HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Leave McCarver Alone!!
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:12:35 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake scott@asd.com (Scott Barman):
>
>Now the question is why is McCarver being picked on now when he wasn't
>being picked on when he was at ABC.  Could it be that Curt Gowdy, Jr.,
>then producer of baseball at ABC, understood the talent better and let
>McCarver express himself?  I think the problem is NOT McCarver but CBS's
>really screwed up notion of how to cover baseball.

Mr. Tim isn't one of my favorites, but I have to agree.  Putting Jack Buck
and Tim McCarver in a booth together and telling them to broadcast the game
but behave is sort of like having cohosts Robin Williams and John Gielgud
hosting the Oscars.

I think the bottom is line is that CBS Sports, as an entity, thinks that
baseball is boring.  How else can you explain the endless interruptions for
Up-Close-and-Personal interviews, comments, nostalgia, innuendo, and so on?
The pre-game shows that get more money and attention from the production staff
than the games themselves do?  The incessant *talk* when people should be
listening and watching?

CBS's motto for next season:  "Baseball: It's Not as Bad as you Think!"



-- 
       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
From: lbr@holos0.uucp (Len Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Braves in Fulton for '93?
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:34:25 GMT
Organization: Holos Software, Inc.

In article <1992Oct7.203843.1437@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> paula@koufax.cv.hp.com (Paul Andresen) writes:

>Having been to both, I'll agree that the Atlanta ball yard is a decent place
>to watch a game, but it is stamped out of concrete with the same cookie-cutter
>that was used for St Louis, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh. To me,
>those five stadiums are indistinguishable from one another.

Having lived in Cinti. and Atlanta, and having visited St. Louis many
times, I have to disagree.  (I haven't been to 3 Rivers or the Vet.)
These stadiums are certainly similar.  But AFCS is the best to see a
baseball game in.  It's 10,000 seats smaller than Riverfront or
St. Louis; I often sit in the upper deck and have a nice view.  In
Riverfront (or even worse, Busch), you need a telescope.  AFCS also
has grass.  No it's not Wrigley, but it's better than the others in
its class.

My fear is that the new stadium will be a disaster.  The idea of turning
an Olympic stadium into a ball park has not worked well. ;-)  Even if
it does work, though, until AFCS is razed there will be no parking in
the area: they're gonna put the new stadium where the parking lot now sits!
From: zuhars@madrone.eecs.ucdavis.edu (Gary Hovercraft Mandibles Huckabay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: The Jays will CRUSH Oakland!!!!
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:12:10 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Regretting The Canseco Trade, Unlimited.

There will be no game 7.  Guzman will throw a 94-pitch no hitter
today, crushing the worthless Oakland batters under his heel like so
much the insects that they are.

Meanwhile, Dave Winfield, Joe Carter, Roberto Alomar, and John Olerud
will blast the melons hurled by Mike Moore halfway to Hawaii, and
Toronto will continue their march of Manifest Destiny against the
Braves in the World Series.

Atlanta and Toronto will DESTROY their worthless, morally inferior
opponents, and meet in the best world series ever.

I LAUGH at the woofing God!  Toronto IS the team of destiny!  Oakland
is but worm filth.



-- 
*    Gary Huckabay    *            What's on my CD player?           *
*  "Glipper.  Plotz.  *                                              *
*  Tworg.  Arnk. Oog. *   The shrunken, salted head of Jimmy Hoffa.  *
*  Blik. Han. Glvnk." *                                              *
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: baseball@catch-the-fever.scd.ucar.edu (Gregg Walters)
Subject: Re: Who's winning game #6 - ALCS
Organization: Scientific Computing Divison/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:18:32 GMT

new file
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com  (Jeff Heilner)
Subject: .tiff or .gif Team Logos
Organization: SPS
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 17:31:34 GMT


Anyone out there know where I can find .tiff or .gif files of MLB team  
logos (the A's in particular).

Please e-mail me if you do.

Thanks.

- Jeff

--
---------------------------------------------------
Jeff Heilner
Motorola SPS - Tempe, AZ 
Email: jeffh@pisces.sps.mot.com (NeXT)
*** A'S *** SHARKS *** WARRIORS *** RAIDERS ***
OAKLAND A'S - 1992 American League West Champions!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tconnors@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Tim Connors )
Subject: Re: Weird day at the ballparks
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 13:07:31 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.123054.8386@cis.ohio-state.edu> atchison@kazoo.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark Atchison) writes:

>>Jim Kaat mentioned Gibson's HR about 10 seconds before Alomar's blast.
>Also:
>_______________________________________________________________________________
> Mark Atchison, a.k.a. <atchison@cis.ohio-state.edu>; Graduate Student in the
>Computer Science Dept, THE Ohio State University (NOT an Ohio State University)
>		Any plagiarisms seen above are not my own...


Mark,
   I have seen that happen quite a few times. The hitter is at the play
and I think to myself "homerun coming up" and sure enough, it happens.
Announcers have a knack for the same. The will often be saying how
syer X is bound to come out of his slump soon, and bam, 3-run homer.
Did you notice as well that *every* play-by-play man claims to know what
the hell is being discussed at a mound conference? ""Borders is telling
Guzman not to worry about the runner, and to keep the ball low and
outside." "Steinbach is just reminding Stewart that Carter has a
tendency to swing at low-outside heat." I have heard this countless
times. Maybe all catchers are wearing hidden mikes?
         tconnors@morgan.ucs.mun.ca
              Tim Connors
l
k
From: rinehart@aramis.rutgers.edu (Mark J. Rinehart)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: result:  Braves 3, Pirates 2
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:48:25 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Oct15.040317.12412@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> am001b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Shark) writes:

> Atlanta won a thrilling come-from-behind victory by scoring three runs in
> the bottom of the ninth to beat the Pirates 3-2 and win the NL pennant.  
> GO BRAVES!!!

As I sat in my chair, stunned to have seen a great Braves win, I
couldn't help but think that this game was a great example of why
baseball is so much fun. Those who say it's boring simply don't
understand. 

I'm glad to see the Toronto Blue Jays get into the Series. It should
be a great Series with these 2 teams in it. I'll be pulling for the
Jays, not because I'm a fan of theirs - I'm a Yankees fan - but
because they've been close several times, and came up empty. Of
course, the Braves lost in a heart breaker seventh game last year, so
this is going to be a great matchup - 2 teams who've never won the
Series. 

Mark
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: The Jim Abbott Story
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 05:32:35 GMT
Organization: Boo!  

I decided to go through Jim Abbott's season to see exactly how bad his
luck has been overall.  His starts:

Date     IP   R  ER RS  D  Notes
4-8      7.1  4  2  3   L   
4-13     7.1  0  0  3   W  
4-18     5.1  0  0  5   N  Left with lead. Bullpen blows save. Cal wins later.
4-24     6    5  5  2   L   
4-29     8.1  1  0  0   L
5-4      6    5  5  2   L  
5-9      7    1  1  2   W  
5-15     8    3  3  0   L  
5-20     7.1  1  1  2   N  Bullpen blows save. 
5-26     5    4  4  1   L  
5-31     7    4  2  3   L  
6-5      5    6  6  1   L  
6-10     8    1  1  2   N  Bullpen blows save.
6-15     9    5  5  2   L
6-21     7.2  2  2  4   W  
6-26     9    1  1  10  W  
7-1      9    2  2  1   L  
7-6      7.1  3  3  0   L  
7-11     3.2  1  1  2   N  Left with injury  
8-8      5    2  0  2   N  Cal scores 2 in 7th; bullpen later loses it.
8-13     7    3  3  1   L  
8-19     8    2  2  3   W  
8-24     8.1  2  2  5   W  
8-30     7    1  1  1   N  Leaves with tie; bullpen loses 
9-5      8    4  4  1   L  
9-11     8.1  0  0  8   W  
9-17     9    2  2  1   L  
9-23     8    3  2  0   L  
9-28     8    5  5  6   N  Leaves at tie; Angels win in extra innings

So:

11 times California scored either 0 or 1 run in games Abbott started.  In
these games, Abbott was 0-10-1.  

Only 6 times did California score more than 3 runs in a game he started.

There were 3 blown saves.  Only twice did he leave games in which he was
behind - once by one when he was injured, once by two - and not get the
loss.

Using the quality start statistic, he went 7-9-3 in his quality starts.
The average AL pitcher usually has about a .750 winning percentage in
his quality starts.

Abbot did not get credit for a win in any start that he did not have 
a "quality start."

Abbott went 0-6-4 in these games.

In games Abbott pitched at least 5 innings and allowed either 0 or 1 run,
he was 4-1-5

He was 2-5 in 1 run decisions, 1-1 in 2 run decisions.  
  
I played with the starts a little, taking out the two games in which Abbott
got his best support and the two games in which he got his worst support.
After taking those 4 games out, his run support fell to approximately 2.26
per 9 innings, while his RA without those games was 3.36, a bit higher.
He projected to have a .310 winning percentage without those starts, and he
had a .280.

Was Abbott as good as his ERA?  Close, but not quite.  I believe that he
was too "steady," and that erratic pitchers with the same ERA are usually
a bit more valuable.  Still, Abbott was still an excellent pitcher in
1992.  If he had gotten normal run support for Anaheim - 4.5 runs a game -
he would have been a 15-8 pitcher, according to my calculations.

Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: World-Series ...... Jays have the edge
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 18:46:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct16.174737.53670@watson.ibm.com> TJFAN@WATSON.IBM.COM writes:
>
>But since 1985, all the WS were won by the teams who had the
>home-field advantage. Just statistics. I'd like to see a
>Canadian team to win the WS, though. 

No, this is not a statistic.  Or at least not one to which any
statistician would give any weight.  There may be an advantage there.
But it's hardly overwhelming.  And numbers like this are entirely
meaningless.  (Maybe that's the hardest part of statistics?  Figuring
out which numbers mean something and which ones are worthless?)

Will you give me 2:1 odds on the Jays?  After all, the disadvantaged
team hasn't won in the last seven years...  Should be a chump bet for
you.

-Valentine
-- 
Make outs, not walks!					tedward@cs.cornell.edu
Clemens four Cy Young!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: TW.N82@isumvs.iastate.edu (BOB.PEDERSEN)
Subject: a small woof
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 03:52:20 GMT

KELLY GRUBER:all home.  All is forgiven.

You gotta love this game!!!

--
Bob Pedersen
Recent graduate and flunkie, Iowa State University
Future Library Science student, University of Iowa
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: 1952/1953 World Series
Keywords: baseball, world series
Reply-To: kuras@aiag.enet.dec.com ()
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 12:09:14 GMT


1952:  NY Yankees over Brooklyn Dodgers, 4 games to 3

1953:  NY Yankees over Brooklyn Dodgers, 4 games to 2

source:  1992 Baseball Almanac

JoeK
From: erude@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Erick Rudiak)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Top of 9 may have been it
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:39:56 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois

In article <1992Oct15.093308.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca>, pmorris@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
|> It certainly was one of the most exciting games I have ever seen. Most 
|> previous posters have commented on the dramatics of the bottom of the
|> ninth, but we shouldn't ignore what transpired in the top of the inning.

	Indeed a good point.  Justice's perfect throw might have been the biggest
play of the game (Lind's error not withstanding - that was a non-play).  Here's
why: had he not thrown out Merced, and had the Braves not scored another run,
the game would have gone into extra innings.  Lemke was already out of the game,
as was Belliard (since Cabrera had pinch-hit for Belliard).  There were no
infielders left on the bench.  The players left in the game were: Gant, Nixon,
Justice (OF); Pendleton - 3B; Blauser - SS; Cabrera (a catcher by trade) - 2B;
"Speedster" Bream (did anyone notice that he was about 2/3 of the way to 3rd
base when Cabrera hit the ball) - 1B; Berryhill - C.  The Braves would have been
stuck with Cabrera at second base.  This could have led to *lots* of problems
(double-plays, etc...)  


-- Erick
_____________________________________________________________________
                                                | 
I hope them cigarettes gonna make you cough     | Erick Rudiak
I hope you hear this song and it pissed you off | erude@nwu.edu
I take that back, I hope you're doing fine      |____________________
And if I had a dollar, I might give you 99      | "I'm not worthy..."
                                                |      \o/      \o/
  -- Spin Doctors, "Little Miss Can't Be Wrong" | O__   \\  O__  \\
________________________________________________|_/__|__||__/__|_||__
From: mm42@prism.gatech.EDU (Mark Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Pittsburg Fans
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:47:53 GMT
Organization: Ramblin' Wrecks from Georgia Tech

jt2t+@andrew.cmu.edu (James Francis Thomas) wrote:
}
}The population base of Pittsburgh is only a little above 2 million.
}
}Compare this to say Atlanta which has over 3 million people.  They get
}their fair weather fans from a much larger population base since the
}Braves are the only major baseball team in the south ...

My world almanac lists Pittsburgh at 2.2 million and Atlanta at
2.7 million, not a huge difference.  However the part about 
Braves drawing fans from a large area is correct.  The Braves
have fans throughout the South who are able to follow them on
television through every game (all but 2 were on TBS, SportSouth, ESPN,
or CBS this season).  These fans are certainly more likely to make
multiple trips of 4-10 hours to Atlanta in a season if the Braves
are doing well.

}I say fair Weather Atlanta Fans because of my observations during game 5
}of the NLCS.  I was sitting next to a group of Braves fans, and I knew
}more about the Braves than they did.

I don't think it is wise to judge the Braves' fans (or any large group)
by a chance encounter with a few of them.  Many Braves fans who did
venture to Pittsburgh complained of being doused with beer, being hit
with cups, peanuts, ice, etc., having their caps and tomahawks stolen,
etc.  I could easily read this in the paper and declare "Pittsburgh
fans are thugs.", but I doubt that would be very fair to the majority
of Pirates fans.

}                                      They had no clue who Smith was,
}and they didn't know who Leibrandt was either.

They sound more like idiots than "fair weather fans" to me - most
"fair weather fans" of the Braves curse Leibrandt on a daily basis
for giving up the winning homer to Kirby Puckett in last year's 
World Series game 6.

}To add further to my amazement, they thought that the Braves had
}previously won a World Series before.  

They have - the last one being when they were in Milwaukee.

-- 
Mark Mitchell           Georgia Tech            mm42@prism.gatech.edu

       "Death wears a big hat, 'cause he's a big bloke."    
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kmartin@dogwood.cray.com (Kenneth B. Martin)
Subject: Re: Bonds "choke"?
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 8 Oct 92 12:11:30 CDT


I'm sorry, but I've really had enough of this Bonds "choke" subject.
Let's just admit that he really hasn't been playing well so far in the
postseason and get on with it.  'Nuff said!

GO BRAVES!!

NLCS in 5!!

Ken

--


===============================
Ken Martin, Sales Analyst
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: paladin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jason Gische)
Subject: Re: Pirates Musing
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 20:58:22 GMT

In article <8OCT199213212044@cats.ucis.vill.edu> mcclure@cats.ucis.vill.edu (MCCLURE HAROLD) writes:
>
>Actually, I'm a bit miffed myself. Anybody can put on a Bulls jacket or a 
>Redskin cap, but give me the real, diehard fan. I have routed for the Braves
>since 1966, even when they were the absolutely worst team in the game. Better
>still give me a Mets fan now that they are back where they were before 1969!!

Hey!  They're not quite down to that level yet.  I'd say they've
regressed to where they were in the late 1970's, when John Stearns
was their best player.  But there still are a few of us fans out
here who saw the glory days come and go.  Hopefully they'll come 
again before my as yet unborn children die of old age.
Actually, I was upset that they didn't finish in last in the East.  But I am
happy that they stayed ahead of the Dodgers.
Go Mets.  Draft well for a change!
Jason Gische
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: fass@math.uwaterloo.ca (The FASS Theatre Company)
Subject: Re: I don't understand
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 02:53:02 GMT

How about a little credit to Pat Borders here.  The replay showed that he 
consciously did not field the ball and let it roll into the dugout.
Had he touched the ball the run would've counted. Heads up play Pat!

Lee.

I'm a virgin...I'm just not very good at it.
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Pittsburgh Fans
Date: 13 Oct 92 19:48:12 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1992Oct13.175009.4046@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>  
ehlerswm@hackney.ecn.purdue.edu (William Mark Ehlers) writes:
> 	In order to see who has the best fans (ie - loyal), why don't
> 	we just base it on a percentage.  In other words if Team A sold
> 	~90% of its seats for the entire season and if Team B only sold
> 	~80% of its seats, team A would have the most loyal fans even if
> 	team B draws more total fans.  

Well, first off, I don't think that fans going to games is what
makes fans loyal. There are lots of other factors. 

But, even given that, your proposal doesn't take into
account stadium size. Whose fans are more "loyal," those that
fill up 80% of a 60,000 seat stadium or those who fill up
90% of a 40,000 seat stadium?  (For the sake of argument, lets
assume that the two areas are about equal in population; otherwise
there is yet another part to the debate.)

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: yonatan@csri.toronto.edu (Gary Will)
Subject: Re: boo jays
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Distribution: na
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:39:10 GMT

In article <Bw62r4.JpJ@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> wwedward@descartes.uwaterloo.ca (Wayne Edwards) writes:
>> reason 40995: they bought all their good players anyway.
>
>The New York Mets and LA Dodgers "bought" teams just like the Jays but were
>never even close to challenging their respective divisions.

The Jays are hardly a "bought" team.  Only Morris, Cone, and Winfield
are bought players (although Cone was technically acquired by a trade).
Everyone else was acquired through trades, waivers, or drafts.

--Gary Will
From: gritter@cs.purdue.EDU (Carl R. Gritter)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Major League Baseball's Alltime Homerun Leaders
Date: 8 Oct 92 04:30:18 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

The only milestone reached was Eddie Murray's 400th early in the
season.  Andre Dawson just barely missed out on 400 and should make it
early next season.  Dale Murphy could also hit 400 if he makes a major
league roster next season.  George Brett is 2 away from 300 and would
probably make it if he plays next year (I hope so).

Major League Baseball's Alltime Homerun Leaders

 * - active player,
 R - active last year but not currently on a major league roster

 1.	Hank Aaron		755
 2.	Babe Ruth		714
 3.	Willie Mays		660
 4.	Frank Robinson		586
 5.	Harmon Killebrew	573
 6.	Reggie Jackson		563
 7.	Mike Schmidt		548
 8.	Mickey Mantle		536
 9.	Jimmy Foxx		534
10.	Willie McCovey		521
10.	Ted Williams		521
12.	Ernie Banks		512
12.	Eddie Matthews		512
14.	Mel Ott			511
15.	Lou Gehrig		493
16.	Stan Musial		475
16.	Willie Stargell		475
18.	Carl Yastrzemski	452
19.	Dave Kingman		442
20.	Dave Winfield		432*
21.	Billy Williams		426
22.	Darrell Evans		414
22.	Eddie Murray		414*
24.	Duke Snider		407
25.	Andre Dawson		399*
25.	Al Kaline		399
27.	Dale Murphy		398*
28.	Graig Nettles		390
29.	Johnny Bench		389
30.	Dwight Evans		385R
31.	Frank Howard		382
31.	Jim Rice		382
33.	Orlando Cepeda		379
33.	Tony Perez		379
35.	Norm Cash		377
36.	Carlton Fisk		375*
37.	Rocky Colovito		374
38.	Gil Hodges		370
39.	Ralph Kiner		369
40.	Joe DiMaggio		361
41.	Johnny Mize		359
42.	Yogi Berra		358
43.	Lee May			354
44.	Richie Allen		351
45.	George Foster		348
46.	Ron Santo		342
47.	Jack Clark		340*
48.	Dave Parker		339R
48.	Boog Powell		339
50.	Don Baylor		338
51.	Joe Adcock		336
52.	Bobby Bonds		332
53.	Hank Greenburg		331
54.	Willie Horton		325
55.	Gary Carter		324*
56.	Roy Sievers		318
57.	Ron Cey			316
57.	Lance Parrish		316*
59.	Reggie Smith		314
60.	Al Simmons		307
60.	Greg Luzinski		307
62.	Fred Lynn		306
63.	Rogers Hornsby		301
64.	Chuck Klein		300
---------------------------------------------------------------
Other active players (more than 150):
	George Brett		298*
	Darryl Stawberry	285*
	Brian Downing		275*
	Cal Ripken, Jr.		269*
	Kent Hrbek		258*
	Tom Brunansky		255*
	George Bell		252*
	Robin Yount		243*
	Joe Carter		242*
	Jesse Barfield		241*
	Harold Baines		241*
	Jose Canseco		235*
	Gary Gaetti		231*
	Ryne Sandberg		231*
	Mark McGwire		220*
	Pedro Guerrero		215*
	Kirk Gibson		210*
	Lou Whitaker		209*
	Rob Deer		205*
	Howard Johnson		204*
	Tim Wallach		204*
	Rickey Henderson	199*
	Chili Davis		197*
	Kevin McReynolds	196*
	Don Mattingly		192*
	Fred McGriff		191*
	Glenn Davis		189*
	Eric Davis		184*
	Danny Tartabull		177*
	Barry Bonds		176*
	Ron Kittle		176R
	Dave Henderson		172*
	Kevin Mitchell		171*
	Lloyd Moseby		169R
	Alan Trammell		162*
	Pete O'Brien		162*
	Wil Clark		162*
	Keith Hernandez		162R
	Cecil Fielder		161*
	Alvin Davis		160*
	Paul Molitor		160*
	Ruben Sierra		156*
	Cory Snyder		153*
	Ken Griffey, Sr.	152R
	Carney Lansford		151*
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball