From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: joe carter and others
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Distribution: rec
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 16:10:23 GMT

In <5d_rmt=@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@lacerta.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:

>'Sfunny, we can model the sum of those component parts pretty damned 
>effectively.  But then, I forgot, you're "not entirely familiar" with RC/27,

Why has it never occurred to you that what you are modelling is not baseball
but an incomplete perception of what baseball really is?  If you really truly
think you have figured it out why aren't you down in Vegas making yourself
a rich man?

>As one AL executive said, "Toronto got rid of some problem players, but they
>picked up Joe Carter and Devon White, who are two of the most selfish players
>in the game."

>A reporter wrote that, on December 24, 1990.  I give that the same amount of
>credibility I give the reports of Henderson's "moodiness".

Reporter?  Is Marty York of the Globe and Mail actually a reporter?  I have
heard him called lots of other names but never that.  This is the only instance
I have ever seen where White and Carter have been described as selfish. 
Henderson has been described as such time and time again.  (maybe you could
compile statistics on who is reportedly the most selfish player in the game.)

>That's okay; all this talk I hear about Roberto Alomar being a great second
>baseman appears dubious when he ranks in the middle of the pack for second
>basemen...

That is because you cannot understand what you see with your own eyes.  You
have abstracted yourself right out of reality pal.  If you cannot tell 
whether a player is any good without consulting statistics (that only 
measure part of a players contribution to winning) I don't see how you
could possibly enjoy watching a game at any but the most simplistic rah-
rah level.

>What about paying another 750,000 and getting Barry Bonds?  Oh, sorry, he's 
>"not a team player".  

Bond's contract was what?  43 million?  Carter's was around 20.

>Jesse Barfield is out there, and if he passes a team physical, could probably
>be had for one eighth of Carter's salary.  At most.  Even if he posts a line
>like .235/.290/.400, that's not much worse than Carter, and they would still

You are assuming that "the line" measures a player's contribution.  It doesn't.
Barfield sucks bigtime.  Comparing him to Carter shows us all just how flawed
your system is.

>have the money to make an offer to Maddux instead of Stewart.  As much as
>Maddux liked Atlanta, I'm sure that he would also like being the ace of the
>World Champion staff.  

I don't think there is any doubt that next year Maddux will be the ace of the
WS winning staff.

>Hell, protect Nigel Wilson instead of Turner Ward, sign Joe Orsulak for a 
>year or two, and in two years, you've got a player who's going to do the exact
>same damn thing as Carter, but is a decade younger, and five or six million
>dollars a year cheaper.
>Then again, there's always this thing called a "trade".

Sure.  Let's dismantle a World Series winning team and gamble that in a few
years some of our youngsters can duplicate what we already have right now. 
Never mind the fact that some fans actually *enjoy* watching Carter and
White and their teammates perform.  The fans, that is, who enjoy watching the
game more than they enjoy tabulating statistics.

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball