HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Subject: Re: Statheads and park effects
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 07:00:54 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.034702.1492@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> akamholz@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Andrew E Kamholz) writes:
>Perhaps Boggs just doesn't hit well of the road- like on road trips.
>(Maybe he is too busy with other pursuits!) So maybe settling in Yankee
>Stadium, he will hit like he is home. Let's all remember that it's not
>necessarily the park- it could be the state of mind.

Yes, of course.  Exactly what they said about Fred Lynn and umpteen million
other players.  But they were wrong then, and they're wrong now.

It isn't an individual player like Boggs doing it that causes us to call 
Fenway a hitter's park, though Boggs takes even *more* advantage of it 
than the average player.

The entire league, as a whole, hits MUCH better in Fenway than outside it.

For an individual player, *maybe* it is his state of mind that causes him
to hit better in Fenway, though I've never seen someone's cerebellum try
and pull a Roger Clemens fastball.  But the entire league hits better there!

It isn't Boggs.  It isn't the Red Sox.  It's the American League.
Consistently.  Year after year.  

I don't know why park effects are so difficult for people to accept.
How hard is it to realize that all those Green Monster doubles that
Boggs hits are going to be lazy fly balls in Yankee stadium?  

Just like they are for the rest of the American League?
-- 
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: mjones@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com (Mike Jones)
Subject: Re: Need infoS
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 23:06:16 GMT
Reply-To: mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
Organization: IBM Corp. Kingston NY

In article <1992Dec12.063948.8360@cc.umontreal.ca> iacurtop@ERE.UMontreal.CA (Iacurto Paul) writes:
>
>Some names may be missing from this list
>Please mail at  iacurtop@ere.umontreal.ca
>Red Sox                 Ivan Calderon            Mike Gardiner
>                        Andre Dawson
                         Jose Melendez            Phil Plantier
						 Scott Fletcher

   Mike Jones  |  AIX/ESA Development  |  mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com

Is he a dot, or is he a speck?
When he's underwater does he get wet?
Or does the water get him instead?
Nobody knows, Particle Man.
	- They Might Be Giants
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Melendez-Plantier
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:07:18 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Dec14.215636.29379@cbnewse.cb.att.com> gotribe@cbnewse.cb.att.com (richard.g.barry) writes:
>The Red Sox are really making some DUMB deals.  Melendez is a decent
>pitcher, but NO WAY should he be traded even up for Plantier.
>(Of course this is the same team that gave away Jeff Bagwell too.)
>It has to be because Plantier and Hobson didn't get along;
>Even if that's true, Plantier's value HAD to be higher.

I agree.  If Plantier and Hobson didn't get along, trade Hobson,
fire him, dump him, get rid of him.

I wish the Padres weren't owned by loonies, I might even root for
them...
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: jscott@micom.com (James Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: All-Time Astros
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:02:36 GMT
Organization: Micom Communications Corp., Simi Valley, Ca.

>>Gotta get Wynn in there somewhere.  All three of these guys were great, but
>>Wynn was better than any of them.

>Who goes then?  I don't know how Cedeno was in secondary stats.  Cruz
>suffered from the same sort of underrating that Wynn did -- he consistently
>outperformed Rice, Winfield, and Dawson on the road.  Staub didn't play too
>long for the Astros, did he?

imho, this one's easy ... staub!  his best years were north of the border.

>>>of-1b: Bob Watson
>>Don't forget Enos Cabell :-)

>Blech.  But you're right, he might very well be the best 3b the Astros
>have had.  Frightening thought.  I guess it would be cheating to put
>Ferguson there and Biggio at catcher.

no two ways about it ... enos sucked at third.  the 'stros HAVE, however,
had some fine 3rd basemen.  1st: doug rader - great glove ... good power.
			    2nd: ray knight - clutch hitter ... ok glove
			    3rd: phil garner- the bulldog

james
 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: arrow@netcom.com (Les Arrow)
Subject: Re: Comments on SF (Bonds, Stadium)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 11:14:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.012102.4638@data-io.com> dietz@parody.Data-IO.COM (Kent Dietz) writes:
>This appears to be the logic in San Francisco (and in Seattle for that matter).
>It seems to be that the Giants are trying to convey to the people of the Bay
>Area that they want to put an attractive product on the field.  Instead, the
>voters will take this as an assumption that they have *soooo* much money, then
>they can build their *own* stadium (huff!).
>
>I think that the Giants made a mistake in buying such a high profile player.
>One player a team does not make.  From what I saw of Pittsburgh attendance
>(which was admittedly limited to the playoffs) Bonds never attracted enough
>people to warrant the price for fan appeal only.  If they had spent the money
>more carefully, they could have strengthened the entire team and probably 
>helped themselves more in the standings (IMHO).
>
>The beauty of a Puckett or Griffey is that the fans for some reason see those
>players as appealing.  People (myself included) will go to games if for no 
>other reason than to  see that one player.  Griffey has been a big part of the
>reason the Mariners have drawn well over their previous averages in the last
>two years (2 Mil in 1991, 1.6 this year for a 64-98 team!).  
>
>Likewise, Minnesota was probably wise to sign Puckett for business reasons, if
>not for baseball reasons.  
>
>But, Bonds will have to prove himself under extreme pressure.  Bonilla did not
>handle it real well, and apparently, Bonilla took lessons from Bonds on 
>handling the media and fans :-)
>
>Time will tell, but I expect Bonds to keep having good years and hear nothing
>but crap from the "fans".
>
>
>Praying for no lockout,
>
>Kent Dietz
>Twins in '93, Mariners in ... never mind!

Personally, I think the signing of Bonds will help the Giants sell tickets.
Of course, putting a contender together would have done the same thing.

On the stadium issue, I keep hearing on the radio how now that the team almost
left and Bonds is here people are going to vote for a stadium. BULLSH*T.
There's a reason why the new stadium was voted down and it still hasn't
changed. People on meager salaries don't want to raise their taxes to build
a stadium r millionaries! 

--Les
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Jason Abner Miller)
Subject: RE: All-Henderson Team;All-Jewish Team
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University - HCF
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:31:00 GMT

In article <15DEC92.12341126@vax.clarku.edu>, hhenderson@vax.clarku.edu writes...
> 
>Ted Frank writes:
> 
>>How about an all-Jewish team?
>> 
>>C: Moe Berg
>>1B: Hank Greenberg
>>2B: Rod Carew
>>SS:
>>3B:
>>OF: John Lowenstein
>>OF:
>>OF:
>>P: Sandy Koufax
>>P: Steve Stone
>>P: Ken Holtzmann
>> 
>>There have got to be others, that's just off the top of my head.
> 
>The latest issue of Elysian Fields Review (wonderful baseball magazine,
>by the way) has a cover story on Jews and baseball -- playing it,
>writing about it, etc.  They discuss Jewish players.  Unfortunately
>a friend of mine has absconded with the magazine and I can't refer
>to it...
> 
>How about Ron Blomberg?  I seem to recall he had the nickname of
>"Superjew".  

	Also, don't forget a key member of the All-Name team "Mighty
Millers", Norm Miller, who played for the Houston Astros in the
late '60s and early '70s.  I think he was your first-baseman type,
but I don't remember.
	Andy Stankiewicz *sounds* Jewish, but I don't know for sure.
	Then you have those two obscure middle-relievers, Wayne
Rosenthal and Steve Rosenberg.  I don't think they'll ever amount to
anything in baseball, but they have those great names. 	


>Heather
>HHENDERSON@vax.clarku.edu 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jason A. Miller				|		Kill Tanana!
=============================================================================
"doctor8@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu"		|		"some doctor guy"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
	Billy Ripken:  Second Baseman for the Last Place 1993 Mets
	Frank Tanana:  Opening Day Starter
	Mike Flanagan: Ace bullpen Closer.  Our very own Eck.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: hora@ecf.toronto.edu (HO ROBERT ANDREW)
Subject: Who are the best pitchers of our generation?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 09:11:28 GMT


I was just flipping through Bill James' Baseball Book 1991 and stumbled
accross a comment he made about who the best pitchers of this generation
are.  Specifically, under his comments for Dave Stieb, he says that
Clemens, Dave Stewart, Dwight Gooden, and Frank Viola are/were the best of
this generation, while Stieb and Jack Morris would rank just behind those
guys.  I was just wondering whether anyone here agrees or disagrees with
this evaluation.  Who were/are the best pitchers of our generation?  Two
years later, does James' statement still hold, or was he wrong to begin with?
Obviously Clemens rates as the best pitcher of his generation, but are
there any others that you would rate ahead of those guys?  Does anyone else
besides me wonder who will be remembered as the best of this generation
twenty years from now?
-- 
Robert Ho
Univ. of Toronto
hora@ecf.toronto.edu
From: maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Date: 17 Dec 92 02:46:40 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON

In <20335@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu (Gary Throwing Hard Huckabay) writes:

>(Roger "Don't like my posting?  Call 1-800-TEQUILA!" Maynard) writes:
>>Molitor won't play 90 games this year.

>If healthy to start the season, I'll take this bet.  If Molitor plays
>less than 90, you win.  If 90 or more, I do.  What are the stakes, Rog?

I'll design a .sig and you use it throughout the LCS and WS. And vise versa.
No profanity.  And what about this "healthy to start the season" nonsense?
He either plays 90 or he doesn't.  (regular season of course but unless the
Jays trade him I don't think he will have to worry about playoffs...)

>>Right on Pat!  Let's rebuild!  And when the jays go down the toilet this
>>year all the stathead dorks in this group will be calling for Cito's head.

>Nothing quite like a deftly-inserted ad hominem.  Of course, you'll probably
>back away from it now...  How about NAMING some names?  Who do you want
>to call a dork?

I guess we will just have to wait for Valentine (or any of the other "prominent"
posters to this group) to start blaming Cito for the Jay collapse.  And when he 
does, I will call him a dork.  

as always, a pleasure,

rm

-- 
roger maynard
maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Ozzie's defense (Was Re: Mattingly discussion, take 2.)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:22:44 GMT
Organization: Boo! 

In <BzGq29.KHp@news.cso.uiuc.edu> hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks) writes:

>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.


>After looking at the DA numbers and playing time for 1991, I've
>come to the conclusion that Ozzie Smith was no worse than the 
>second best defensive shortstop in the NL, after having been the
>best for 1988-1990.  The decision to give him the Gold Glove in 
>1991 was not unwarranted.  Despite a significant fall-off in his
>skills from 1988, he remained near the top of NL shortstops, 
>defensively.  (Since the data is not in yet, I can't say anything
>about the 1992 award.)

I'm glad Harold posted this stuff; I meant to follow-up to what Bob
said about Oz but forgot.

Now, Ozzie isn't nearly as good a shortstop as he used to be, but when
you're coming down from the highest peak possible, there's a lot of
room on the way down where you're still above everybody else.

I also think that the overall defensive quality of NL shortstops the
last few years hasn't been as high.  Barry Larkin looked like he was
going to be a great defensive shortstop, but I think injuries have
already hurt his range a lot.  I think Ozzie would have a lot more
competition for Best Def SS in the AL.

Greg
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball finances query
Date: 16 Dec 92 17:35:19 GMT
Organization: CSE Dept., UC San Diego


In article <1992Dec16.032250.21922@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:

|> >I don't know the exact percentages for the split of the gate, ...
|> 
|> I believe the exact percentage is actually different in the AL than in the
|> NL.  It is in double digits, but it's nowhere near 40% for the visitors.

OK, so none of us appear to really know, so I'll put my soggy neurons on
this.  I seem to recall that the NL splits the gate pretty evenly, but
the AL gives the visitors just a small bit.  Don't remember the numbers
so I'll make some up - 50-50 NL, 70-30 AL?


-- 
Dave DeMers			 ddemers@UCSD   demers@cs.ucsd.edu
Computer Science & Engineering	C-014		demers%cs@ucsd.bitnet
UC San Diego					...!ucsd!cs!demers
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114	(619) 534-0688, or -8187, FAX: (619) 534-7029
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: franjion@spot.Colorado.EDU (John Franjione)
Subject: Re: Mattingly discussion, take 2.
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:24:06 GMT

gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes:

>baba o' vesterman wrote about the yankees for a while...

>the reason why silvestri has almost no shot of being called up is
> reportedly he can't field shortstop any better than you or i.
> i heard, and i can't verify this, that he made almost 50 errors last
> season, and doesn't have range, and plays shortstop as if the ball 
>carries some venereal disease.

According to the most recent McWeekly, Silvestri made 11 errors in 114
games last year.

John Franjione
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: All-Time Astros
From: guilford@otago.ac.nz
Date: 13 Dec 92 12:30:25 +1300
Organization: University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand


In article <474@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, genetic+@pitt.edu (Dr. Dave) writes:

> Thus spake thf2@midway.uchicago.edu:

>>3b: Toughie.  Either Art Howe or Phil Garner.

> Didn't Buddy Bell play for Houston at some point?  Or did he only play for
> Texas?

Why not Rader?  His BA and OBP were low, but he a) did have some power,
b) did play 3b for them for years and c) supposedly could field.

>>sp: Nolan Ryan, JR Richard, Mike Scott, Bob Niekro. 

Larry Dierker?  Don Wilson?  Dierker won 137 games for the Astros.
Ryan during his time in Houston was not all that great.

Speaking of Jimmy Wynn, the `69 Astros have to have one of the all-time
lopsided outfields.  J Alou hit .248 with 4 HR and 15 BB, Norm Miller
hit .264 with 4 HR and 47 BB, while Wynn hit .269 with 33 HR and 148 BB.
Miller + Alou had 923 AB+BB, 282 H+BB, 107 R and 84 RBI, Wynn had 643 
AB+BB, 281 H+BB, 113 R and 87 RBI.

Bill Guilford
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: All-Time A's Team
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 19:43:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.183207.18266@leland.Stanford.EDU> dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
>>	3B Baker

>Is he clearly better than Bando? Bando had pretty good power
>and gave the A's a lot of good years.

Yes, absolutely.  Baker was a dominant offensive force in his A's years,
right behind Cobb and Speaker and Jackson.  He gave the A's six superb
years; Bando was with the A's for nine years, was a real offensive plus
in most of them, and a league-level force in two or three.  Baker's
career is weird, but he was clearly #1 in all his A's years.

Roger
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: Edward_Lunny@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Lunny)
Subject: Cito- Gillick
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 01:21:56 GMT

Since I started this one, I'd like to pass on something my dad told me about
managers and their influence. He was a sports writer in Montreal. He said
every team is going to win 60 games no matter who is managing and every team
is going to lose 60 no matter what.  There are only 40 or so games up for
grabs each year.
--

 " Ted "
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: paula@koufax.cv.hp.com (Paul Andresen)
Subject: Re: SABR national address and phone?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:22:16 GMT

In article <92346.121504RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>, <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
|> what do you get out of being a member of sabr, besides being able to
|> say, "member of sabr since 1992" (and still be telling the truth)?

There's a 6-8 page monthly newsletter (OK, but nothing to get whipped up
about). 

The real treasures are the Baseball Research Journal and The National Pastime, 
which are put out annually. The BRJ is somewhat like an academic journal. TNP
is a beautiful "magazine"; very high quality production values.

In addition, SABR usually puts out one or two other publications each year;
such things as research tips, reviews of baseball literature, or a special
one time thing (ie they put out "Green Cathedrals" one time).

Of course there is also the regional and national meetings to attend.

All in all, I consider it about the best money I spend in a given year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              If you're really hip, the passing years will show.
                                           ......Tower Of Power

  paula@koufax.cv.hp.com   Paul Andresen  Hewlett-Packard  (503)-750-3511

    home: 3006 NW McKinley    Corvallis, OR 97330       (503)-752-8424
                            A SABR member since 1979
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu (Dave Bonar)
Subject: Re: '93 Royals Infield?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu
Organization: News and Views from LSU
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 13:14:06 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-17108]: sn01.sncc.lsu.edu

In article <1992Dec14.003210.23497@midway.uchicago.edu>, thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes...
>In article <1992Dec13.222332.27109@cs.tulane.edu> eebonar@sn01.sncc.lsu.edu writes:

>>	Actually, I rather like this infield.  Joyner, Lind and Gagne are
>>very good defensively.  Its a little weak offensively but not horrible;
>>if Jefferies has a good year it isn't that different from Atlanta's 1991
>>infield of Bream/Hunter, Lemke, Belliard, Pendleton.  However, Atlanta
>>had a great set of outfielders and terrific pitching.  With the people KC
>>is going to have this infield isn't going be good enough.
> 
	[discussion of the KC infield's lack of hitting deleted for bandwidth
	reasons]
> 
>True, not much worse than the Atlanta infield, but Brian McRae is not
>quite Dave Justice.  He's not even Otis Nixon.
> 
>Signing Lind and Gagne does *nothing* to build this team.  They'll both
>be out of baseball by the time the Royals are ready to contend, and then
>KC will have to find someone else to play those spots.

	Very true.  I'm not a big AL fan and I'm even less of a KC fan.
Thus, I evaluated it only on its merits right now.  Its an old infield
that isn't going to get better (and isn't all that good now).  My point
was only that playing these four as a starting infield isn't the worse
that KC could do for this year.  By itself, it will not doom them to the
basement.  However, the rest of their team will doom them.

	Signing Lind and Gagne doesn't do anything for the long term.  But
it might get the team a few more wins and fans while someone else is groomed
for the job.  No one in the farm system seems ready right now to step in.
There were no star middle infielders available other then Ozzie Smith (who
also wouldn't be arround to contend).  I'm not convinced that KC could do any
better for itself by not spending the money they spent on Lind and Gagne
(they can't make realistic player evaluations, I doubt they can make realistic
investments).

Dave
__________
Dave Bonar
eebonar@lsuvax.sncc.lsu.edu
__________
From: gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Baseball Weekly Loses It
Date: 18 Dec 92 00:06:41 GMT
Organization: Somewhere in Hoboken

The other funny thing about this is that according to baseball weekly,
 3/4 of the teams in baseball improved.  if someone improves, usuall
y someone has to go down (unless it's one of those rare good for both
 team trades).  

- bob gaj
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Blue Jays-Gillick
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 05:46:09 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.051729.8215@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:

>from what i have heard cone was not gettable; and stewart and key's
>numbers last year were quite similar, as i have admitted in another post.
>and in the second half, stewart pitched *much* better than key did.

It may appear similar; after all, Key had a 3.58 ERA to Stewart's 3.66.  But
Key pitched out of one of the best, if not the best, hitters' park in the
league, while Stewart pitched out of one of the worst.

In fact, I expect Stewart (who gave up 25 homers in 199 1/3 innings in
Oakland) to become a major contender for BBDDD next season.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer)
Subject: Re: Branch Rickey (Was Re: joe carter and others)
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Distribution: rec
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:56:34 GMT

In article <Bz96GJ.22I@news.cso.uiuc.edu> hbrooks@uiatma.atmos.uiuc.edu (Harold_Brooks) writes:
>In almost 
>all of the cases, including the Mize from the Cardinals to the Giants
>trade, he traded an older player (>30) for younger ones and, usually, cash.
>A lot of those trades were to open up spots for younger players from the
>farm system.

I nominate Branch Rickey as an Official Stathead Idol.

This is what I was hoping the Red Sox would do.  Unfortunately, Lou
only managed to find a taker for Reardon, and recently has been doing
the *reverse*.  Acquiring 40 year old outfielders at the expense of
cheaper, better, younger players.

Rickey managed to win a lot of games.  Lou, with this strategy, will
manage to lose equally many.  And he'll spend a lot more money in the
process.

-Valentine
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball