HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Morris pitches to the game
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 04:39:14 GMT
Organization: Boo! 

In <BvCovB.HII@zoo.toronto.edu> rising@zoo.toronto.edu (Jim Rising) writes:

>I think that all pitchers do this to a certain extent.  If Morris
>is better at it (& that remains to be demonstrated IMHO) perhaps it
>is because he has more experience.  But the other night (left game up
>9-0) I think illustrates the point.  The Jays scored 3 runs in the 1st,
>it was raining, and Morris came out and threw strikes, i.e. he threw it
>in & let the Yankees swing away.  I don't remember whether or not he
>struck out anyone, but he was not walking or finessing hitters, and they
>were hitting all over the park, luckly (for him) mostly at people.  I 
>think that the lousy weather conditions also made it hard to hit (although
>the 4 top batters in the Jays were 10 for 10 at one place).  In that
>game, however, Morris could have easily given up several runs if some
>balls had dropped in.  He was just trying to get the game in, once
>they had the lead.
>-- 
(This isn't really in reply to Jim's post, just on the same subject)

I don't anybody here has really denied that a pitcher may pitch differently
with a larger lead.  He would, presumably, try and be less fine.  He would
probably give up less walks.  He would be less likely to give up a big
inning, and more likely to give up a quick home run.  I don't know that this
is true, but it may very well be.

But there's no reason to think that a pitcher with a large lead will give
up more runs.  In fact, because he is less likely to give up the big
inning, he may actually be able to better contain the opposition (on
average).

When you have a big lead, your object would be to presumably minimize
runs scored so that the opposition doesn't get in sight of catching
up.  I don't see how that would translate into a higher ERA.  On the
other hand, in a close game, a pitcher might be risking a higher total
runs scored in order to prevent even one run from scoring.  Now that
might raise an ERA! 

This might make an interesting study, actually.  Are pitchers with big
leads less likely to give up big innings?

Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: RC/27 for DHes
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 23:14:56 GMT

				RC/27	VALUE
Paul Molitor, Milwaukee		7.98	56.3
Dave Winfield, Toronto		7.57	51.2
Brian Downing, Texas		7.03	24.3
Chili Davis, Minnesota		6.43	27.4
Albert Belle, Cleveland		6.02	29.2
Glenn Davis, Baltimore		5.37	12.7
AVERAGE				5.03
Harold Baines, Oakland		4.94	11.2
George Brett, Kansas City	4.79	11.3
Kevin Maas, New York		4.74	5.5
George Bell, Chicago		4.68	10.3
Jack Clark, Boston		4.38	2.7
Hubie Brooks, California	2.74	-10.5

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
From: jrmst8+@pitt.edu (Joseph R Mcdonald)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves-Pirates Pitching Rotation (Does Anyone Know It?)
Keywords: baseball
Date: 3 Oct 92 16:19:11 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <69711@hydra.gatech.EDU< jg10@prism.gatech.EDU (GILMORE,JOHN F) writes:
<
<     We are running our AI baseball demo again this year to predict series
<winners. Last year we picked the Braves in 7 over the Bucs and The Twins in
<6. Hopefully we do as well this time around. 
<
<Here's what I have so far:
<
<Game 1. Smoltz vs Drabek
<Game 2. Avery vs Wakefield

Wakefield has been bumped to game 3 at home (Knuckleheads Unite!).
Jackson is pitching game two for the Bucs.
Tomlin is in the Pen.

<Game 3. Glavine vs Tomlin
<Game 4. Smoltz vs ?
<Game 5. Avery vs ?
<Game 6. Glavine vs ?
<Game 7. Smoltz vs ?
<
<The Braves are going with a 3 man rotation for the NLCS. They have dropped the
<sore-armed Pena and will used Pete Smith and Charles Liebrandt (ugh!) in 
<relief roles.

Dean

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dean J. Falcione                                   Dean's UNIX Exorcism Service 
(using jrmst8 by permission                             "We kill daemons" 
 of the owner, Joe McDonald)   
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell)
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 21:44:10 GMT

In article <92277.182016JPIERCE@MIAMIU.BITNET> Jeff Pierce <JPIERCE@MIAMIU.BITNET> writes:
>I believe that the most recent Elias mentioned that Bonds is tied with
>Gene Tenace for consecutive hitless ABs with runners on base in league
>championship play (0 for 16 last year and 0 for 4 in his final ABs in
>1990).  Any guess as to how far he may stretch it this year?

Didn't Tenace go on to have a superlative Series?

Or is it just that the World Series is less pressure than the LCS?

Or could it be, just maybe, that if you take 270 players and have them
face the top pitching staffs in the league in short series there is
a good random chance that two of them will go 0 for 16?

>I don't know if Bonds chokes or not (the sample size is too small, but
>possibly will continue to grow), but he hasn't been productive to date.
>Maybe this year will be different.  Maybe we'll see him lifted for a
>pinch-hitter if he continues to struggle and the Pirates need someone
>to put across the tying/winning run in Game Six or Seven.

Gee, that would be bright.  Let's send Willie Mays back to the minors
because of an 0 for 16 slump.
-- 
ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu 
also at quibeaux@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
ajax crypto-analyzer -- warning! remove all chicken bones first
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: RG's 1992 Tribe Front Office Report Card
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 15:36:03 GMT

In article <6OCT199210045722@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov> ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham) writes:
>
>the Tribe offered that amount to RP Alejandro Pena later on.

I take it all back.  The Indians are no smarter than they used to be.
They must have gotten lucky with the Baerga and Lofton deals.  (What
$&$*#$ would pay that kind of money to sign *Pena* to a team that
won't contend for a few years???)

>Olin and Lilliquist were made better (I think) by each other.  I don't think
>either could have had the year they had without having the other

I definitely agree.  Olin dominates right handers, but is somewhat
vulnerable to lefties (it's the delivery).  But who is going to
pinch-hit a lefty when Lilliquist is waiting in the pen?

>The grade would've been lower if Browne had not wanted $900K.  But you're
>right: I was more sour on this deal than maybe I needed to be.  Browne
>IMPO did what the A's needed him to do, and that very well.

No, you were right.  A price tag of $1 mil for a decent middle
infielder in his prime?  They paid that much for Fermin.

>No, as I indicated last year, I still think Swindell needed to be traded.
>But I agree with you: he's good enough that he could've been shopped around.
>Of course, the deal you offered me last year, Morton and Greenwell, that
>wouldn't have worked out any better.  :-)

Okay.  :-) So I offered you a bum deal too.  :-) Still think they
could have gotten something nicer for Swindell.

>I think we're on the order of 30 innings.  But Armstrong went 3-0 with
>a 1.16 ERA in his relief appearances.  That is better than acceptable.
>And, best of all, Airmail kept the ball in the park.

*Anybody* can pitch 30 decent innings.  Good pitchers often have
streaks of three shutouts in a row.  And Armstrong has always been
known for his streakiness.  I see no compelling reason to believe that
this is a real change.  He was used as a reliever last year too, no?
Was he effective then?

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: *** 1992 Prediction Results Award Show ***
Keywords: Hatred of the Giants, Dodgers, Mets, and Cubs helps.
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:58:08 GMT

In article <17929@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Frog Baseball Huckabay) writes:
>
>Predictor	AL	NL	TOT	Z Score (Std Dev from Mean)
>Gary Huckabay	17	6.67	23.67	4.18
>Greg Gottlieb	16	21.33	37.33	2.45
>Valentine	26	14.67	40.67	2.03
>Greg Spira	22	18.67	40.67	2.03

Wow!  Tied for third place, *despite* picking the Red Sox first
in the AL East!  (I *meant* last.  I really did.  I knew they
would suck.  Does anybody believe me???)

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: joeb@cserver.plexus.com (Joe Brotz)
Subject: Re: AL ROY - Cal Eldred?
Organization: Plexus Corp. -- Neenah Wisconsin
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 14:51:09 GMT

thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:

>In article <joeb.717873107@cserver> joeb@cserver.plexus.com (Joe Brotz) writes:
>>The debate the last few weeks over the AL Rookie of the Year has 
>>centered on Pat Listach and Kenny Lofton, who are of course deserving
>>candidates. 
>>
>>How about Cal Eldred? Currently he's 11-1, ~1.5 ERA, and
>>has a 10 game winning streak. Without a doubt, the basic argument 
>>against Eldred is that he's put up his numbers for only half a year
>>(he was called up right after the All-Star break). 

>Well, let's be fair.  Let's take the other half season and fill it
>with stats from a player called Replacement Value.

>Replacement Value	 5-7	5.00 ERA
>Cal Eldred		11-1	1.50 ERA
>----
>Total			16-8	3.25 ERA*

>(actually that ERA would probably be lower--R.V. wouldn't have
>stayed in for as many innings per start at Eldred did.)

>Is a 16-8, 3.25 ERA pitcher better than Listach or Lofton?  My vote
>is "Yep."  For one thing, it's "rookie of the year," not "most valuable
>rookie."

>>So the big question is this, How much time do you have
>>to put in to be a legitimate contender? 

>Didn't Horner win one year with only 90 games?  I vaguely recall
>McCovey winning with a sensational half-season when he put up
>Plantier-style numbers.

Incredible that you would have mentioned McCovey. I just read something
concerning his ROY season and I was just itching to post a follow-up.
McCovey played in only 54 games in 1959 but put up a .354 BA. That
translates to 1/3 of a season. Based on that historical precedent,
give the award to Cal!
--
"Bob Gibson is the luckiest pitcher I ever    <Joseph A. Brotz         >
saw. Every time he pitches, the other team    <joeb@cserver.plexus.com >
doesn't score any runs." - Tim McCarver       <UUCP: spool!cserver!joeb>
From: morse@cs.unc.edu (Bryan Morse)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Torre!  Torre!  Torre!
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:03:32 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.224250.7263@adobe.com>, snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:
|> In article <56369@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:
|> >Realistically the season comes down to one thing, not being able to beat
|> >the Pirates head to head. they beat us 15 out of 18. If we played .500
|> >against them, we would be right there in the race.
|> 
|> Not to pick on Russ, but I hear this sort of thing regularly: "If only they
|> had won more games against Team Y, who beat them 15 of 18" or "If only they
|> had played better against their own division (or the other division)".  I
|> don't really think this makes any sense.  I mean, teams are going to lose
|> 50-100 games a season; it'd be unusual if those losses were evenly
|> distributed among all their opponents.

I think that in general, you are right.  This isn't just any team, though--
it is the team that they lost the division to.  What you say is correct
for "team A could have won the division instead of team B if they'd only
had a better record against team C."  It's quite different to say something
like, "team A had as good a record as everyone else in the division as
team B did, but they blew it in the head-to-head games against B where
B beat them 15 out of 18."

-- 
Bryan Morse                University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
morse@cs.unc.edu           Department of Computer Science
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Monday, 28 Sep 1992 11:47:53 PST
From: Thomas Hyer <IOR@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Better than Runs

  OK, I was stupid.  I posted an argument without an
example.  So here's one:

  Team A scores 1 run each inning.
  Team B scores 9 runs 1/9 of the time, 0 the rest.

In the course of a season, both teams will score the
same number of runs (neglecting statistical fluctuations).
However, Team A will certainly win more games.

Team A always scores 9 runs (in my league, we play the
bottom of the ninth every time :), which wins maybe 90%
of the time.  Team B, on the other hand, scores

0 runs 35% of the time  (winning 1%)
9 runs 39% of the time  (winning 90%)
18 or more runs 26% of the time (winning 100%)

and wins only 62% of its games.  Thus Team A's runs are
more valuable than Team B's.  (Note that Team A wins 70%
of head-to-head contests.)

I hope this is sufficiently clear by now.  Again, does
anyone have the distribution of runs/inning for either
league?


Thomas Hyer             _____________________   Sometimes you're the
                       / Half the time, even \         windshield;
-S--L----A------C-----<  _I_ don't share my / \   sometimes
                       \    opinions.      /     you're the
                        -------------------     bug.
From: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Date: 2 Oct 92 06:06:27 GMT
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken

i believe bill james said roughly the same thing in this year's baseball
 book - that being "you can't tell on an individual basis who is better
 and who isn't, because the space is too small, and the effects of
 being a clutch performer are greatly exaggerated by most of the media,
 but it DOES exist, at least a little bit."

i think the comparison he used was that the media thinks it's an elephant,
 and it really is the size of a roach.

but it exists.    i believe eddie murray is a clutch player, beacuse
 he has done it over lots and lots of at bats.

there's one other interesting question around the "clutch" factor.

if - barry bonds normally hitst .300 (assume batting average is the end-all
 stat), and in the playoffs hits .250.  you'd say he chokes, right?
 well, how about the .200 shortstop who hits .250 in the 7 game
 playoff series?  clutch?  

- bob gaj
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: PIRATES AGIAIN!!!
Date: 2 Oct 92 18:53:51 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

In article <Men7OtW00VpN4_xEgV@andrew.cmu.edu> al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu  
(Amit Likhyani) writes:
> Excerpts from netnews.rec.sport.baseball: 2-Oct-92 Re: PIRATES  
AGIAIN!!!
> Eric Alva Dunmire@andrew (864)
> 
> > Bonds will stay in Pittsburgh.  He can see that his buddy Bonilla  
found
> > out that money doesn't mean winning. 
> 
> > Drabek will be gone. He'll go for more money than the pirates  
will offer him.
> 
> 
> God I hope you are right. 

Why? Drabek is a good pitcher, and it'll be too bad if the 
Pirates lose him.

 If they do sign Bonds, they probably won't
> even offer Drabek another contract.  They have enough young  
pitching
> plus a healthy Zane Smith to make up for Drabek.  Also, assuming  
Bonds
> comes back, their offense will be better with Kevin Young getting  
400
> AB's and Garcia replacing LInd.

Why replace Lind. He may be the best defensive 2B in baseball
right now.  Is Garcia good enough offensively to make up for
the loss of Lind in the middle.

> 
> I think the Pirates are the most improved team.  They no longer  
have
> Bonilla!!!!!!

You know, I can understand people not liking Bobby Bonilla. I
liked him, myself, and thought it too bad the Pirates couldn't
keep, but I can see others not liking him.  But why belittle the
man.  He gave the Pirates several good years, and it's silly
to say that the Pirates are a better team without him. 

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: AL Rookie of Year Award?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:59:57 GMT

In article <joeb.718377962@cserver> joeb@cserver.plexus.com (Joe Brotz) writes:

[Are the Brewers really more aggressive than in the past?]

>I don't guarantee that this is the EXACT total, but I believe this years
>stolen base total for the Brewers was 256. Their previous club record
>was 176, so as you said, its about 80 stolen base higher than any of
>their previous marks. BTW, their stolen bases this year was the 
>highest ever for a team in the AL East, and the most by any team 
>since the '76 A's (a team that Garner was a member of).

>IMO, it would be hard for anyone to produce any truly meaningful 
>statistics to measure the impact of a team's running game. Here are
>my observations of the running game's affect in a baseball game
>(obvious ones anyway):

Not true; just about all these effects show up, at least indirectly, in
other stats -- like runs scored.

>  1) the stolen base itself 
>  2) getting an extra base on the hit-and-run
>  3) pressure on pitcher causing balks
>  4) pressure on pitcher causing bad pitches (this one could  
>     have a HUGH impact, but how do you measure it?) 

By seeing if Brewers batters HIT better with runners on base.

>  5) pressure on fielders causing errors (or just bad decisions)
>  6) avoiding double plays when the baserunner is in motion
>  7) extra pressure on the catcher (takes his mind off of calling
>     the game??)
>  8) putting infielders out of position when they have to cover
>     the attempted stolen base (turns an out into a hit).

>I'm sure there are other side affects. Through the year, Brewer fans
>have observed the positive affects that we've gotten in each of these
>areas, but it's pretty hard to say where we would have been without
>the aggressive running game.

But you're forgetting the *NEGATIVE* effects.

1) Losing runners (and outs) due to caught stealings.
2) Getting thrown out going for that extra base.
3) Lining into DPs because the runner was moving.
4) Hurting the batter by putting him behind in the count when he has to
	take pitches to allow steals.
5) Distracting the batters.
6) Not being able to tag up on a fly ball because a runner was moving.
7) Extra injuries from being too aggressive, plus general wear and tear.
8) Eliminating the hole on the right side of the infield by stealing.

There are probably other negative ones, too.

-- 
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 weeks!!!
From: larrow@novell.com (Les Arrow)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Predictions
Date: 5 Oct 92 18:09:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Novell Inc., San Jose, Califonia

With all this talk about arrogance I thought this would be a good time
to post my predictions of all the winners.

The BlueJays and A's will be the divisional winners in the AL, with the
Braves and Pirates winning in the NL. (I thought I would start out with
an easy one :-)

Anyway,

-Blue Jays in 7 win the ALCS
	Although, I do not doubt the Blue Jays will try to blow it behind
	Cito's do-nothing managing style, they just have too much talent.
	It's not going to be easy, though. The A's will put up a furious
	fight. Rickey Henderson will be the MVP, but it won't be enough.

-Braves in 5 win the NLCS
	I won't hide it here. I don't like the Pirates. I've always thought
	VanSlyke was overrated and I don't think Drabek or Bonds will carry
	the team. Danny Jackson pitching in a playoff game? Forget it. Look
	for the Pirates to win the first game and lose the next 4.

-Braves in 6 win the World Series
	Wow! This could be one heck of a World Series. With the pitching
	talent available there could be a total of 8 runs scored in the entire
	series. Consider this my no-confidence vote in Toronto, though.
	Although, I feel they should win, I also felt they'd win a lot more
	games this year. With Cito at the helm, no World Series rings for
	Toronto.

A few scattered predictions:

NL MVP: Bonds (he'll be paid handsomely next year)
NL CY:  Maddux (he'll also be paid handsomely next year)

AL MVP: Alomar (the 2nd baseman, not the catcher...Sandy might get it during
		a strike year if he decides to play)
AL CY:  Eck (Is there any doubt? He's not going to win MVP, he's gonna take 
	     this one)

Take care all!

--Les

	
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: littaum@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Mike Littau)
Subject: Baseball stats?
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 23:59:05 GMT


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:27:29 GMT

In article <48202@shamash.cdc.com> jblixt@mips.COM (jon blixt) writes:
>
>He has only performed
>below average for a relatively small number of at bats and for this
>reason I can say he hasn't choked.

I realize it's nit-picking, but I think it's an important point.  You
have your negation backwards.  You *can't* say he hasn't choked.  But
you can't say that he has, either.  In fact, you can't really tell
*anything* by looking at 18 AB.  You need at least 50 or 100 AB before
you can even really judge whether he looks comfortable or not.  And
you need ~200 AB before the difference between a .200 BA and a .300 BA
is really statistically significant.

Maybe Bonds is a choker.  Maybe not.  None of us have enough info to
really say, at this point.  IMHO, he didn't look *that* bad in the
series.  He wasn't making consistently good contact, but this happens
sometimes.

Cheers,
-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: A dumb question
Date: 6 Oct 92 09:56:08 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Oct6.131023.19992@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes:
> 
> Will LaRussa be starting Weiss in the playoffs?  It seems that he
> would have equally good defense with Bordick/Browne as with
> Weiss/Bordick (Weiss has reportedly lost a step), and Browne certainly
> has had the better bat this year!

	Not that it means anything, but in this morning's USA Today, in the
position-vs-position matchups, they have Weiss listed at short.
	OTOH, nowhere do they mention Bordick...

Brandon Cope
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves-Pirates Pitching Rotation (Does Anyone Know It?)
Keywords: baseball
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:56:34 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <69711@hydra.gatech.EDU> jg10@prism.gatech.EDU (GILMORE,JOHN F) writes:
>
>     We are running our AI baseball demo again this year to predict series
>winners. Last year we picked the Braves in 7 over the Bucs and The Twins in
>6. Hopefully we do as well this time around. 

Have you ever gotten around to running the simulation on past series?  It
would seem to me to be an important step in validating the model.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball