HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: luigi@sgi.com (Randy Palermo)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Astros Contenders?
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:52:18 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA

In article <1993Jan8.225345.14654@micom.com> jscott@micom.com (James Scott) writes:
>From: niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma)
>
>paula@koufax.cv.hp.com (Paul Andresen) writes:
>
>> Despite these losers, the Astros should still win 90 ball games this
>
>niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gordon Niguma) responds:
>
>>> What? ... They also have the Plexiglass principle workings against
>>> them; teams that change records dramatically tend to go the opposite
>>> year in the next meaning the Astros are likely to slide back down.
>
>hmmm.  most recently proved by atlanta going worst to first and then
>the next year collapsing its way back into the world series.
>
Actually, until this last week I thought the Astros might make considerable
noise in the NL West this year, however, they then went out and signed Jose
Uribe and Kevin Bass. I thought, "Well if they use them as backups and in
certain situations they might not hurt that much". Then this past weekend
they went out and signed Chris James. It is no longer possible for the Astros
to have a winning season. If you care about your 'stros you will write to
your new owner and ask, no plead with him to remove at least one of these
players from the roster. No team with all three can have a winning season.
It's a little known league rule that the new management obviously was not
aware of. :^)

luigi
--
Randy Palermo   luigi@csd.sgi.com    Fax: (415)961-6502
Silicon Graphics Computer Systems, 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd Mt. View, CA 94039
"Play an accordion, go to jail. That's the LAW"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mr27092@macbeth.fmrco.uu.uunet (David Hayes)
Subject: Re: red sox are laughable.
Organization: [deleted]
	<1993Jan4.233544.24378@athena.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 12:34:49 GMT


>> at least they got rid of ellis burks... who signed with the other
>> color sox.

time will tell if getting rid of him was good or bad -- but we know NOW
that protecting him in the expansion draft and then losing him with
no compensation was a bonehead move (even by gorman standards) !

wedgie, we hardly knew ye.

--


*********************************************************************
    --dph                    (this space intentionally left blank)
    fmrco!tugboat!mr27092
*********************************************************************
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Hall of Fame voting (read - Disgusted)
Date: 12 Jan 93 15:58:57 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig):
>In article <1it9cjINNlu7@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:
>
>>5) He is (or was, at the time I saw the last numbers) the hardest pitcher to
>>   hit _in history_.  
>
>Again, if you let the runs score, that's not worth much.  Ryan doesn't
>have the ERA to match that historical distinction, which suggests that
>it's at least partly a distinction of the "gee whiz" variety.


Not necessarily.

I've suggested this before, but I think that Nolan Ryan really is one of the
two or three most effective pitchers of all time.

From a full windup, that is.

What happens when he finally allows a baserunner is, on the other hand, 
horrific.  Check out (if you can find them) his career splits in opponents'
OBP and SLG with and without men on base.  I really think that Ryan's career
is pretty much what you would expect if Sandy Koufax were replaced by Bobby
Witt every time there was a baserunner.

Any avid Nolanophiles out there who can comment on this?  Has his pitching
from the stretch improved late in his career?  I see no reason to suppose that
this is a clutch/choke thing; it might be simple mechanics.


-- 
       David Tate        |"Out of the dugout endlessly swinging,
 dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | Out of the manager's throat, the sound fundamentals,
 Prof. of Story Problems | Out of the six-month season..."            
 Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR | 	Walt "Lefty" Whitman
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: rbd@flash.ece.uc.edu (Bobby Davis)
Subject: Baby Ruth
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:50:28 GMT

The candy bar was actually named after the daughter of Grover Cleveland
(no, not Grover Cleveland Alexander).  I think she may have been born in
the White House.  Cleveland had married a much younger woman - it was a
"scandal" according to his political enemies - and Ruth was their first
child.  All of this occurred before Babe Ruth was even born.  He was born
in 1895 if I remember right, and Cleveland served as President 1885-1888
and 1893-1896, the only President ever to serve two non-consecutive terms.

History Rock has been sponsored by Big K Cola, which may or may not have been
named after Nolan Ryan.  "That's taxation without representation, and that's
NOT FAIR!"

Bob Davis	rbd@thor.ece.uc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Red Sox
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 05:37:38 GMT

In <1993Jan7.194152.10641@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.160326.15610@europa.asd.contel.com> king@ssvax.gte.com (Larry King) writes:

>>I look at some of the starters signed by other clubs and wonder why we
>>couldn't have picked up one of them.  Bosio, Abbott, Stewart, Moore, and
>>Key are some of the good starters that moved around.  Granted the Red
>>Sox have a money problem but a starter could be used.  

>The Red Sox have a money problem alright -- they have more dollars than
>sense.

>A team that pays what the Red Sox did for Andre Dawson does not have a
>money problem.

Speaking of which, what happened to Tom Brunansky?  My recollection is
that he's a free agent, but the Red Sox weren't going to keep him
because he was too expensive.

Anyone else think Brunansky is likely to be better and cheaper than
Dawson?

>Sports Illustrated claims that the Red Sox were the big winners at the
>winter meetings, and that they could contend.  Ha.

So does McWeekly.

They also seem to think the Cubs are going to miss Dawson more than
Maddux, because (of course), of Dawson's leadership.  Hah.  Anyone want
to bet Candy Maldonado has a better year than Dawson?

The worst part is, the Red Sox are obviously going to be better than
last year, if for the simple reason that Herm Winningham isn't going to
250 plate appearances.  Presumably Hatcher will get fewer than 300 ABs
as well, and Greenwell will be better or won't play.  They'll be smart enough, 
at a minimum, I assume, not to start Matt Young anymore.

And when the Red Sox improve, everyone will talk about Dawson's veteran
leadership.  Ick.  Bet you won't see much about Calderon's veteran
leadership.  Or Jeff Russell's, if they sign him.

-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kettler@pierre.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.)
Subject: Re: red sox are laughable.
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: MIT Lab for Nuclear Science
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:06:00 GMT

In article <875.02LZ300r01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>, dba30@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com 
(David Allison)   writes...
> 
>It wasn't so much that they chose Hatcher over Burks.  I think the fact
>that Burks wanted a GUARANTEED 3.something salary and was offered a
>2.something with incentives, but turned the offer down had a lot to do
>with it.  It makes me wonder about his back when he out right refused an
>incentive based contract.  I wouldn't want to guarantee him over 3 mil.
>either.

I never heard any requirements by Burks for such a contract. What was offered 
by the Red Sux to Burks was a one-year contract for $500,000 plus incentives 
such that the possible total was $2.3 mill. However, the Red Sox never told 
Burks or his agent what the requirements for the incentives were. If given such 
a contract in baseball, I wouldn't have signed either. The contract that he 
signed was for $500,000 plus incentives such that the possible amount is an 
even $2 mill, but the incentives are $500,000 for playing 90 games and $1 mill 
for 500 PA's from what I read.

					Sincerely yours,

					Thomas R. Kettler "Expos Fanatic"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nss3@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Noel Steere)
Subject: Re: Lies about attendance (Was Speculation Of A Coming Orioles Sale)
Reply-To: nss3@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:59:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.181254.923@asd.com> scott@asd.com (Scott Barman) writes:

<stuff on getting profit/expenditures information from MLB teams
deleted>

>There is information on all of this in various places.  Those of us who
>do job searches and investigates the companies they receive offers from,
>know about some of these outlets.  I wonder why some smart journalist
>(an oxymoron?) hasn't figured it out?

Actually, a smart economist (perhaps even a bigger oxy -- oh, never
mind.  I just couldn't resist :-)) did some investigating and recently
came out with a book, *Baseball and Billions*, that explains his
findings.  The economist's name is Andrew Zimbalist.  I highly
recommend this book.

Noel Steere                  |...of the Dave Rossing fan club
GM/Manager, New York Knights |Knights' Final Run Total: 806 Runs
Internet Baseball League     |
nss3@midway.uchicago.edu     |Hector in '96!
Make outs, not walks!        |Cal Ripken, AL Gold Glove?  Well, at least
(well, Joe *said* I said it!)|  we got rid of Bush and Quayle...


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mem@mv.mv.com (Mark E. Mallett)
Subject: Re: Hey Giants fans!
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 09:09:48 GMT

In article <mzya3rs@Unify.Com> .Unify.Com.wm@unify.uucp (William Morehouse) writes:
>With my first baseball game being so exciting, I was hooked for
>life.  Anybody else have a good story about their first ballgame?

It was my first real day on the job as a photographer for a daily
paper here in New Hampshire; my assignment was go to with a bunch of
newpaper carriers to Fenway Park, where it was newsboy's day one day
in 1973.  I got to go out onto the field and take pictures of the kids
meeting with the Sox players, and say hello to some of them myself.

I don't remember the game at all.  But I do remember the day!

-mm-
-- 
Mark E. Mallett  MV Communications, Inc./ PO Box 4963/ Manchester NH/ 03108
Bus. Phone: 603 429 2223    Home: 603 424 8129     BIX: mmallett
Internet: mem@mv.MV.COM  ( uucp: ...{decvax|harvard}!mv!mem )
Looking for news and mail in southern NH / northern MA?  Try MV!
From: guilford@otago.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Dodgers sign Parrish and Ritchie
Date: 13 Jan 93 11:16:13 +1300
Organization: University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

In article <1666@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:

> Thus spake pcaster@mizar.usc.edu (Dodger):

>>Consider this one.  Mike Scioscia is considered washed up by Claire
>>at what, age 32?  So Claire goes out and signs Lance Parrish, age 36.
>>Yeah, that makes a lot of sense to me.  Uh huh!

> It makes a lot more sense if you consider that Scioscia was among the worst
> offensive catchers in baseball last season (Bret Mayne, Tony Pena, Todd
> Hundley, Junior Ortiz, and maybe Gino Petralli were worse), while Parrish
> was well above average (behind Daulton, Tettleton, Hoiles, Slaught, Harper,
> Steinbach, Wilkins, Stanley, Oliver, Macfarlane, and Nokes).  Parrish is 
> older, but had a much higher peak value.
> 
> It's certainly not a long-term solution, but I can't imagine that Parrish
> will be any worse this year than Scioscia would be.

                 Scioscia OPS     Parrish OPS

          89     .701             .696
          90     .753             .789
          91     .744             .673
          92     .568             .712

1. Scioscia has been in Dodger Stadium (of course).

2. Hernandez and Piazza hit right-handed.

3. Parrish caught 56 games last year.

4. Scioscia has the better defensive/pitch-calling rep.

5. Parrish is 2 and half years older -- his "peak value" years were 
years ago, whereas `90 and `91 were quite close to peak for Scioscia.

6. Parrish, like all players whose value has expired (or is expiring),
is bouncing around the league like Bobo Newsom.

Why can't you imagine that Parrish will be worse than Scioscia?  I find
such an image coming to mind without effort....

Bill Guilford
From: psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Stop the Keystone Cops! (was - Ted's Simmon's latest acquisition)
Date: 5 Jan 93 13:53:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: blue.1391
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

Lonnie Smith - *wimper*

Now, mind you I don't dislike the guy and he might actually be a good
guy to relieve VanSlyke and Al Martin from time to time, and he didn't 
cost a fortune by the modern baseball standards, but this signing
combined with a few others that Ted Simmons and Mark Sauer (aka Keystone cops)
have made this season - well they've given me a episode of Deja vu
that I could do with out.  The signing of Pena, Foley, Candelaria 
and now Smith reminds me very much of a period a few years ago when 
management filled the roster with the like of Steve Kemp, George Hendricks
and Amos Otis.  

Not only did the strategey produce some pretty awful teams but the 
fans couldn't be forced into the stands at gun-point.

But the thing that irks me beyond anything, is that the money they've frittered 
away, signing these over the hill has beens, could have been used to sign just
one decent free agent outfielder that would have allowed this team to remain 
somewhat competetive. 

There was a rumor, back in the days of Larry Doughty I believe, that the Pirate
owners were planning to purposely drive the team into the crapper so they 
could justify, to the other owners, selling it and moving from Pittsburgh.
I used to think that was a silly notion, now I'm not so sure.

I'm not a happy Pirates fans!  Pittsburghers unite, stop Simmons and Sauer 
before we lose our team!!

Paul
-- 
America must've gone through quite a change the last month and a half.  Since
Clinton promised a cabinet that "would look more like America," it must be that
we've all become far left academicians or career politicians.  The ivory tower
is rebuilt, communism lives and its advocates are working for Bill Clinton!
From: fierkelab@bchm.biochem.duke.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Expos news
Date: 10 Jan 93 21:18:40 GMT
Organization: Biochemistry

In article <1993Jan9.170659.24642@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> bspencer@cs.mcgill.ca
(Brian SPENCER) writes:
>Here is a summarof some Expos news in the Saturday Montreal Gazette:
>

>6) The Expos and Red Sox are having trouble getting in touch with Ivan
>Colderon. No-one from either team has told him personally that he's been
>traded. His agent knows, but apparently he's disappeared. He promised to
>play winter ball this year, but didn't because he's feuding with the
>owner of the team in the DR that hold's his rights. Anyway, the last
>time he disappeared like this, last winter, he showed up to training
>camp so out of shape that he hurt his elbow shooting a commercial.
>

Makes sense, if you were Ivan Calderon, would YOU want to know you were going
to play for Lou Gorman and the Red Sox?  If Lou Gorman traded for ME, I'd take
it as a hint that it was time to retire!  ;)


Eric Roush			Deck us all with Boston Charlie
fierkelab@			Walla Walla Wash and Kalamazoo!
bchm.biochem.duke.edu	Nora's freezin' on the Trolley,
				Swaller Dollar Cauliflower Alla-ga-Roo!

				Walt Kelley
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hasch@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Bruce M Hasch)
Subject: Re: attend (WAS Re: Expos Clinch! Wallach to Dodgers)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:36:00 GMT

In article <1iad52INNb0t@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu>, rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert) writes...
>In article <1993Jan3.195845.26160@midway.uchicago.edu>  
>thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>> It's not too radical, but it is quite unproven.  Fans like winning more
>> than they like any particular player, with the possible exception of
>> Fernando Valenzuela, who, to my knowledge, is the only player who has
>> proven ability in drawing fans above and beyond his contribution to the
>> team's winning percentage.
> 
>How about Fidrych? 

	Probably did, but his career was too short.  I think Ted is trying to
use Fernando as an example of a player who caused attendance to rise above the
norm for the greater part of a career.  
	To throw in my $0.02, I would say that Nolan Ryan certainly has this
ability--both at home and on the road.  The fact that the Rangers have tried
to save so many of his starts for home dates over the past few years IMHO
verifies this.  (This is not to say that Nolan doesn't contribute to the 
team's winning percentage, but rather that, at this point in Nolan's amazing 
career, he's not a 200+ inning pitcher anymore...)
	(I will occasionally flash back to the first game I ever attended live-
at Memorial Stadium on May 18,1975.  Nolan pitched for the Angels and defeated
the O's--and until 1991, it was the last time Nolan had won at Memorial 
Stadium.  AND THE MAN IS STILL PITCHING!  Well, enough nostalgia, but can you
believe that there will still be moronic sportswriters out there who won't 
vote him into the HOF when the time comes...  Of course, these are the same
guys who vote Joe Carter for MVP, so I guess we should consider the source...)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce 'Sell the Damn Team, Eli!!' Hasch          hasch@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu
      Jason Miller will be away until sometime around Jan. 20th.  The
      Johns Hopkins University community wishes Jason well as he 
      recovers from a bruised ego and the operation in which his foot
      was removed from his mouth.  Good Luck, Jason.   :-)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kettler@pierre.mit.edu (KETTLER, THOMAS R.)
Subject: Who was drafted befor "Big Hurt"? (Was: Re: Clark v Thomas)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: MIT Lab for Nuclear Science
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 15:44:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.073258.4439@athena.mit.edu>, frisch1@athena.mit.edu 
(Jonathan Katz)      writes...
>They are really pretty similar players, except Thomas walks 50-70 more
>times each year.  And is still young enough that there is a chance he
>will get even better.
> 
>Cheers,
>-Valentine
> 
>-Hey, Thomas has a _lot_ more power, too.
>-Jonathan Katz

To try to stop this thread which has gone on way too long, I have a question.  
Which teams drafted and which players were drafted ahead of Frank Thomas? I 
know that he was drafted seventh overall in the 1989 draft but I don't know who 
was drafted before him. Of course, if the Expos were one of the teams by 
acquiring a pick that early by trade, I'll cry. d::-) or d::-( if so.

					Sincerely yours,

					Thomas R. Kettler "Expos Fanatic"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roney@selkirk.sfu.ca (Chris J. Roney)
Subject: Re: Alomar and Range Factor (was Re: Lists: The Best Players In Baseball)
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:30:49 GMT

spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:


>Well, unadjusted range factor over one year, yes.  But you can adjust range
>factor in many ways to make it make much more sense.  And you can use over
>a long period of years, and it will will present a reasonably accurate
>rating of many fielders.

>One year, unadjusted range factor is not very useful, and probably totally
>useless for second basemen and shortstops. 

>But if you have 4 years of data, you can probably reach some conclusions
>with reasonable accuracy.  And if you adjust it in certain ways - only
>count "plays made," and not "Ps+As," adjust for balls in play, adjust for
>the type of pitching staff (left or right, ground or fly), you have a much
>more useful stat.

>And then if you adjust for actual chances to make plays, and do it properly
>(DA, not ZR), you're even better off.  Yes, you still have the problem of
>how the quality of the pitching staff (as opposed to the type) affects the
>ability of the fielders to turn balls into outs, and also park factor problems,
>but it does seem to give a fairly accurate representation of a fielder's
>performance,              

>And it is obviously far more accurate than traditional fielding measures
>like fielding percentage, which are worse than useless.  And I'm a lot
>more comfortable relying on them than the silly observations of
>writers etc. who seem to feel, if I may borrow from Billy Crystal's 
>"Fernando" for a moment, "that it is better to look good than to field
>good."

>Greg 


    I asked this elsewhere, but this looks like where the action is on
this issue  -  is one of the factors that people talk about adjusting
for whether an infielder plays on grass or turf?  Just eyeballing some
of the range numbers last year, I thought that maybe infielders on
turf tended to do a little worse than I thought they would.  This kind
of makes sense if more balls are unplayable because they shoot through
the infield.  Anybody know if this effect (range factors being lower
for infielders on turf) is a real effect, or is it just my
imagination?
-- 
Chris Roney  (e-mail chris_roney@sfu.ca)
From: dbloom@bnr.ca (David Bloom )
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re:Braves bullpen
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:32:20 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP

>What's up with the Braves' bullpen? Last I heard, Scheuerholz has shopping
>around for a closer,

How about this trade:    

    K.C. Gets:  Pecota and Gant 
    Braves get: Miller and Montgomery


This would solidify the braves bullpen and give them a quality
hitting second baseman (improvement over Lemke).  

This would give K.C. an RBI guy for the middle of the lineup 
and a utility player. 
 
I don't see how Pecota would fit in Atlanta except to give
Pendletion an occasional day off.  It was reported in the
Sporting news before Pecota signed, that he was close to
signing with K.C. 

So possibly Scheuerholz signed him with the intention to
trade him.
From: ts@chainsaw.ecn.purdue.edu (Thomas Ruschak)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Astros Contenders?
Date: 7 Jan 93 05:09:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <Jan.6.22.37.20.1993.23150@pilot.njin.net> gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes:
>gord - i think yu're being a bit hard on anthony and cedeno.  both 
> players are not garbage...a .407 slugging in the astrodome isn't bad,
> y'know (anthony), and i think he'll improve to .320 / .430 this year,
> if playing full time.  cedeno was awful last year, but i think he'll improve
> as well, to .290/.400.  which isn't awful for a shortstop.
>
>- bob gaj

	Just FYI, Stats projects them like this:

		 BA   OBP/ SP
	Anthony	.244/.307/.400
	Cedeno	.236/.271/.373

	Not horrible, no, especially considering it's the Dome, but not good.
I think Cedeno has some potential. He did hit .243/.270/.418 in '91, and
.290/.400 seems like a reasonable possibility. He'll have to improve his
defense, tho.

	Still, the team as a whole has Cubbie Fever -- they love to swing.
Team OBP wasn't good at .313 (NL avg .315), and they had just 4 players with
decent OBP's (Biggio .378, Bagwell .368, Finley, .355, and Caminiti .350)
In fact, other than those 4, the only one with a >.300 OBP and significant PT
was Inky, and he's gone.

	Of those 4, Caminiti is projected at .320/.364, and Finley at
.331/.371, so that'll leave them with just 2 with good OBP, 2 with decent,
and the rest trash.. Hmm.. Just like the Cubs :-(

(Oh, well, at least we've got Willie Wilson! Wow! What a shrewd signing!)
:-(

Tom