HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: joe carter and others
Date: 16 Dec 92 04:36:06 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Distribution: rec
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Dec16.034257.10526@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:
>In <1992Dec15.184041.21914@news2.cis.umn.edu> thornley@milli.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:

>>In article <1992Dec14.024046.12197@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:

>>>I agree with this totally.  I myself don't see near enough games to judge
>>>objectively.  But some people do.  Managers and other players do.  And
>>>they don't need stats to tell them what is going on.

Well, managers and other players *don't* see any opponent more than 18
times a year, and next year that goes down to 12 or 13 in all cases.
That's a small sample.

>>They make lousy decisions, also.  Consider Kirby Puckett as Gold Glove winner.

>Who says that the Gold Glove is an objective measure of defensive quality?
>Just because the winners are chosen by those who understand the game at the
>highest level doesn't mean that the awards are not merely a popularity
>contest.

Fine.  So Gold Glove voting tells us nothing.  Noted.

>>If you look at Sherri's Defensive Averages, you will see that Puckett was

>Are Sherri's averages based on a big enough sample size?  

They're based on all games played, not just 12 or 13.  That's a MUCH
bigger sample size than what "those  who understand the game at the 
highest level" (I love it: Don Zimmer?) get to use.  

>How big is a big enough sample size?  

Depends on what you're trying to do.  As stated, that's a meaningless 
question.

>Is an entire career a big enough sample size to inductively
>establish the quality of a player's defense by using statistics?

It sure can give us a fair amount to compare by.  As we've seen, 
some fielders *always* get more asissts, or more range, or more
DA than others; and we know -- from the rules of the game  -- that DA
is measuring something we care about, namely out-making.

Roger
Date: Friday, 11 Dec 1992 10:58:36 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Free Agents?

jimmy key signed with the yankees.  i don't know about the other two,
though i hope that ruben suddenly learns to play shortstop, and signs
with the yankees.

bob vesterman.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose)
Subject: Re: marge.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 03:37:31 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <92346.005040RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>
>  "you know, you can say what you want about marge schott, you
>   can hiss her, you can boo her, but she's still a damn good
>   looking lady."
>
>                              -dave letterman.
>                               maybe a little paraphrased.
>
Just a little... :)

"You know, you can say what you want about Marge Schott.  You can hiss her,
 you can boo her, but you have to admit, she's a damn good lookin' man."

(The same comment was made about Saddam Hussein.)


-- 
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: hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: All-Henderson Team
Organization: Clark University
Date: 15 DEC 92 03:19:38 GMT

Well, we had something like 28 inches of snow here in Worcester MA
over the weekend (Worcester was even on CNN!  What fame!  What
glory!  Actually, what appeared on CNN was the Rt. 9 exit sign that
said WORCESTER, but anyway, you take fame where you can get it) so
I decided to undertake a completely silly exercise and look up how
many Hendersons played major league baseball.  I was inspired by
the discussion of "9 Hendersons" on a team, and wondered if there
actually had been 9 Hendersons.  Lo and behold, there were!  
But they're all either outfielders or pitchers.

Presenting:

*The Clan Henderson* 
Motto: "Sola virtus nobilitat" (Hit 'em where they ain't)

Dave Henderson
Ken Henderson
Rickey Henderson
Steve Henderson
Bernie Henderson (0-1 in 1921)
Bill Henderson (0-0 in 1930)
Ed Henderson (1-1 in 1914)
Hardie Henderson (81-121 from 1883-'88)
Joe Henderson (3-2 from 1974-'77)

On the mound:  my man Hardie!!  81 Wins!  I bet he had great
muttonchops.

The other pitchers would have to draw straws to see who played
where in the infield.  The odd-outfielder-out (can't decide who
that is -- Ken? Dave? Stevie?) at first or third.  And of course I
would be the owner, sitting in my field box at every home game
accompanied by my lovable pet wildebeest, Hendu, who would be
specially trained to shit on the field during batting practice.

Our opponents in the All-Name League:  The Smith Brothers, The
James Gang, The Jolly Millers, The Vodka Collins (well, maybe the
League wouldn't approve of that name), The Fabulous Baker Boys...
there must be more...?

Heather
HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu
From: libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Brave staff greatest in recent history?
Date: 15 Dec 92 15:49:07 GMT
Organization: Emory University, Atlanta, GA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

gene@bogus.sw.stratus.com (Eugene Loparco) writes:
: In article <cubsfan.723966608@camelot> cubsfan@camelot.bradley.edu (Michael Silverman) writes:
: >Maddux, Glavine, Smoltz, Avery 20 wins apiece
: >Pete Smith 15 or so...plus the usual scattering of middle
: >reliever wins.
: 
: I'd rather have Gooden, Viola, Cone, Fernandez, Darling from a few years
: back...
: 
: 
e: -Gene           

Can't see why.  These guys have all been good to phenomenal at
different points in their careers, but they didn't really click
that well when they were together.  

Bill
From: genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: chickenman in New York
Date: 18 Dec 92 18:27:51 GMT
Organization: Department of Industrial Engineering

Thus spake mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones):

[re Wade Boggs:]

>Last five years:
>       AB   H   2B 3B HR  BB  K   AVG  OBP  SLG
>Home  1397 492 137 13 19 280 105 .352 .459 .510
>Road  1487 428  67 11 10 202 111 .288 .371 .368

Oof.  Like a boot in the solar plexus, eh New York?

>Time to get used to the
>phrase, "American League batting champion Edgar Martinez."

Alas, Edgar was buried in the minors for too long.  I fear that he's had
his monster season, and will now have 3 or 4 years of slow decline as merely
a very good player (and probably the most valuable 3B in the AL), and then
tail off considerably.

However, now *is* the time to get used to the phrase "American League Batting
Champion Roberto Alomar"...


-- 
       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: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Benito Santiago / Marlins lineup.
Date: 11 Dec 92 20:18:56 GMT
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken


 put nigel wilson in left field!!!

he's going to bat fourth.

wit some luck, that's where the marlins can finish as well.

- bob gaj
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Wearing Out Pitchers
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:34:19 GMT

In article <17DEC199216243986@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu> doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller) writes:
>	So the question would be, is the cost worth it just to
>have 2 good seasons?  Not one of the guys above had a substantially
>long career past 1983; they all faded away through injuries, and didn't
>Norris have some kind of drug problem?

It depends on whether you think they would have been good pitchers at
all.  If it's the case that Martin takes nobodies who burn brightly for
two seasons and then sputter out, then it might be "worth it."

If, on the other hand, Martin takes prospects who could have pitched
ten years at above average levels to burn them out at somewhat better
than above average for two years, then it's not "worth it."

What surprises me is that we don't see more of this in the age of 
free agency.  I don't see any reason to protect Juan Guzman's arm
so that he can pitch well at the age of 32 for another team, other
than the possibility that if you get enough of a reputation for it,
pitchers might be unwilling to sign for your team.  But teams only
have the player for the first six years (three under the latest
possibility).  Seems counterproductive not to run them hard now,
when in the long term they're just going to be pitching against you.

>	Somebody might tell Tommy Lasorda this too - remember Fernando
>and Ramon Martinez.  Was this specific injuries or just plain
>wear-and-tear?

Valenzuela -- two explanations.  One is that the screwball is allegedly
a much more arm-damaging pitch.  The other is that he's really five to
nine years older than the age on the back of his baseball card (though
I never saw any followups on this after the accusation was made in the
papers).

Ramon Martinez pitched over 28 batters per game in 1990 at the age of
22 which is, according to the Conventional Stathead Wisdom, a Bad Idea.
His arm appears to have blown out some time in August 1992. 
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: dbc@tc.fluke.COM (Dan Carson)
Subject: Re: same name (WAS Re: Maddux signs with Braves (Was Re: Juan Guzman/STATS))
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:28:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.230224.28841@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>In article <1gdq1iINNqn9@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu> rickert@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (John H. Rickert) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec10.191903.19818@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu  
>>(Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>> (good thing the expos traded gardner away, isn't it? can you imagine
>>> having mike gardiner and mark gardner on the same team?
>>> it was confusing enough when they were in different leagues :^)
>>
>>Similar things have happened before.
>>A few years ago the Tigers had Billy Benae and Billy Bean
>>and the 1962 Mets had Bob Miller and Bob Miller.
>>
>>I also saw a AA game a few years ago in which 
>>Chuck Howard faced Chuck Howard (I still don't know 
>>if it's ever happened in the majors - Anyone got some 
>>1981 box scores so that we can check out the Mike Marshalls?)
>
>no, though i do remember the battery of Steve Trout and Steve Lake.
>i always did like that one.
>
>(i suppose Ken Griffey and Ken Griffey is cheating, right? :^)
>
>--
>charles

At least those are all names I have heard of outside of sports.  The one
that always surprised me the most is Steve Ontiveros (pitcher for the A's)
and Steve Ontiveros (Giants, Cubs, 3b, 1b, OF).  Are these guys related?
This reminds me, please, Giants, don't trade Matt Williams unless you get
a good third baseman in return!  I still have nightmares about Steve
Ontiveros, Dave Kingman, Ed Goodson ... although it made the seats behind
first base fertile ground for souvenir seekers.

Dan Carson
John Fluke Mfg.
Everett, WA

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:25:32 GMT

In <1992Dec17.174319.13706@panix.com> spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira) writes:

>In <1992Dec17.030347.22009@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes:

>>Nope.  They won with Griffin.  If you think they could have won without him
>>then the onus is on you to prove it.  And you can't.  I can prove that they
>>won with him.  And if you can't prove that they could have won without Griffin
>>then you can't prove that Griffin was any less valuable to the team than
>>Alomar.

>And, of course, by that logic, we can't prove that the Jays would have
>won without the bat boy, the equipment manager, the trainer, the clubhouse
>attendant, the ticket sellers, the guys who deliver food to the lockerroom,
>the Toronto press, the fans, etc.

>Wait a minute.  You know, I got to watch a lot of Toronto games on tv this
>year.  And there is in fact no way to prove that they would have won the
>World Series if I had not watched those games, because in fact they did
>win the World Series with me watching.  Therefore, there is no way of
>proving that I was any less valuable to the team than Roberto Alomar{or
>Pat Gillick or Dave Winfield or Joe Carter!

Wait a minute.  You know, Pat Gillick got to sign a lot of Toronto players
to contracts.  Winfield and Carter hit balls, fielded balls, snapped towels
in the showers...what did you do to contribute to their championship?  You
watched TV.  No doubt you bought some product they were hawking (although
I don't recall ever seeing a Mattel Toy Co. add during a jay's game) so I 
guess in some sense you helped pay that 45M+ payroll.  You should be pleased.
Please watch again this year.

a pleasure, as always,

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
From: jh016b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (James Michael Holsomback)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Phillies woes need to be addressed by mgmt.
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:12:10 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec9.070409.26005@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> jh016b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (James Michael Holsomback) writes:
Distribution: na


>>	More from the files of what are the Phillies thinking.....?

>>	It has been a while since Philadelphia has had a winning team.  We
>>have waited many years through rebuilding process after rebuilding process. 
>>Last year was supposed to be the .500+ year.  Their pitching staff fell
>>apart due to injuries; however, it became apparent that they still do not
>>possess the pitching to stay competitive in the NL East (not the strongest
>>division in baseball either).  

>>	They were supposed to pursue a #1 starter.  Terry Mulhulund is not a
>>#1 pitcher.  Neither is Curt Shilling.  They are adequate #2 and #3
>>starters.  They need a David Cone, Jim Abbott, or, Doug Drabek.  They signed
>>Danny Jackson and David West and traded their only middle reliever (Mike
>Harley) to get
>>West.  They have NO bullpen.  Your stopper is supposed to CLOSE the game,
>>not add entertainment value to it.  They were not even mentioned in the race
>>to get any decent free agent pitchers.  Stupidity.

>>	They just signed Pete Incavilia for $1 mil a year.  WHY?  He is the
>>only player who could have more strikeouts than at bats.  Their outfield is
>>more than adequate when healthy.  John Kruk, Lenny Dykstra, and Wes
>>Chamberlain (who will go 25 HR/100RBI) is above average.  Dave Hollins may
>>be the best unknown third baseman in the majors.  Daulton won't repeat his
>>performance, but will come close.  Duncan, who is a great asset for a
>>contending team, is versatile, but they need an everyday shortstop and
>>second baseman. 

>>	Back to pitching.  If their young starters come around, they could
>>be decent.  Tommy and Tyler Greene (if Tyler's arm can last a season) are
>>potential 15 W's a season.  Kyle Abbott will be the surprise of the NL this
>>year.  He will win 13 (yes, I am sober).  However, a starter to cornerstone
>>your staff is always needed.  If the Phils don't get one, they will be
>>promising a better season in 1994.......

>>						Jim H
>>(jh016b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: silber@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: Stupidest rule in baseball (perhaps a new one)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Sci - University of Illinois
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:34:26 GMT



>Anyway, this sure seems an odd choice for "dumbest rule in baseball."  At
>the very least, it seems to me, a candidate for this crown should be
>something that, if changed, wouldn't fundamentally recast the game.  Maybe
>the infield fly rule, or fan interference, or running on a dropped third
>strike.

Maybe fan interference, but the other two examples you named are important.
Without the infield fly rule, the following scenario exists:

Runner on 1st, ball is popped up. If the runner stays on 1st, the fielder
lets the ball drop, throws to second for the force out. Since the batter-runner
can't reach 1st with a man staying on it, he might be doubled off as well.
If the runner leaves 1st, the fielder catches the ball and throws to first
for a double play.

The dropped third strike rule just adds excitement.

.
-- 
ami silberman - janitor of lunacy
	silber@cs.uiuc.edu
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Eeyore's Evil Twin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Bay Area baseball
Date: 13 Dec 92 05:46:16 GMT
Organization: Pooh Corner Country Club -- A Planned Community

boell@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Donald P Boell) writes:

>The Giants get Dave Martinez from Cinc and plan to bat him leadoff and play
>him in center.  Two-thirds of the outfield are not set.

um, huh? It's martinez and bonds in the outfield, so 1/3 is not set. you
knew about MArtinez and not Bonds?

>With the trade SF
>acknowledges their stupidity for letting Butler go.  McGee has not been
>a hit in SF and has been whinning about getting out.

they admitted that a while ago. McGee is the most invisi ble .300 hitter my
fantasy league has ever seen. Bye, willie.

>No news on the SF pitching front.  Looks like a rotation of Black, Burkett,
>Wilson and ???.

Brantley, who's probably the #1 starter of the group.

-- 
            Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, ESD Support & Training (DAL/AUX)
                      Member, SFWA =+= Editor, OtherRealms
                chuq@apple.com | GEnie: MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ 

                       Sterling Holloway: We'll miss you.
From: hainer+@pitt.edu (Jon M Hainer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cost per win
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:59:58 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1412@netxcom.netx.com> jwc@netxcom.netx.com (Jeff Comer) writes:
>More hot stove fodder.... This chart takes each of MLB's 26 teams, and lists
>their payroll figures, their wins in 1992, and how much they paid for each win
>The salary figures are 2nd-hand; please advise if you see an error.
>
>1992 Teams, Payrolls, Wins, and Cost-per-Win
>--------------------------------------------
>
>Team    '92 Payroll+Rank   Wins+Rank   CostPerWin+Rank
>----    ----------------   ---------   ---------------
>CLE     $ 9,323,339    1    76   16    $122,675.51   1
[Other teams deleted.]

What might be equally interesting is Gross-Profit-Per-Win and
Net-Profit-Per-Win, so we can truly see which teams were "getting their
money's worth."  If anyone volunteers, don't forget to include
television contracts and merchandising.

:-)

Jon Hainer
hainer@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: wall@cc.swarthmore.edu (Matthew Wall)
Subject: Re: All-Henderson Team;All-Jewish Team
Followup-To: rec.sport.baseball
Organization: Swarthmore College Computing CenterCenter
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:23:59 GMT

Don't forget Walt Weiss at SS.

There are at least two books on Jewish baseball players, one's called the
Jewish Hall of Fame, author forgotten, and the other one is a general book
on Jewish athletes which came out last year, author and title forgotten,
but which was still in hardcover the last time I browsed it in the
bookstore.

Sorry to be so unspecific, I suppose can take notes the next time I see
them and post back.

- matt

---------------------------------------------------------
This space left intentionally blank until spring training.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz)
Subject: Re: Mattingly discussion, take 2.
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:20:48 GMT

In article <92352.051418RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>first off, while i am sure that there have been gold glove winners
>who were the best (defensively) at their position, in general, the
>award is one big popularity contest.  mattingly, like ozzie smith,
>wins because he used to be good.  i think he's still slightly above
>average, but he's not the best.  not by a long shot.

Have you guys who continually knock Mattingly's defensive skills SEEN
HIM PLAY? I have. The only guy in the league who comes close to his
ability is Mark McGwire, who I have also seen play. (I drove cross country
and saw several games at each of several parks). Wally Joyner is next,
followed by Kent Hrbek. I don't know what you're considering in your
formula for defensive ability, but he is, by a long shot, the best.

>SECOND, you admit that mattingly has become much worse than he once
>was, offensively.  why, then, do you still want to bat him third?
>you say that with williams and boggs in front of him, he'll have a
>lot more chances at the plate with runners on base than he used to
>have, and give this as your sole reason for batting him third.
>
>i fail to see why "lots of runners on in front of the three slot"
>implies "might as well bat a mediocre hitter third".  wouldn't it
>make more sense to bat someone who will cash in on all those
>opportunities third, than to bat someone who will let a lot of them
>slip away third?

When I get a chance, I will post Mattingly's numbers on hitting with men
on base. Elias has it. He is incredible- way above average. Some Yankee
people attribute Don's shortcomings the last few years to the fact that
there hasn't been anyone on base for him. There hasn't been anyone on base
for him since he drove in 145 in '85. Believe me (Why not?); he WILL cash in.

And I agree; Frank Howard IS really cool.

-AEK

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI)
Subject: 1993 NL MVP
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 06:48:06 GMT


It seems now that the Expos are beginning to get some recognition as the
team to beat in the NLEast.  I don't like the looks of that.
The last time they surprised everyone and was picked for 1st during the
winter, they finished last.  Then they're picked for last again, and they
finish a strong 2nd.  So now people say 1st again, and I'm getting nervous.

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):

1) Larry Walker
2) Terry Pendleton
3) Delino DeShields
4) Kevin Mitchell (a long-shot, but maybe...)
5) Marquis Grissom 

Pretty obvious which team is my favourite, eh?

--Dave
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball