!!
Date: 11 Nov 92 16:21:58 GMT
Organization: Harris Computer Systems Division

Yep. The Giants will stay in SF alright, but now the real fun begins.

Since the Tampa group does, in fact, have a signed contract in their
hands, lawsuits will definitely be filed.

Both Bob Graham and Connie Mack (the two Senators from Florida) are steaming
mad, and have sworn a fiery oath to get baseball's anti-trust exemption
overturned (and poor old California now has two most junior Senators at the
same time).

Meanwhile, everyone in the Tampa/St.Pete area is convinced this is all a
dastardly plot by Wayne Huigenza to keep a Florida baseball monopoly for
himself and they have started boycotting Blockbuster Video stores (can
firebombing be far behind? :-).

Personally I think this is an extreme instance of Murphy's Law operating
to teach elected officials what happens when they build stadiums with
public money without even asking the people if it is a good idea.

There is a definite book possibility in the Tampa baseball story. Maybe
they could call it:

   If you build it, they won't come...
--
======================================================================
domain: tahorsley@csd.harris.com       USMail: Tom Horsley
  uucp: ...!uunet!hcx1!tahorsley               511 Kingbird Circle
                                               Delray Beach, FL  33444
+==== Censorship is the only form of Obscenity ======================+
|     (Wait, I forgot government tobacco subsidies...)               |
+====================================================================+
From: jwc@netx.com (Jeffrey W. Comer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Who was the favorite player of your youth?.
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:52:33 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: The Chaos Bobs

tanenbla@cs.columbia.edu (Michael Tanenblatt) writes:
>Turning to baseball: Who was the favorite player of your youth?

Someone should tally these results, but for me, the answer is clear -

Pitcher: Sandy Koufax
Non-p:   Willie Mays
HonMent: Mickey Mantle
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Mattingly, what a fine fielder (was: Hardly not etc.)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:07:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov05.005627.159157@zeus.calpoly.edu> jplee@zeus.calpoly.edu (Jason Lee) writes:
>pointless.  I haven't seen that many games this year, but I think to a
>certain extent I'm qualified to at least discuss baseball. 

You don't have to see any games to be "qualified" to discuss baseball.  

>see one game, that certainly qualifies you to discuss is.  Mr. Loparco
>has the right idea here.  He says the only real way to judge a player is
>by watching him.

I disagree.  I think in many ways, that's the worst way to judge a player.


>What difference does it make?  He said he *feels* that Mattingly is as
>good as McGwire.  Arguing about it is the whole fun of it.

It's one thing to say that I enjoy watching Mattingly play defense.  It's
another to say "Mattingly is the best defensive first baseman in baseball,
and anybody who thinks he's only average is clearly crazy."

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thornley@micro.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Subject: Re: Gold Gloves Announced
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:31:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.171357.11939@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:
>
>What I want to know is - who in their right mind thinks that Kirby Puckett
>is a better defensive centerfielder than people like Lofton and Lance
>Johnson?
>
Kirby Puckett *used* to be good.  (Yes, Gary, he did play too deep.)
He *used* to get to most stuff that a regular CF would get, and make
eight or a dozen catches over the fence each year.

The difference is obvious.  You can see it by watching him.  He just doesn't
get around as much as he used to.  More balls drop in.  He's not making
nearly as many spectacular plays as he used to (no, I don't judge players
based on spectacular plays, but it isn't a bad way to track an individual
player's ability).  My wife doesn't follow baseball much aside from going
to a couple dozen Twins games a year and watching maybe another dozen on
television, and she commented that Puckett was really losing range.

So, why can't the people who play baseball, whose business it is to know
this stuff, notice as much about an outfielder as a fan from the infield
upper deck?  Doesn't anybody in this here game *see* anything?  Should I
start a thread about how the umpires are so much more observant and
accurate than everybody else in baseball?

David Thornley
"And the third class of brain, that fails to know things even when
explained, is worthless, as it will continue to play Puckett in center,
Devon White leadoff, and pay Tartabull five million a year."
- Niccolo Machiavelli

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dae@cbnews.cb.att.com (david.a.elliott)
Subject: Re: Gene Michael should be shot
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:25:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.212526.11797@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
>In article <1992Nov4.124313.1@violet.ccit.arizona.edu> f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:
>>
>>Well, O'Neill was consistently improving up through 1991.  That year he
>>hit 28 HRs, got 95 RBI, and had a good OBP.  1992 was a drop-off, but it
>>might have just been luck.
>
>It isn't unusual for average players to have career years around that
>age...  I think it is more likely that 1991 was a fluke than 1992.
>(Well, okay.  They were both flukes in opposite directions.)

The radio sports guys in Cincinnati are speculating that O'Neill's poor year
was due in large part to Piniella's handling of him.  Lou is hardly the
patient, supportive type, and it seems that O'Neill quickly became his
favorite whipping boy this year.  Sabo got hurt early, and when O'Neill
slumped rather than pick up the slack, Piniella criticized him often both
publically and privately.

Who knows if this was really a factor, but I suppose it is possible.  With
the short porch and a new manager, O'Neill just might have a big year.

I still say the Yanks are overloaded with right fielders and lefty bats,
though.


Dave Elliott
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: jints to stay
Keywords: Giants
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 92 04:05:22 GMT

kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt "Some Guy" Bose) writes:

>>baseball officials the way they wanted us to and listened to their
>>promises.  They have come through with none of them.
>>
>Like a cheap slut who dresses provocatively to seduce married men and then 
>screams like hell when they go back to their wives...

I think that's a patently unfair assessment.  Up until they filed suit this
time around, Tampa Bay didn't do anything that hasn't been done elsewhere
in the league successfully.  Or are the folks in Atlanta, Milwaukee, and
Minnesota all cheap sluts too?

-- 
 davE.  Making the world safe for intelligent dance music.  dave@bradley.edu.
######### David L. Vessell -- Bradley University Computing Services #########
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball