HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sweda@css.itd.umich.edu (Sean Sweda)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: 22 Jul 92 19:52:26 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan ITD Consulting and Support Services

In article <Brr235.D8s@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
>In article <1992Jul21.160012.29170@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca> sinhaa@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Anand Sinha) writes:
> 
>>Hmm. Whom did the Jays have to play the OF to replace Bell? Syl Campusano? 
>>Rob Ducey? Mookie Wilson? Let's face it, Bell was the 3rd best OF the Jays
>>had in the organisation that could play at the Major League level. He knew it.
>>And the Jays knew it.  Now, I don't know Dave Winfield's situation, but 
>>didn't Dave demand to play in the OF 2-3 times during a week? Even though he
>>rarely gets to a ball? No, Dave should not play the OF, not with his lack of
>>mobility. It is not good for the team for Dave to play the OF. Yet he demanded
>>that he play there.  Doesn't seem like he's in it for the best of the team.
>
>If you remember Mookie DH'd quite a bit that season and so by putting Mookie
>in left you improve defense and the offense would remain the same.  Also
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Speaking as both a Mets fan and as a Mookie Wilson fan I can assure you
that Mookie couldn't throw the ball through a wet paper towel.

>it would have been nice to see Ducey get a chance to play because I think
>that he could be better than average defensively and and OK offensive player.
>

Just one question:  Did you believe all that mediot blather about how
Fred McGriff was a "choke" hitter in Toronto because his RBI totals were
low?  If so then I can understand your how you got your opinion about 
George Bell.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: news@bmerh85.bnr.ca (Usenet News)
Subject: Herzog Seen Shopping In Syracuse
Organization: Bell Northern Research, Ottawa, Ontario Canada
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 13:15:29 GMT


	Whitey Herzog has been at several Syracuse Chiefs (Toronto Blue Jays AAA
Affiliate)  games over the last several days.  His primary interest is likely 
Blue Jays catching prospect Ed Sprague.
 
	Also, during the Blue Jays west coast trip an unusually large number of
Blue Jay executives and scouts have been poking their noses around.  
 
Question:  Are the Jays-Angels trade rumors we've been hearing about back on the 
           rails?  What Angels' pitcher could the Jays be interested in now that
           Abbott has been sidelined?  Langston?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: pcaster@mizar.usc.edu (Dodger)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Dodgers/Giants Monday Night
Date: 27 Jul 1992 21:53:32 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

Same old story for the last place Dodgers.
Black beat them 5-1 tonight.
Butler hit a triple to keep his batting streak alive and
scored the Dodgers only run.
After failing to turn a double play in the first, Candiotti
gave up a 3 run home run to Cory Snyder.  The Giants other
runs scored on an error and wild pitch.
Candiotti pitched well, giving up just 7 hits.
In the 6th (I think) the Dodgers had an inning that typified
their whole season offensively.  Webster led off with a line
drive to right field.  James made a great catch to save a double.
After Scioscia flied out, Hansen doubled.  Had Webster's ball
fallen in, the score would have been 3-2.  Then Candiotti
hit a towering fly ball that looked like it might be a home
run off the bat....but James made a spectacular catch at
the warning track...the ball would have hit the fence.  That
WOULD have made it 3-3.  But the Dodgers have been hitting
the ball like that all year....close but no cigar.

Fred Claire made this monstrous team, now it appears he will
begin dismantling it.  But frankly, I was surprised when
no trades were announced Sunday with Montreal.  Maybe
the Expos, now only 1 game back, decided they didn't need
anyone else.
					BleedsDodgerBlue

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kenney@tribe.b17d.ingr.com (David Kenney)
Subject: Re: Alex Cole
Reply-To: kenney@tribe.b17d.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, Alabama
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:59:47 GMT

In article <55444@olivea.atc.olivetti.com>, rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:
|> Heard on WTBS yesterday while Alex Cole was hitting from I believe Ernie
|> Johnson.
|> 
|> "When Cole first come up in the Cardinals' system, they thought he was
|> another Vince Coleman who could steal 80-100 bases a year. The problem
|> for him has been getting on base."
|> 
|> Has Coleman ever had an OBP as good as Cole's OBP while he was in 
|> Cleveland? Cole gets caught stealing too much, but getting on base
|> is not a problem for him.

Ernie Johnson's quote makes perfect sense to me.  Recently, Cleveland has
always been among the worst teams in the AL in OBP.  Cole didn't fit in
with the rest of the team because he got on base too much.  That was his
problem. :-)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Kenney                                       kenney@tribe.b17d.ingr.com
205 730 7655

"Bob Gibson is the luckiest pitcher I ever saw.  He always pitches when the
other team doesn't score any runs." -- Tim McCarver
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kiviat@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Brian Kiviat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:14:19 GMT
Reply-To: kiviat@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Brian Kiviat)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.sport.baseball, djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:

>There are two question which I feel can be asked when comparing players.
>1)  Who is more talented?  This requires statistics alone.  Attitude,
				 ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^
>    enthusiasm etc. won't change talent.

      Isn't talent a subjective term. Statistics alone tells you which
      guy has better statistics alone. From this you may subjectively
      rate this human being's abilities as you see them. These are people
      not machines and cannot be rated by total number of defects per
      production run. Baseball is a great game played by people in an
      constantly changing environment.  In my scientific mind statistics
      tell a large part of the story but my human side looks for more.

      If stats are your bag, cool. But don't tell others they are everything.
      If stats aren't, don't call them all "statheads" . My flame retardant
      screen is burning to often.

      Just my, hopefully not to inflamatory,  free opinion. You get
      what you pay for.

      Now, lets get back to BASEBALL.


      Brian
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 23:10:08 GMT

In article <Bs29GA.5sv@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.uwaterloo.ca (David Johnson) writes:
>Ok. Lets take this a little further.  Would you like to have a player on
>your team who makes this demand and when he isn't played makes a disturbance
>in the clubhouse and publically complains to the media about the .300 hitter
>and about the manager not playing him.  Would you keep this player or get rid
>of him?  If he wasn't causing a disturbance would you keep him or get rid of
>him?

It depends upon whether the player is performing adequately at his job or
not, what the needs of the team are, and what I could get for him.  I
certainly wouldn't automatically trade him because he publically
complained.  Public complaints may be just as strong a sign of managerial
shortcomings as any problem with the player himself.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
From: gt2807a@prism.gatech.EDU (Benjamin H. Cowan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: RULEBOOK TRIVIA 14
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:07:56 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <36084@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers) writes:
>In article <92205.211559IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Ryan Robbins) writes:
>>With nobody on, the batter hits a high pop-up in front of the
>>plate. The catcher gets into position to make the catch, but loses
>>sight of the ball just before it comes down and bounces off his
>>glove, which is over the plate. The ball squirts to the backstop.
>>The catcher retrieves the ball and throws it back to the pitcher.
>>The pitcher takes his position on the rubber, the catcher and
>>batter go to their boxes, and the pitcher pitches. The batter
>>grounds the ball back to the pitcher, and the pitcher throws the
>>ball to first for the out. How is this play scored?
>
>There are a couple of issues.  First, was the popup fair or foul?
>From the description, it sounds like it was a fair ball; however,
>there would have been a ruling from the umpires and I must infer
>that the ruling was "foul ball", based on later actions.
>This might be wrong, but there's nothing to be done about it.
>Second, is the catcher charged with an error?  That's up to
>the scorer, but based on the description, I'd charge an error.
>My ruling:  E2 + 1-3

  I disagree.  Whenever the ball hits homeplate and goes off into foul 
territory, this a foul.  In addition, if a ball were come to rest in a batters 
box or on the plate, this too would be a foul.  So, I'd say that the ball was 
technically in foul territory when it bounced off of the catcher.  

  Therefore, the batter did indeed have to bat again since the ball was first 
touched in foul territory.  In addition, the catcher shouldn't be given an 
error because errors are not scored on plays where the ball was not played on 
in fair territory.

I'd say it's a foul ball then a 1-3 putout.


Ben...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benjamin H. Cowan                       || Reply to: gt2807a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech... Atlanta, Georgia  30332 || 
================================================================================

           "I don't believe there is a man, woman, or child alive
                   that doesn't enjoy a lovely beverage."
                                                        --Dave
From: steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Commish Consistency (WASRe: Strike 1 on Commissioner)
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:50:10 GMT
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies

> = (Joel K Ness) writes:

>What makes more sense Cubbie fans, Atlanta in the NL west or your Cubs?
>This is really stupid!!!  Waaa  Waaaa

If the schedule goes 13-12 for home games, I'm not much concerned.  I live
in Lyons, Co. near Denver, and will enjoy seeing them play the new Rockies.

The "waaa waaaa" is childish crap.  Maybe the Cubs logically belong in the
West, but why supersede the entire NL's 1969 agreement?  If the Giants go
ahead and move to the east coast for NEXT SEASON, that realignment won't
have accomplished a damn thing.  Why not wait for that to happen, or not?
Or will "best interests" start to be used as cheaply as Bush tosses around
vetoes, with Cincinnati being forced back to the West because they'd be
"more West" than Tampa or Buffalo?

The estimated savings to MLB if the schedule indeed is 13-12 has been
stated at ~$150,000.  What's the big deal here?  Why is it suddenly a big
deal to Vincent after 23 years?  Despite the Cubs obviously worried about
TV revenues, why make fun of their traditional rivalries?  The Mets really
are one, the Pirates, I believe, hosted both Cub division title clinchers
in 1984 & '89.  I realize, though, that another big rival is going with 
them (Cardinals).

I'm a little concerned at Vincent using the "best interests" clause for
something that appears quite minor to me.  He should save that type of
power for real problems in baseball.  Else, why not use it for the
designated hitter that he hates?  To him (and me), that would also be "in
the best interests of baseball" (asbestos suit on :); I just don't think
it's in the best interests of the useage of the "best interests" clause.
(Whaa??)

Maybe I'm a little sensitive to overbearing commishes.  I'm STILL
seething over 1984 and Uberroth(sp?).  After 39 years of ridicule and being
ignored, the Cubs win the division.  Suddenly, the lack of lights at
Wrigley becomes a big deal and, only weeks before the playoffs, the Cubs,
because of goddamned *TV schedules* (hey, just like the Cubs now!), are
forced to give up the home field advantage in the then-5 game format.

They screwed around with the PLAYOFFS at the _end of the season_.  What
kind of crap was that?

We all know what happened.  Cubs win 2 at Wrigley, lose three in San Diego.
Maybe it would have changed nothing, but...we'll never know, huh?  You tell
me - was that schedule shift "in the best interests of baseball"?  And if
so, why is the Cubs same desire for TV revenue and scheduling suddenly 
invalid?




-- 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Steve Novak |    |"Nothing to do to save his life..."| 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
steven@advtech.USWest.Com
From: poutsmaj@mace.cc.purdue.edu (unknown)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Braves Fans
Date: 26 Jul 92 19:18:23 GMT
Organization: Purdue University

It is wonderful for Braves fans to see their team in first place in the 
west, but before anyone starts talking too much just remember that winning
streaks do not last forever.  The Braves WILL lose again.  The other teams
in the division will win some games and lose some games as well.  Granted,
the way things look now it appears that the Braves should be good enough
to win enough games to take the division title again.  Stay optimistic but
don't get too cocky yet.


a humble twins fan
paul
From: tannerg@milton.u.washington.edu (Glenn Tanner)
Newsgroups: tim@normal.georgetown.edu,rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Who Replaced Ernie? (Tiger Announcers)
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:03:37 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

>We all lamented the replacement of the greatest announcer (I have)
>ever heard, Ernie Harwell.  Since I am out of town, I have not heard
>the replacement(s).
>
>Who are they, and how good are they?  How do they differ from Ernie?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Timothy Law Snyder

The Tigers managed to pry Rick ("That's a major league play by Omar Vizquel!")
Rizzs away from the Mariners.  As to how they might differ, I'd have to assume
that Ernie Harwell acted as if he had seen a baseball game before.  Rizzs
has a nice voice, but that's about it.

GT
From: kimmel@epx.cis.umn.edu (Eric Kimmel)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: ARTIFICIAL TURF: EMBARASSMENT TO THE GAME
Date: 23 Jul 92 20:53:13 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota

In article <1992Jul21.190217.29416@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> g_waugaman@nac.enet.dec.com (Glenn R. Waugaman) writes:
>
>Go figure is right.  We've been through this before.  Fenway Park does not
>change the basic character of the game.  Fenway Park does not turn
>weakly-hit ground balls into singles and bloopers into doubles, and
>sharply-hit balls in the infield into outs (a property of artificial
>turf).  Fenway Park does not affect at all balls that are hit in the
>infield or which drop in front of outfielders.  In fact, Fenway Park does
>not significantly affect balls put into play that travel any less than
>300-350 feet.  In general, Fenway Park affects the value of certain
>extra-base hits, both positively and negatively, and that's about it. 

Fenway Park turns plenty of infield singles which die in the grass.  Turns
plenty of doubles into triples because of the weird fence angles.  Turns
plenty of line drives in left field into doubles that would be homers in
several other parks.

NONE of this happens in the Metrohump.  Balls hit
the fence and bounce straight back at you.  Balls that hit the baggie drop
straight down.

Balls that hit the Green Monster near the top are VERY
difficult to play.  I'm sure the Boston outfielders have no problem with
this like the Shane Mack might.
>
I think we should tear down the Boston outfield fences and make them
perfectly symmetrical, the same height, and smooth all around to take
away that advantage.  NOT!  It's what makes Boston a great park.
If Mack blows a carem off the GM, it's his fault, not the fences.  If
Hatcher loses a ball in the Metrohump, IT'S HIS OWN FAULT.

>It's aesthetics.  Anyone is perfectly free to like that which they prefer
>(although I've seen polls that say that baseball fans don't generally like
>domes and artificial turf).  I like the occasional quirk as much as the
>next guy, but if you get your kicks from fly balls dropping from dangling
>speaker wires, I can't argue with you... 
>
Sure, I love it the one or two times it happens each year.  Don't forget that
Chili Davis could just as well do the same thing Clark did.

>---
>Glenn Waugaman
>Digital Equipment Corporation
>Littleton, MA
>g_waugaman@nac.enet.dec.com
>---
From: p_emond@pavo.concordia.ca (PATRICK EMOND)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Both Canadian teams in first place
Date: 31 Jul 92 17:43:00 GMT
Organization: Concordia University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Jul30.023619.24284@dvorak.amd.com>, twhite@mozart.amd.com (Tom White) writes...
> 
>   It would certainly be a death blow for CBS.  I don't think they'd
>   like it at all.

    Of course, you're insinuating that the Blue Jays could actually beat
 someone in the ALCS...51 million$ payroll and all. 

    Besides, any small-market series gives the networks the shits. Minny-Atlanta
 had awful ratings if I remember correctly...CBS wouldn't make money this year
 with a Mets-A's series, that's how badly they botched their MLB contract.


 *******************************************************************************
 Patrick Emond    unofficial r.s.bb net.contact for the Montreal Expos
 Concordia U.     official net.raving-expos-fan for r.s.bb
 Montreal, Can.   MONTREAL EXPOS-FROM WORST TO FIRST!!!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: RC/27 for CFs
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 00:46:22 GMT
Organization: Boo! 

In <1992Jul24.154147.1766@island.COM> fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:

>He has had 3 other years on a par with (or slightly better than) this year,
>so I'd have to say he ain't bad at all.

But he's 4 years away from those years.  I've posted his recent RC/27s in
another post and he's declined each of the last 3 years.  Unless a player
has been limited in some way during the last 3 years (an injury he's just
recovering from finally, etc.), looking at 1986-88 really doesn't help you
in evaluating a player all that much.  You've got to look at ability as
something like (and this formula is complete nonsense, I'm just using
it as a wild approximation) (.5 x 1986) + (1 x 1988) + (2 x 1989) +
(4 x 1990) + (8 x 1991) + (8 x 1st half 1992).

>It's close after parks effects? Their OBP is about the same, and Bonilla's
>SLG is 100 points below Puckett's. Elias lists the 'Dome effect as +5% and Shea
>as -5%. Close? If Puckett goes into a prolonged slump and Bonilla goes on a 
>tear, yeah, it'll BE close. Right now, it ain't.

Well, I defined close (for myself) as about .5 RC/27.  At the time
I did the calculations, they were about that far apart.  

Oh, and I noticed that someone (sorry, I forgot who) replied to this same
messages by adjusting OPS with the park effects.  I don't think you can really
do that, though.  The park effects for runs scored can only be used on units
expressed in terms of runs, like RC; they can't be used on OPS.

Greg 
-- 
  spira@panix.com       "The one-O delivery to Fisk.  He swings.  Long drive,  
 cmcl2!panix!spira      left field!  If it stays fair, it's gone!  Home Run!"  
158-17 Riverside Dr.                     Ned Martin, 10/22/75   
Whitestone NY 11357          (Insert your favorite baseball moment here)
From: IOR@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (Thomas Hyer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Replacement levels, by position
Date: 21 Jul 92 16:54:40 GMT
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center


  I used the recently posted (thanks, Claudius) lists
of RC/27 at each position to try to deduce the replacement
levels at each.  Results first, method afterwards:

POSITION    RC/27 to avoid REPLACEMENT (RC0)
--------           --------------

   C                   3.07
  SS                   3.16
  2B                   3.76
  3B                   3.97
  CF                   4.34
  1B                   4.54
  LF                   4.57
  DH                   4.60
  RF                   4.77

It runs about as you'd expect, though it's odd that
outfielders are expected to produce more than 1B's.

Heroes:                               RC - RC0

Barry Bonds, Pittsburgh           LF  6.10
Fred McGriff, San Diego           1B  5.70
Chris Hoiles, Baltimore            C  5.66
Frank Thomas, Chicago             1B  5.57
Edgar Martinez, Seattle           3B  5.37
John Kruk, Philadelphia           1B  5.25
Don Slaught, Pittsburgh            C  5.18
Andy Van Slyke, Pittsburgh        CF  4.66
Darren Daulton, Philadelphia       C  4.66
Gary Sheffield, San Diego         3B  4.48
Mark McGwire, Oakland             1B  4.26
Will Clark, San Francisco         1B  4.14
Roberto Alomar, Toronto           2B  4.14
Kent Hrbek, Minnesota             1B  4.05

This statistic favors monster sluggers (who happen
to play 1B a lot) and catchers (since they're so
hard to replace).

Now, the method:
I expected that the density of players as a function
of RC/27 would be low up in the stratosphere, then
steadily increase as the level of performance decreased,
until it reached a point where Jose Uribe doesn't
belong in the major leagues, where it would again
drop.  I plotted

$$\sum_i {[R(i) - R(i+1)] \over [C + (i-x)^2]}$$

where $i$ is the rank and $R(i)$ is the RC/27 at
that rank, using $C=2$.

Sadly, this gave beautiful and incontrovertible
results only for shortstops:  there is a clear
cutoff at 3.16 RC/27, and 23 shortstops are above
it.

It gives decent signals for 1B, 3B, RF, C, DH
(which I used) and for 2B (which I did not use,
since it claimed a replacement level of 4.77,
at which only 14 2B's qualify).

For CF, there was a very faint signal favoring
the level I chose, but the real motivation was
a cutoff, which I decided to impose at x>20
(that is, over 80% of the league must be above
replacement level).  I used the same cutoff
for LF and 2B.

Thomas Hyer                   _____________________
                             /Half the time, even  \     words
-S---L------A---------C-----< _I_ don't share my  / \     support
                             \  opinions.        /          like
                              -------------------          bone...
From: jaykay@orion.oac.uci.edu (R. Jayakrishnan)
Subject: Rangers.. Aaargh.. Late innings ERA stats, anyone ?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:08:17 GMT
Distribution: na



  My beloved Rangers blew another game after leading 4-1 into the
  8th innings, at Milwaukee.

  This is getting sick. Why is it that the Rangers can't find even one
  guy to pitch the 7th or at least an 8th.  I have lost count of the
  games they have blown after the 6th innings. 

  Does anyone have inning-wise ERA for the Rangers ?  I am sure it is
  below 3 for the first 6 innings and much above 4 after that.
  This year the starters have been doing a reasonably good job. The
  pen has blown at least 4 games for Todd Burns (ERA 3.25) and at least
  4 games for Ryan. May be 15-20 games altogether. What is the problem ?

  I would like even Craig McMurtry back !    And is Fajardo going to 
  pitch this year ?  Is he any good as a hold-man ?   Maybe they should
  give Gerald Alexander another chance. I HATE TERRY MATHEWS AND
  FLOYD BANNISTER !!

  Go Rangers (break my heart this year too !)

  Jay

  PS:  And somebody asks why we don't post about Rangers !  Just that
       we are plain mad at what they are doing...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball