HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:33:00 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.182153.25244@cbnewse.cb.att.com> gotribe@cbnewse.cb.att.com (richard.g.barry) writes:
>
>You guys get so bogged down in your stats and comparisons, that you
>forget what the Detroit owner really wants to do - get people to
>the park and make money.  Fielder is as big (no pun intended) in
>Detroit as other superstars are in other towns.

Perhaps.  But other stars would draw fans too, *and* help them win
more games (again, drawing more fans).  Is Fielder so big in Detroit
that people care more about him than about the team?  (Like with
Puckett, Clemens, Sandberg, Ripken, and other superstars?)

He might be worth it next year, but if he doesn't rebound from his '92
numbers, fans will have totally forgotten him by 1994.  And they will
boo him heavily in 1995.

Of course, he probably will rebound a bit, and continue to hit 35 HR
with 90 RBI for several years.  (Low RBI totals due to low BA and the
eventual decline of Whitaker/Phillips.)

But will that be enough for him to maintain his popularity?  Winning
consistently is the best way to draw fans.

>In Chicago, the guys on
>the radio are already advocating not going to Bears pre-season games
>next year because McCaskey fired Ditka (Chicagos' newest superstar
>hero).

Is the movement working?  Such boycotts don't generally last very
long...

>Detroit needs Fielder and $$$ shouldn't be an issue.

In the short term it might make sense.  In the long term, I'm less
convinced.

Cheers,
-Valentine
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: mkaverha@cs.ruu.nl (Micha Verhagen)
Subject: Re: Get a life baseball fans... Try ping-pong!
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 10:59:32 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science

In <9301082157.AA27017@pserv.CFSMO.Honeywell.COM> Khanh Nguyen <khanh@cfsmo.honeywell.com> writes:


>I finally stooped so low as to watch a baseball game the other day.  It was
>a tape of the "World" Series!  What a joke!  I can't believe you people.  I
>have seen some half-assed sports in my day, but baseball has got to take
>the cake.  I mean, really, a bunch of fat, old men running around in kid's
>outfits, scratching themselves, and spitting on national television.  
>
>Oh, and God forbid they should have to run across the field and damn near
>have a heartattack.  Please!
>
>And what do these slobs get paid?  $50,000,000 per second!  For what?
>
>Have you seen a modern table tennis tourney lately?  Real action!  Mano a
>mano battle for supremacy on the board.  Each one grabbing his paddle
>instead of his crotch.
>
>Pardon my saying so, but the only thing lamer than baseball is what you
>call "football."
>
>No flames necessary-- although I'm not sure you knobheads could scrape up
>enough intelligence between you to come up with a good one.  Anyway, I'm
>sure you're all REALLY offended.  Offended-- that's a big person word for
>when you don't like something that someone said.  
>
>So, don't bother.
>
>Khanh

Thank you Khanh, for your intelligent essay about what you think of baseball.
It is good to see people with so much brains (needed to play ping-pong
ofcourse) give their opinion in such a humble and gentle way. Your
contribution to this group tells me more about you than it does about
baseball, which you obviously can't or don't want to understand. Otherwise you
would have taken a little more care before passing your judgement.
 
		       Micha Verhagen
		       mkaverha@cs.ruu.nl
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Organization: Boo!  
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:31:23 GMT

In <1993Jan11.164948.27987@athena.mit.edu> frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz) writes:

>In article <1ira9nINN1st@lynx.unm.edu>, kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:
>|> In article <1993Jan11.072048.3770@athena.mit.edu> frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz) writes:
>|> >You think Fielder is barely above average!!!
>|> >
>|> Lemme guess.  You're new here, right?
>|> 
>Now, wait a minute.  What exactly are you trying to imply??
>The only point I was trying to make, albeit not to your satisfaction, was that
>there are plenty of teams who would be better off with Fielder.
>If you have a problem with that, please specify it instead of resorting to vague
>generalities!

Woah.  First, Jonathan, please use shorter lines.  Second, all Kurt was
saying was that no one who had been reading this net for more than a month
could possibly have made the post you've made, because if you had been
reading you would seen the (literally) thousands of posts on the subject
and would at least have understood why people here fell about Fielder as
they do.

Greg 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hakari@inga2.acc.stolaf.edu (The Conformist Contrabass Clarinetist)
Subject: Re: First Game Memories (Was: Re: Hey Giants fans!)
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:27:46 GMT



My first game was in 1985 at the Metrodome.  First base line seats, about 10 
rows back.  Twins played the Mariners.  Steve Howe came on in relief for the
Twins.  Hrbek hit a right-field *upper-deck* homer, and the Twins won 14-3.


--Andrea, contrabass clarinetist extraordinaire...
From: sfh@po.CWRU.Edu (Steven F. Hubbard)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: American League West (Was Re: The Minnesota Twins)
Date: 8 Jan 1993 21:50:40 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: sfh@po.CWRU.Edu (Steven F. Hubbard)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, sckelm@iastate.edu (Steven C Kelm) says:

>
>Help me out here, as there are huge question marks in most rotations. (Note
>questions marks are do to both lack of pitching and Steve's failing memory.)
>
>MN: Tapani, Erickson, Mahomes, Trombley, Deshaies
>CWS: McDowell, Fernandez, Alvarez, Steib, ?

McCaskill's the other guy here.  I think the White Sox will be very happy
with the rotation.

>TX: Brown, Ryan, ?, ?, ?

  Liebrandt came to the Rangers in a deal with the Braves a while ago.  I don't
know who the 4th and 5th guys are.  Champiarino (whoever)?  I saw in Baseball
Weekly a while ago, that they may bring up 21 year old Kurt Miller before the
end of the season.

>Oak: Darling, Welch, Davis, ?, ?

   Isn't Bobby Witt still there?  He'll help this team quite a bit with Stewart 
and Moore gone.

>Sea: Fleming, Johnson, Bosio, Hansen, ?

  I saw that Seattle picked up Reggie Harris in the rule 5 draft.  Can he hold
a spot in a rotation (I mean withour walking 200 guys)?   I assume they'll keep
Harris on the roster rather than offer him back to Oakland if Harris can pitch
at all.  I don't know that Seattle's minor leagues have any decent pitching
prospects.


>KC: Cone, Appier, Picardo, Gubiza, ?

  I think Gordon's the next guy.  Good rotation.

>CA: Langston, Finley, Valera, Hathaway?, Springer (or whoever they picked up 
>    from the Yankees)
>
>There has to be a number of pitchers that I don't remember off-hand.  In any
>case, the good offensive teams are pretty lack-luster pitching wise, and the
>good pitching clubs (KC in particular) need some punch in the line-up in a 
>BIG way.  This division is pretty much up for grabs.
>

   I don't see a clear favorite either.  I think Chicago has a slight edge, and
I'm even willing to say Texas could be there.  I don't think Seattle or 
California is really in it, but I didn't think Baltimore would be in it last
year  (Brady Anderson?  Come on!).

SfH 
-- 
Steven F. Hubbard                ** "If people don't want to come to the 
Case Western Reserve University  **     ballpark, how are you gonna stop them? 
Department of Physics            **  
Cleveland, OH 44106              **                         -- Yogi
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: The Best First-base Player in !993
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 07:55:07 GMT

In article <C0M6pC.IIp@news.iastate.edu> vbdiep@iastate.edu (Vinh Diep) writes:

>	While many of you are arguing about Will Clark and Frank Thomas, and 
>one is better than the other, one player that some of you seem to ignore will
>surprise baseball fans in 1993. That All-Star first-baseman is DON MATTINGLY.
> 	Any questions?

Yes.  Why in the world would a player who hasn't even been average in
four or five years suddenly become the best first baseman in the league
again at age 32?

Don Mattingly, in his entire career, 1982-1992, has NEVER EVER EVER had a
season as good as any of Thomas's.  Why would he suddenly start now?

-- 
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: roney@selkirk.sfu.ca (Chris J. Roney)
Subject: range factor question
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 01:27:46 GMT

    I have a question about "range factor".  If I understand
correctly, a major (THE major?) component of this is the number of
defensive plays made.  Last year I was a little surprised at how low
the number of plays made were for several players (Roberto Alomar
being one).  One possible pattern I noticed was that a number of these
surprises were infielders playing on artificial turf.  This sort of
made sense to me, since it seems possible that more balls scoot
through the infield and are unplayable on turf.  What I'm wondering
is 1) does anybody know if this is a real effect? and 2) if it is,
does it get accounted for in "range factor"?
     Thanks!

-- 
Chris Roney  (e-mail chris_roney@sfu.ca)
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Hall of Fame voting (read - Disgusted)
Date: 8 Jan 1993 17:39:38 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <Jan.8.11.51.56.1993.6304@pilot.njin.net>  
gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes:
> rinehart@aramis.rutgers.edu (Mark J. Rinehart) writes:
> 
> >In article <C0Is3E.KAw@news.cso.uiuc.edu>  
lbarnes@alexia.lis.uiuc.edu (Laura L. Barnes) writes:
> 
> wow.  i disagreed with laura - rather strongly - but i never
>  thought i'd see someone be as rude as mark rinehart was to her.

You don't read the net often, do you? :)

I went back and read Mark's post, assuming there'd been some
major nastiness that I'd missed.  Other than the last line
(which wasn't ALL that bad) I couldn't find much. His response was
rather restrained, given that Laura had said that a) she didn't
like Jackson and b) she really knew nothing about him.  She asked,
for example, what he did besides hitting post-season homeruns.
550+ regular season homeruns aren't "something"?

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Dodgers sign Parrish and Ritchie
Date: 11 Jan 93 17:43:26 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

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.


-- 
       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: erics@sco.COM (eric smith)
Subject: Re: Baby Ruth
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993 18:41:21 GMT


rbd@flash.ece.uc.edu (Bobby Davis) writes:

>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.

I think the scandal had to do with Cleveland's admission during his first
presidential campaign that he had fathered an illegitimate child and was
paying child support. The Republicans came up with the rhyme "Ma, Ma,
where's my Pa? Gone to the White House, ha ha ha!", but Cleveland won
anyway.

-----
Eric Smith
erics@sco.com
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610
From: kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Date: 11 Jan 1993 22:11:30 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
NNTP-Posting-Host: carina.unm.edu

In article <1993Jan11.164948.27987@athena.mit.edu> frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz) writes:
>In article <1ira9nINN1st@lynx.unm.edu>, kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:
>|> In article <1993Jan11.072048.3770@athena.mit.edu> frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz) writes:
>|> >You think Fielder is barely above average!!!
>|> 
>|> Lemme guess.  You're new here, right?
>|> 
>Now, wait a minute.  What exactly are you trying to imply??
>The only point I was trying to make, albeit not to your satisfaction, was that
>there are plenty of teams who would be better off with Fielder.
If you have a problem with that, please specify it instead of resorting to vague
>generalities!

It's just that this is one of those things that seem to come up with great
regularity.  In fact, it's probably the single most controversial statement that
gets made in this group.

"Cecil Fielder is barely above average among first basemen."

But he isn't a star, except on highlight films.  Which is, I suppose, what
matters most when you talk about "stars."  He's great at driving in runs.  Not
the best, mind you, because he gets so many chances to do it because of the
great tablesetters in front of him.  But great.  Fine.  But he is decidedly
BELOW average in the other component, which is to allow yourself to be driven
in by those behind you.  He isn't a good baserunner or fielder either, though 
those things aren't as important.  A great slugger with poor talent in all the 
other areas isn't a star; he's a one dimensional slugger.  But the fans have
always liked one-dimensional sluggers, and so they get the big bucks.

And yes, there are plenty of teams who would be better off with Fielder.  About
ten to twelve between the two leagues, to be exact.  And that makes him a little
above average.

-- 
Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Walks: not that sexy.
"Halt!  Based on conclusive dental evidence that truly bites, I arrest you 
 hereby for the murdering of the dead Belzic Tascar.  I am obliged to warn you 
 that my weapons are registered as offensive fronds!!"- R.M.Allen, "Monkey See"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Yet another all-star team
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:14:18 GMT

In article <1ita7rINNm9j@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:
>In article <1993Jan11.204415.103451@locus.com> aardvark@cygnus.la.locus.com (Warren Usui) writes:
>>And now, the 1992 All-Scrabble teams! (Players whose last names score the
>>					most points when playing Scrabble)

>>1B - Guillermo Velasquez (Padres)         30

>And assuming you could use names in Scrabble, how would you go about making
>this name?  All the others seem to have either a) eight letters or less, so a
>name could have been created from nothing, or b) have a legal Scrabble word in
>the name, upon which the name could have been built.

>Oops.  Excuse me.  I looked up "vela", which turns out to be the plural of
>"velum", which Webster's uses in relation to the soft palate.  Wow.  I stand
>corrected.

What's wrong with "as"?  Or, for that matter, the musical syllable "la"?

Moreover, you don't need a word to build on.  You can work across two
words separated by a row or more and going in the other direction:

            VELASQUEZ
            I       E
            P       R
            E       O
            R

If the down words are there, all you have to do is drop in ELASQUE.

Roger
>-- 
>Kurt Bose (as in Daisy, not Rose) * kbos@carina.unm.edu * Walks: not that sexy.
>"Halt!  Based on conclusive dental evidence that truly bites, I arrest you 
> hereby for the murdering of the dead Belzic Tascar.  I am obliged to warn you 
> that my weapons are registered as offensive fronds!!"- R.M.Allen, "Monkey See"


Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: SMOKING BANS at ballparks?
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 02:53:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.233432.2209@news2.cis.umn.edu> lsmith@deci.cs.umn.edu (Lance "Squiddie" Smith) writes:
>In article <1ikhoaINNdkk@meaddata.meaddata.com> brian@meaddata.com (Brian Curran) writes:
>>Today's paper reports that the Orioles have become the fifth major-league
>>team to ban smoking at their open-air stadiums.  Two questions:
>>
>>1) What are the other four?
>
>Minnesota is one. I'd guess at least some the domed stadia have bans.
>Seattle and Toronto seem like they might have bans on smoking. I'd say
>Houston, but Texans seem to be big on personal freedom.

Houston has a smoking ban which is as vigorously enforced by the ushers
as just about every other regulation, seating assignment, etc.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
never shout movie in a crowded firestation
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: The Minnesota Twins
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:04:07 GMT

In article <93008.004857MV013374@NDSUVM1.BITNET> steve eliason <MV013374@NDSUVM1.BITNET> writes:
>       I just want to say I am a big Twins fan and wish them the best of
>luck this year. I predict that they will be untouchable if and only if
>they get their hands on a decent pitcher.

What does their lineup look like?  The keys (Puckett, Hrbek, Harper,
Mack) are all another year older, and the loss of Gagne will hurt.
(Winfield more than makes up for Davis, though, IMHO.)  The left side
of the infield looks weak, and the pitching staff is a bit shaky.
(Tapani and Erickson are solid, but Mahomes is still young and
inconsistent, and the other spots are unknowns.)

The Twins could win.  I don't think anybody really dominates that
division.  But I think they need more than one more pitcher to really
run away with it.  (Besides, where are they going to find one?)

Cheers,
-Valentine
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker)
Subject: Re: Lists: The Best Players In Baseeball
Keywords: stars best baseball
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 02:22:08 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.012305.18342@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:

>if that is the case, i don't understand these range factors very much.
>could someone please explain what they are, what they include and exclude,
>and also for what they are adjusted (park, etc.?)
>
>i'm not going to start down the "the stats say he's worst but i know he's
>great from seeing him" road again.. i'm just genuinely curious as to how someone
>who appears to be a defensive gem can have the lowest range factor. either
>he is doing it with mirrors, i am crazy, or that statistic is bogus.
>if anyone can clarify which of these three it is, i would like to hear it.

Range factor is putouts + assists + errors per nine defensive innings.
Some people omit errors from the formula; the numbers for Alomar
quoted in the original post were from McWeekly, which uses the formula
I just gave. It doesn't adjust for anything.

While it is generally more reliable than fielding average, it is
really only measuring the good things (except for the few errors). But
the really important thing to know is how many balls are going past
you for hits. You can be the greatest fielder ever, and never allow a
ball past you for a hit, and never make an error; but if for some
reason very few balls are hit in your direction, your range factor
will be low. It is similar to hits and batting average; if you bat
1.000, but only have 100 AB, you are not going to lead the league in
hits. So RF is a function of 1) how many balls are hit to you, and 2)
how many you convert into outs. (with a lot of other things as well).

Defensive average is the ratio between how many outs you converted,
and how many balls were hit to you. Presumably, the better the
fielder, the higher this percentage will be. You have to have some
kind of play by play data to calculate it, though.

Looking at Alomar in 91, his DA was well above average, but he trailed
Gallego and Sojo. However, Toronto second basemen only had 559 ground
balls hit at them, second lowest in the league, and 48 balls below
average. With Alomar's .720 DA (avg .690), that means he was shorted
of 35 plays. HIs range factor is artificially lowered. There is no
reason to beleive it couldn't have happenned again this year. I say:
he is a good fielder, but not great; his range is lower through no
fault of his.

Another good person to look at is Sandberg. His DA in 91 was
outstanding, trailing only Oquendo. But Sandberg's range was enhanced
by the 676 grounders hit to Cub second basemen; first in the league,
and 71 above average. That is almost half a play per game extra, and a
third of a play made more per game. Wrigley Field forces the Cubs to
get groundball pitchers, and so the range factors of the infielders
are artificially enhanced and the outfielders are artificially lowered.

Clay D.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball rules question
From: hobbs@cs.wvu.wvnet.edu (Gerald R Hobbs)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 17:46:25 GMT
Organization: Concurrent Engineering Research Center

In article <1993Jan11.204300.8472@athena.mit.edu>, frisch1@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan Katz) writes:
> Here's a baseball rules question which I've never seen come up:
> Say there's a runner on first, running with the pitch, and the batter 
> hits a pitch foul and into the stands.  
> Now, of course, the umpire takes out a new ball and throws it to the pitcher.
> However, what if the runner is still midway between first and second (he was
> running with the pitch, remember) when the pitcher gets the ball from the umpire?
> Obviously the runner can't be thrown out, but at what point _can_ he be thrown
> out?
> For instance, is there any rule which says that the runner must come back and
> touch the first base bag before the ball is in play?  This seems to be what
> occurs.
> -Jonathan Katz

The runner can't be put out until the ball is put in play. The ball can't
be put in play until the runners assume positions at their rightful bases.
That is, until they tag up. It isn't always enforced.
                             Gerry

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball