HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Expos Clinch! Wallach to Dodgers
Date: 26 Dec 92 14:22:30 GMT
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken

djcoll04@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes:

>> 
>> DeShields was on the way up, at age 23.  Wallach is definitely on the way
>> down, at age 35.  Besides, although the BAs are similar, DeShields' '91 was
>> leaps and bounds ahead of Wallach's '92 (or '91, for that matter).
>> 
>> DeShields posted a .347 OBP in his bad year, which Wallach, at this point,
>> can only dream about, for example.  (Besides, DeShields is a second baseman,
>> so not as much offense is expected of him aay.
>> GO CALIF
>Hey,, I'm not saying that Wallach will necessarily rise from the ashes. While
>he had a worse OBP than Deshields in teir off years, he didn't approach 
>Deshields league leading strikeout total.
so?  if youre going to make an out, it doesn't make much difference 
 whether that out is a strikeout, a line out, or a double play.  obviously,
 sacrifice flies are "better" outs.

>Remember, Expos fans, that they told us that Tim Raines was washed up.  He 
>has played consistent ball since the trade while Calderon was on the bench
>and Barry Jones was a wash.
during calderon's first year in montreal, he completely blew away any of
 raines' past 5 years.  wasn't his bad year due to an injury?  if so, you
 can't blame the expos *at all*.  raines for calderon, without injury,
 is a good deal for the expos.

>Doesn't anyone out there believe in the importance of a good defense and a
i do.  but if you've got an awful offensive person, it hurts *more*
 (most of the time).


- bob gaj
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: djcoll04@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: Expos Clinch! Wallach to Dodgers
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 08:17:08 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

> 
> DeShields was on the way up, at age 23.  Wallach is definitely on the way
> down, at age 35.  Besides, although the BAs are similar, DeShields' '91 was
> leaps and bounds ahead of Wallach's '92 (or '91, for that matter).
> 
> DeShields posted a .347 OBP in his bad year, which Wallach, at this point,
> can only dream about, for example.  (Besides, DeShields is a second baseman,
> so not as much offense is expected of him aay.
> GO CALIF
Hey,, I'm not saying that Wallach will necessarily rise from the ashes. While
he had a worse OBP than Deshields in teir off years, he didn't approach 
Deshields league leading strikeout total.

Remember, Expos fans, that they told us that Tim Raines was washed up.  He 
has played consistent ball since the trade while Calderon was on the bench
and Barry Jones was a wash.

Doesn't anyone out there believe in the importance of a good defense and a
veteran, experienced presence in that defense?  

                             Confused in Louisville, 
                                           Patrick Tierney
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Offense, Defense, and the Transmutation of Egalitarian Society
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:25:19 GMT

In <1992Dec22.064548.1964@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:

>But is the balance between offense and defense really the same in baseball
>as in a slow-pitch softball game with 4 fielders?

yep.  One side is trying equally hard to beat the other.

>Yes, preventing runs and scoring runs is equally important.  But I'm not sure
>that's the same thing.  If you change the rules of baseball, and make it
>much harder to prevent runs, doesn't offense become more important and
>defense less so?

nope.  You are making the typical stathead error.  The object of the game
is not to score as many runs as possible - that is the object of the 
offense.  The object of the whole team is to score more runs than the
other team.

>The ultimate example seems to me to be a batting cage contest.  There is
>no defense, so it can't possibly be 50% of the game.  And if you add a
>slo-pitch pitcher, does that automatically make defense 50% of the game. 

If there is no defense then there is no analogy.  If the slo-pitch pitcher
is trying to prevent you from scoring runs then defense has become just
as important as offense - 50 -50.
 
>If you have a game in which raising the talent of your offense by 10%
>is more beneficial than raising the talent of your defense by 50%, I
>don't think there's a 50-50 split.

Raising the talent of your offense only means that you are coming closer
to realizing the maximum contribution your offense can make to winning -
which is still only 50%.

Again, the object is not to see just how many points you can score - it is
to score more than the other team.  And in this sense defense makes just
as big a contribution to winning as offense.

a pleasure, as always,

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Mattingly
Date: 21 Dec 1992 14:01:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec19.201019.2194@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>  
akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz) writes:
> For the last damn time, I DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT HIS OFFENSE!
> I did not say he is the best first baseman. I said I thought he has
> the best defense. That is all I said!

Fine. And most of the replies to you have been about defense.
All of the replies I've seen have been polite disagreement with
you, with stats and facts to back up the assertion that a number
of players are better at first base than Mattingly. 

Most people here post to try to generate discussion. Yet you
seem to be objecting to the fact that your post generated
discussion.  Why then post?


--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbanaian@bernard.pitzer.claremont.edu (King Banaian)
Subject: Re: TICKET PRICES FOR 1993
Organization: Pitzer College
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 20:44:10 GMT

In article <1hvk93INNbpc@menudo.uh.edu> chee1l5@Jane.UH.EDU (sam lane) writes:
>David McCarroll writes:
>
>>Chicago Cubs  (note: price increases from 1992)
>>   $17 Group section
>>   $16 Group section (April, May, September weekdays)
>
>$17 for the *Cubs*! Yeah, I can see that.
>Why are the tickets less in April and May? Seems they'd be more since the
>Cubs haven't been mathematically eliminated yet.
>
The Cubs do this because those months have kids in school, which cuts down 
the crowd.  They try to balance out the attendance, since the park is so 
small.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,soc.women,soc.men
From: yhl@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Stallion)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 1993 NL MVP
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:29:36 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec21.064806.26318@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI) writes:
>Pretty obvious which team is my favourite, eh?
>
>--Dave

well, excuse my ignorance, but i don't find that to be so obvious as you said
it is :=)

stallion
From: BARBER@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Wayne Barber)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Holiday Gift
Date: 24 Dec 92 17:00:15 GMT
Organization: University of Maine System

In article <1992Dec24.000338.1@uwovax.uwo.ca>, jpalmer@uwovax.uwo.ca (The
Econoclast) says:
>
>As a holiday gift to MLB and especially Bud Selig, I hereby
>offer to spend my sabbatical next year as the next commissioner of MLB.
>
As a holiday gift to myself, I hereby declare myself a free agent.

Scouting report on me:  Can't hit, can't field, can throw a little.

I would be slow on the basepaths, but I never get on so it won't show. My
fastball has been clocked at 52 mph at one of those carnival booths (I
even guessed correctly and won a stuffed dog!).

My agent (my wife) is asking for Spike Owen money, at least.

Can someone make sure Lou Gorman sees this?  I'm only 34 years old, so I
may have to wait a couple years for him to call.
>--

> Regards,
>  John Palmer    London, Ontario       Voice: (519) 661-3533     FAX: 661-3666
>  reply to jpalmer@uwovax.uwo.ca       The Economics Institute for Journalists
>  ============================================================================
>  only $30K plus expenses and I'm yours, Buddy Boy
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Too bad.  You think too much like an owner.  Expenses is where the numbers
get cooked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Barber - Data Support Specialist     | Red Sox wannabe
University of Maine System                 | Owner, Salt Bay Spirits
INTERNET: Barber@Maine.Maine.Edu           | Real League (Internet)
From: charly@hal.COM (Charly Rhoades)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Pirates self destruction
Date: 22 Dec 92 02:33:12 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: renoir.hal.com

In article <1992Dec18.171249.16030@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz) writes:

[ in reference to distress at signing Candelaria ]

>Who is still one of the the best ever at getting out left-handed batters.
>Don't be so upset.

If only it were a few years ago, but alas in admittedly limited appearance,
the Candyman actually performed better against righthanders last year.

-- 
   Charly Rhoades               
                                   This message provided for
   HaL Computer Systems           informational purposes only
   charly@hal.com            
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball,soc.women,soc.men
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Women Sports Reporters
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:22:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.024452.24795@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
>Wyche did not try to unilaterally ban women reporters from the locker
>room, but attempted to secure the privacy of his players while they
>were bathing and void of clothing.  He erected a temporary wall in the
>locker room with blankets or some such and told the women reporters
>that they could ask to talk to any player, and that player, if he was
>not dressed, would put on something and come outside the barrier/wall
>to answer their questions.

Okay, so Wyche took it upon himself to suddenly, after years in the league
as a head coach, decide that women reporters should not have equal access
to the athletes.  If he was so worried about his player's privacy, why
hadn't he done anything before now?  Why didn't he exile men reporters?
TV cameras?

>I assume that men reporters are also entitled to interview women
>athletes while they are bathing, although I've never heard of one man
>even attempting to do so.

In every sport where women participate, men and women reporters have equal
access to the players.

>Wyche's primary motivation was to insure that his players were not open
>to charges of sexual harassment for behaving inappropriately while not
>fully clothed in front of women reporters.  He understood that the
>incident with the New England Patriots football players and a woman
>reporter came about because these Partriot football players were very
>resentful of a woman reporter insisting on interviewing players in the
>locker room immediately after practice while they were bathing.  He was
>trying to avoid this problem.
>
>A group of his players later had group sex with a woman in Seattle, WA,
>and then, when the women pursued them with threats of accusing them of
>rape, paid her a lump sum of something like $30,000 to NOT go forward
>with the allegations.  Then, the woman demanded more money.  The
>players refused to give her more money.  So, she went forwarded with
>the rape allegations.  I don't know the outcome of the trial, though.
>Despite Wyche's "fathering," this group of "his" players were stupid
>enough to open themselves up to such allegations.

Perhaps if Wyche had dealt with the real problem of the players and their
attitudes toward women, instead of tacitly supporting those attitudes, his
"fathering" would have been more effective.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: scott@asd.com (Scott Barman)
Subject: Re: Who are the best pitchers of our generation?
Organization: American Software Development Corp., West Babylon, NY
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:09:46 GMT

In article <BzI1J5.FC2@ecf.toronto.edu> hora@ecf.toronto.edu (HO ROBERT ANDREW) writes:
>I was just flipping through Bill James' Baseball Book 1991 and stumbled
>accross a comment he made about who the best pitchers of this generation
>are.  Specifically, under his comments for Dave Stieb, he says that
>Clemens, Dave Stewart, Dwight Gooden, and Frank Viola are/were the best of
>this generation, while Stieb and Jack Morris would rank just behind those
>guys.  I was just wondering whether anyone here agrees or disagrees with
>this evaluation.  Who were/are the best pitchers of our generation?  Two
>years later, does James' statement still hold, or was he wrong to begin with?
>Obviously Clemens rates as the best pitcher of his generation, but are
>there any others that you would rate ahead of those guys?  Does anyone else
>besides me wonder who will be remembered as the best of this generation
>twenty years from now?

Define "our generation."  I am old enough to remember Hall of Famer Tom
Seaver as well as being around to see Rocket Roger.  And where does Nolan
Ryan fit, who was a rookie with Seaver and has pitched opposite of Clemens?
-- 
scott barman			| <This space intentionally left blank>
scott@asd.com			|
 (I can barely speak for myself, you expect me to speak for my employer??)
From: wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: The Northern League
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:38:20 GMT
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Distribution: na
Organization: Swarthmore College Computing CenterCenter

In article <lsmith.724715203@mega>, lsmith@mega.cs.umn.edu (Lance
"Squiddie" Smith) wrote:
> The players are supposed to be college age and former minor and major 
> leaguers. Is this about what the Cape Cod league does or are they all college
> players?

The Cape Cod league is purely amateur, and almost all College players. Back
when I used to catch 20 games or more a year, there were occasionally
oddball players, such as 14 year old phenoms and the 35 year old
construction worker who was not a bad ballplayer but never gave it a shot,
etc. They literally pass the hat at ballgames to fund it. (Doesn't the
Alaskan league work on similar principles?)

Somebody who's been down/up to a game in the last two seasons, please
correct me if things have changed.

- matt

---------------------------------------------------------
This space left intentionally blank until spring training.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Offense, Defense, and the Transmutation of Egalitarian Society
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:19:04 GMT

In <1992Dec22.181623.54893@watson.ibm.com> mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones) writes:

>Of course, Greg is discussing a point raised by Dr. Dave, Stathead Supreme,
>Keeper of the Sacred Formulae, whose very median I am not worthy to
>calculate, etc., etc. ;-)

Do you honestly think that Dave enjoys this ass-kissing?

>So what's the "typical stathead error", Roger? Who's making it? Do you
>realize you're actually supporting Dave's arguments, you miserable cretin?

If I think he is right I will say so.  And if he is wrong I will say so
as well...how do you do things?

>As the rest of the post shows, you're not stupid, but you're certainly
>obnoxious.

I guess that beats being BOTH stupid AND obnoxious.  What is it like, Mike,
to live in a world where you look around and all you can see are asses: some
to be kissed and the rest to be kicked?  Pretty lonely, eh pal?

>I think we need a term for all those who disdain statistics and those who
>use them even though they themselves give every impression of being
>unwilling if not incapable of understanding them. How about "flat-ballers"?

We already have many, many names for people like you.  And each and every
one of them is commonplace and boring.

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jjungbau@luke.eecs.wsu.edu (Jim Jungbauer)
Subject: Re: 1993 NL MVP
Organization: Washington State University, Pullman
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 08:14:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.064806.26318@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI) writes:

>But assuming everything works out for Montreal, who do you suppose will get
>the NL MVP?
>
>Here are my early predictions (made with the heart, not the mind):
>
>4) Kevin Mitchell (a long-shot, but maybe...)

{distinct sound of my jaw dropping}

But when will he have time... between eating, whining, and sitting
on the DL?

Jim
-- 
Jim Jungbauer               | Go Vikings, North Stars, Twins, Cougars!
jjungbau@yoda.eecs.wsu.edu  | 
EECS Department             | "Nice move by Bellows... big drive... SCORES!"
Washington State University |    -- Mike Emrick, 1991 Norris Division Finals
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Tanana
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:22:24 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: CSE Dept., UC San Diego


In article <1992Dec23.002809.28303@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
|> In article <mcmath-221292154718@mcmathmac.nlm.nih.gov> mcmath@csb1.nlm.nih.gov (Chuck Totally Hair McMath) writes:
|> >The line for Tanana:
|> >
|> >PITCHERS        W  L   ERA   G GS CG GF SH SV   INN   H   R  ER HR  BB  SO
|> >TANANA,F       13 11  4.39  32 31  3  0  0  0 186.2 188 102  91 22  90  91
|> >
|> >~200 IP.  Sure, if you want to give a guy like this 200 IP, I'm sure he'd
|> >gladly accept the gift.  The only problem is that there are about 100 other
|> >people you could choose, including some who are in AAA and would be cheaper
|> >(don't know what Tanana's signed for, but it's not the ML minimum, I'll
|> >bet).  
|> 
|> Are there really that many out there?  Even after expansion?  Certainly
|> enough teams had trouble finding them. 

One problem is that we know how people did after the fact, but would like
to know beforehand...

 The Orioles would've loved to
|> have Tanana instead of Milacki. 

I'll bet there are several AAA pitchers in the system
who would have outpitched Milacki last year if they had been given
the opportunity.

 Tanana would've been a #3 starter on
|> the Indians staff.  The Tigers had enough trouble *with* Tanana on their
|> staff finding such pitchers.  

OK, maybe the Indians & Tigers didn't have anyone in their systems...
but the Padres picked up Deshaies for just about nothing & found
Maddux at a banquet in Las Vegas.  I agree with mcmath - there are lots
of pitchers of about this (current) caliber around.  Sure, he used
to be Tanana... 

 

-- 
Dave DeMers			 ddemers@UCSD   demers@cs.ucsd.edu
Computer Science & Engineering	C-014		demers%cs@ucsd.bitnet
UC San Diego					...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114	(619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Sierra with A's: 5 yrs/$30MM
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 01:13:35 GMT

In <1993Jan4.004652.16862@leland.Stanford.EDU> dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:

>In article <1993Jan3.195105.28444@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:

>>The FANS and other players I would have to think.  If a player is making 
>>4 or 5 big ones a year and he is not putting out then I as a FAN would be
>>damned upset.  And if I was another player making 3 or 4 hundred thou I
>>would be livid.

>I guess you can be envious if you want to be, Roger. I am almost 
>certain that there are people in your chosen profession  who are 
>talented enough to do better work than you do while putting in half 
>the effort. Probably loads of them. If you want to spend your life 
>being irritated at people who don't appear to give their all, go right 
>ahead. Me? I'd rather let the lucky few enjoy their successes while
>I go about living my life the way I'm happiest. I don't have the 
>energy for that kind of pettiness and envy.

I don't think "pettiness and envy" describe the feelings of those
who are being deprived of a shot at the WS because the big boys won't
put out.  Do you honestly feel that being upset at a member of your
team, because his lack of effort is costing you, is petty?

Do you think that FANS are being petty if they are upset because the 
big guy, the guy that they are paying, is not putting out?

>Although, you may have a point. My impression of pro athletes is
>that they have *plenty* of energy to devote to pettiness and envy.

I think you are confusing "pettiness and envy" with the desire to win
at all costs.  This is entirely understandable as it would appear that 
winning is not a part of "living my life the way I'm happiest".

rm

-- 
Roger Maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Best playes of All Time
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 06:58:16 GMT

In <1992Dec21.184211.19102@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) says:
>In article <BzLG6v.Gxy@unix.amherst.edu> ddsokol@unix.amherst.edu (D. DANIEL SOKOL) writes:

>>2B Carew- he won how many batting titles?  Much better than Morgan.

>Carew is probably very underrated, but he doesn't belong at second base
>ahead of Morgan.  Carew began as a second baseman in 1967, but by 1976,
>Carew was a first baseman; he only spent half his career as a second
>baseman.  Joe Morgan, by contrast, in his 22nd season in the majors at age
>40, played 100 games at second base for the Oakland A's.  He was always
>primarily a second baseman.  You can't give credit to Carew the second
>baseman all the things that Carew the first baseman did offensively.  

I noticed that.  I always hated him, as an Orioles fan, because he kept 
on getting undeservedly elected to the All-Star team over Murray in the 
early 80s.

>The only other serious contender for the 2b job other than Morgan is
>Rogers Hornsby.

I dunno; Sandberg is looking better and better.  Now that he's started
to walk consistently, finally, he's becoming awfully good.  Yes, his
stats are inflated by Wrigley, but he still looks good.

And while I know Gold Gloves aren't worth the paper they're printed on,
(am I mixing metaphors, here?), he's obviously better defensively than
Morgan or Hornsby.

-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Is it too early to start making predictions for 1993?
niepornt@phoenix.    | Probably, but that never stopped me before.
   princeton.edu     | ALE: Baltimore ALW: Chicago NLE: Montreal NLW: Atlanta
Baltimore Orioles 93 | AL MVP: Cal Ripken  AL Cy Young: Mike Mussina
From: chee1l5@Jane.UH.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Statheads and park effects
Date: 21 Dec 1992 15:04:24 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: chee1l5@Jane.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: jane.uh.edu

>
>Before I go, let's take a look at pitchers who have spent most
>of the last 5 years in great hitters' parks.
>
>        Home     Road
>Clemens 2.77     2.48
>Rijo    2.80     2.38
>Maddux  3.11     2.92
>Glavine 3.58     3.44
>Browning4.23     3.36
>Smoltz  3.36     3.64    
>
>Yet all these guys but Smoltz have posted better ERAs on the road. >
                        ^^^^^^ 
Actually, its well known that any player with his own personal
psychologists can be considered a statistical outliar (sp?).

Sam

>Greg 
>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball