HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 23:07:07 GMT

In article <5153@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>> |> In article <1992Jul25.030944.22822@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca>  
>91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (roger maynard) writes:
>> |> >Forget about Salazar.  Who would you rather have: Bonds or Puckett?   
>Playing
>> |> >for an underdog Kirby has two rings.  Playing for a favourite Bonds  
>has
>> |> >zip.

I've saved what Roger said above.  To me, he seems to be saying that Puckett
is a preferable player to Bonds, because Puckett has two rings and Bonds none.

>What he said was more like: Take two players who are comprabable
>(in fact, in another post, he admitted that he'd even give Bonds
>the edge here).  One plays on a very good team.  The other plays
>on a better-than-average team, but one whose overall talent is
>less than the first team.   Yet the better-than-average team
>wins two titles, while the very good team wins none.  Given this,
>who would you take for your team?" (Note: NOT who is better)

What definition of better are you using here?  It would seem to be that for
any reasonable definition of "better" in this discussion, the question "who
is better" is indistinguishable from "who would you take for your team"? 

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: 27 Jul 92 01:20:42 GMT
Organization: Boo!

In <Jul.26.16.09.30.1992.14375@pilot.njin.net> gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky) writes:

>greg - if you can do that RE:education of stats, it would be helpful,
> i think, for others to read.  something that would HAVE to be
> in there is the randomness effect - that is, that a team which 
> is a .450 team can beat a .600 team, in a 7 game series (or less)
> and NOT have it show that "one team is better than another".
> 
Well, hopefully someday we'll get together an FAQ (everybody stop laughing
so hard.  Yes, it's funny, but its not THAT funny) which deals with all
this stuff.  But I honestly wasn't really talking about just baseball;
I was talking about the use of stats in society at large.

>also, one criticism?  you were showing in the puckett/salazar
> discussion before about how you can compare them, based on their
> RC/27.  i don't have the actual numbesr in front of me, but
> if salazar is a great hitter versus lefties (he was once - i
> remember strat-o-matic), and he plays ONLY versus that
> side of the place, it's unfair to compare his part time 
> platoon with someone's full time.  so maybe it's
> not a criticism, but a pointing out.

Actually, I checked that out.  Salazar wasn't really platooned either
year.  What happened both years is that they tried other solutions and
went to Salazar when all else failed.  He is a <much> better hitter against
lefties, but he had more at-bats against righties both years.  It looks
like he was rested a bit more often against righties in 1991, but nothing
that would make him into a platoon player.  

>can you believe (anyone) that someone had the gall to mention
> jack morris as a serious candidate for the cy young award - while
> NOT mentioning roger clemens????  i couldn't. it was on 
> wfan late yesterday morning.  and it was one of their
> broadcasters..,mentioned guzman, morris, one of the orioles
> pitchers, i think smiley, and a couple others.  and
> no roger.  wow.

Well, I would pick Guzman or maybe Appier right now, but Morris would
be a joke.  Its pretty clear that he's getting all these wins by giving
up the lead and then having the Blue Jays score lots of runs to win the
game for him.

Except today, of course. 

Greg 
-- 
  spira@panix.com       "The one-O delivery to Fisk.  He swings.  Long drive,  
 cmcl2!panix!spira      left field!  If it stays fair, it's gone!  Home Run!"  
158-17 Riverside Dr.                     Ned Martin, 10/22/75   
Whitestone NY 11357          (Insert your favorite baseball moment here) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: rc/27 for ss'
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 03:25:54 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.834.39911@dosgate> "russell tisseman" <russell.tisseman@canrem.com> writes:
>NL=>Manuel Lee, Toronto             4.18 (definitely not an all-star)
>
>Maybe not an all star but his defense makes up for this. And anyway I 
>will take a solid fielding shortstop over a good hitting shortstop who 
>can't field.
>
>I was one of the guys who were down on Manny at the start of the year 
>but this little guy looks better as time goes on. I am very pleased 
>with his hitting and ecstatic over his fielding.

But he is still no all-star.  These three AL SS', IMO, are better *both*
offensively and defensively than Lee:

Mike Bordick
Cal Ripken
Omar Vizquel

These three *might* not be better defensively, but their *much* better offense
should more than compensate for it:

Travis Fryman
Andy Stankiewicz
Pat Listach

If he is at best the 7th best SS in the league, there is no justification
whatsoever for him to be a shortstop.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
Committee to Elect Johnny Ray as Angels Second Baseman
Committee to Elect Mike Witt as Angels Ace
Committee to Elect Cookie Rojas as Angels Manager
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
From: mjs@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Marc Sabatella)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:59:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball

In rec.sport.baseball, rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:

> In article <Brp97A.Drx@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> djohnson@cayley.waterloo.edu (David Johnson) writes:
> >but if you watch Winfield he is always having a good time and obviously
> >enjoys what he is doing and Bell didn't always show this.
>
> Ever had somebody walk up to you at work/school and say "gee you look awful
> are you sick?" or "why are you in such a bad mood today?", when you actually
> feel fine and are in a perfectly normal mood? Some people have faces that
> are hard to read emothions on.

Indeed.  Altantic Bottle-Nosed Dolphins always appear to be perpetually happy,
but that is just because of their facial structure.  And think about how some
players are admired for their intensity (the Gibson brothers - Bob and Kirk -
come to mind :-) which is a lot closer to the popular perception of Bell than
to that of Winfield.

> >I think that in
> >any job that you can perform better if you are enjoying what you do.
>
> Some people are also perfectly capable of
> doing their job when they in a bad mood. I don't think you can watch a 
> baseball game and tell which players are having fun and which ones aren't.

This may be overstating the case a bit.  I do believe for most people, their
performance suffers when they are in a "bad mood".  But I'd still take the guy
with a perpetual bad mood who drops to a .400 OBP and .600 SLG over the guy
who's so happy, he manages .290/.310.

Now, if you want to argue the "bad mood" rubs off on other players, that is OK.
But it's not like we can't measure that.  Do we see a difference in the team
with the player in versus out of the lineup?  Do we see a year to year change
in performance of players on teams to or from which the player in question was
traded?

In the cases where we've tried to measure this - like last year's measuring of
the "Dan Gladden Spark Plug Effect", which unequivocably showed that Twin
lineups that included Dan Gladden performed wrose over the years than on the
days he didn't play, or the much less scientific but equally unimpressive case
of Alfredo Griffin, Hall Of Fame Candidate and Team Leader - there has been
nothing found.  And the worst part is, people then choose to ignore the
evidence, and instead rely on media portraits to tell them which players have
"bad attitudes" and why this is so evil.

Note - did anyone else hear Skip Caray the other night that "a walk is more
damaging than a home run in this situation"?  We may have gone overboard in our
quest to get the value of the base on balls more generally recognized...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc "Dave" Sabatella		Disclaimer: OPS is not the One True Statistic
marc@hpmonk.fc.hp.com		that makes all others obsolete
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Mmmm - po-ta-to chips!" - John Stuart Mill
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: jcp29389@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (BEACH VOLLEYBALL!!!)
Subject: Re: Cubs totally finished with Maddux?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:24:15 GMT

steven@jaynes.uswest.com ( Steve Novak) writes:

>I'm getting extremely depressed over this Maddux thing.  I was reading
>today that the Cubs are already shopping him around, and that a trading
>deadline in 8 days may be met.
>Damn, can the Cubs do anything?  With the rest of their staff so amazing
>this year, how can they let him go?  Are negotiations absolutely out of
>the question.
>Here we go, Fergie Jenkins and Ken Holtzman all over again.  And
>Eckersley...
>I can see no good result if Maddux is traded, from the viewpoint of 
>being a Cub fan.  Can anyone else?

they offered him about $28 million for 5 years!  it sounds to me like he
doesn't want to stay.  he says he's asking for $32 million, but come on,
what can you do with $32 mil that you can't do with $28 mil???????
if they trade him, they will get SOMETHING.  if they don't trade him, they
either have to fork over that extra dough or get nothing but some extra
spending money.

jay

---------------------------------------------------------------
contrary to popular belief, the most
dangerous animal is not the lion or tiger
or even the elephant.  the most dangerous
animal is a shark riding on an elephant,
just trampling and eating everything they see.     -Jack Handey
---------------------------------------------------------------
From: dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: MLB Standings and Scores for Wed, Jul 22, 1992
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:01:35 GMT
Organization: Factors of Ys, Inc.

In article <14k0maINNaf2@agate.berkeley.edu> jtchern@ocf.berkeley.edu (Joseph Hernandez) writes:

>         MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL STANDINGS FOR WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1992

>NATIONAL EAST
>Pittsburgh Pirates    51    43    .543    --      5-5    Lost 3  28-21  23-22
>Montreal Expos        48    46    .511   3.0     z6-4     Won 2  23-22  25-24
>New York Mets         46    48    .4894  5.0      6-4     Won 1  25-22  21-26
>St. Louis Cardinals   45    47    .4891  5.0     z4-6    Lost 4  22-19  23-28
>Chicago Cubs          43    50    .462   7.5      3-7     Won 1  22-22  21-28
>Philadelphia Phillies 39    55    .415  12.0      3-7    Lost 2  21-24  18-31

On Baseball Tonight a couple of days ago, John Saunders annoyed me no end by
saying "At the beginning of the season, *nobody* could have expected the
Montreal Expos to be doing this well, and *nobody* could have expected the
New York Mets to be below .500 at this point in the season, not to mention
the Chicago Cubs failing to get any offense.", or words to that effect.

I must be nobody.  Ditto for Gary and Dave Thornley and about 5 other regular
netsters who picked Montreal to contend, NY to struggle, and Chicago to
flounder.



-- 
        David Tate         |   When I was a rookie arm and bit 
  dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu  |   And the greenest hurler to take the mound
  Prof. of Story Problems  |   (Sighed the old southpaw, dying of innings)...
  Member ORSA, TIMS, SABR  | 	"Lament", Dylan 'Big Frank' Thomas
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: spira@panix.com (Greg "Sarcasm Is A Way Of Life" Spira)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:23:40 GMT
Organization: Future Visitors To Kirschdom  

In <1992Jul28.161807.3168@otago.ac.nz> guilford@otago.ac.nz writes:

>In article <3811@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate) writes:

>> 	Bonds:		48.6 + 5.1 = 53.7 marginal runs
>> 	Puckett:	25.2 + 0.3 = 25.5 marginal runs
>> 	Salazar:	 4.5 - 1.8 =  2.7 marginal runs
>> 
>> Greg's original claim, that Puckett's stats are closer to Salazar's than they
>> are to Bonds's, still holds true when you look at total contribution over the
>> season.  Had Salazar played full-time, it would be even closer.

>But of course this is dead wrong.  If "closer" is a meaningful thing,
>then Puckett is closer to Bonds than Salazar.  If "closer" is just a
>linear thing, then Puckett is closer to Salazar.  Assuming this 
>particular metric holds up to transformations.

>To see this, note that there are far more guys between Puckett and Salazar 
>than between Puckett and Bonds.

Uh, so?

The original claim was that the loss in runs that would occur as a result
of replacing Puckett with Salazar is smaller than the gain of runs that would 
result by replacing Puckett with Bonds.  Its pretty clear that that's completely
true.  Is it not? 

Second, I don't really see what the number of guys between P & S as compared
to between P & B has to do with anything.  Now if it were true that it is
much less difficult to replace Puckett with Bonds than it is to replace
Salazar with Puckett, you'd have a point.  I don't know if that's true.
It depends on the nature of the curves in the talent spectrum "triangle."

(For example, it may be true that there are 16 Luis Salazar types, 4 Kirby
Puckett types, and 1 Barry Bonds type in terms of level of offensive
production.  But it doesn't matter that there are 12 more Salazars, only
that there are 4 times as many Salazars as Pucketts, as there are 4 times
as many Pucketts as Bonds types)

If David has answered this in a way that makes more sense, feel free to
ignore this note.  

Back to packing...

Greg  
-- 
  spira@panix.com       "The one-O delivery to Fisk.  He swings.  Long drive,  
 cmcl2!panix!spira      left field!  If it stays fair, it's gone!  Home Run!"  
158-17 Riverside Dr.                     Ned Martin, 10/22/75   
Whitestone NY 11357          (Insert your favorite baseball moment here) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: demers@cs.ucsd.edu (David DeMers)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Simulation Games
Date: 23 Jul 92 00:18:10 GMT
Organization: =CSE Dept., U.C. San Diego

In article <QePOu0i00Uh7M1JNxs@andrew.cmu.edu> tf0y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Todd Harris Fletcher) writes:
>What is the best board simulation game?  APBA? Strat-o-Matic? Persue the
>Pennant? Why do you think that?

I like Strato over APBA, more because of realism and playability -
there are some things APBA just can't do (same for Strato too,
but less, IMO), and strato is really simple to play since
most plays don't need the charts.

I haven't played PTP, but rumor is that it's the best.
Don't know what might make it better.

-- 
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: dgh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Doug Huffer)
Subject: Re: Realignment question
Reply-To: dgh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:20:43 GMT

In article <5271@transfer.stratus.com> jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>In article <19842@optima.cs.arizona.edu> dkl@cs.arizona.edu (David K.  
>Lowenthal) writes:
>> 
>> I was under the impression that realignment was supposed to save teams
>> travel money.  I can't understand this.  ESPN showed a graphic stating  
>that
>> the cost of the Astros' 28 day road trip was something like $10,000.  
>> How much money is really going to be saved by, say, the Reds flying to
>> the West Coast 2 times instead of 3 per year?
>
>$10,000.  Per person, maybe?  Hotel rooms alone (assuming one roomate)
>cost (at least) $60 a night per person so that's $1680 just for one
>person.  Multiply that by 35 or so and you get $60,000 just for hotel
>costs of a trip that long.  Add travel and food and you'd at least 
>double that, problably more (since I imagine the players get
>a pretty high per-diem).
>

I saw this and it was for just air fare, hotel, and car rental for a 
single person.  Meals not included.  They were showing what it'd cost 
you if you wanted to follow the 'Stros around on the trip
(like anybody would really want to).  Major league per diem is at 
$59, I'm pretty sure.  I think the minors get about $13.  

>Jim Mann       jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  Stratus Computer

--
dgh2@quads.uchicago.edu     ||  Official Baseball Rules, 1.04 (Con't #11)  
     The catcher's box, the batter's box, the coaches' boxes, the
three-foot first base lines and the next batter's box shall be laid out 
as shown in Diagrams 1 and 2.
From Baseballs Official Rules, 1992 edition.  Without permission, of course.
From: dtate+@pitt.edu (David M Tate)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Dawson, was: Re: GMaddux to Test Free Agency Waters
Date: 27 Jul 92 14:52:29 GMT
Organization: Factors of Ys, Inc.

In article <1992Jul27.134157.16552@tamsun.tamu.edu> rlm7638@tamsun.tamu.edu (Jack McKinney) writes:

>      1.  If you hit above .250 on the Cubs roster this year, you are
>practically eligible for MVP. He is one of their top hitters (3rd only
>to Grace and Sandberg).

One could make the same kind of argument in favor of Luis Polonia this year.
He's the third-best hitter on the Angels (behind Curtis and Felix), and far
ahead of most of the team.  That doesn't make him a good player, or a valuable
one, or one that should be protected, or one that should be signed to a new
contract.  What it says is that the Angels stink, and need entirely new
players for the most part.  Ditto the Cubs, although they're getting there.

>      2.  HRs: As of Saturday night, when (so I hear, I missed the game)
>Andre got a home run, he is tied with Ryno for most number of HRs on the
>team (16, I think). If that isn't on his way to 25 for the season (let
>alone the 400 lifetime mark), I don't know what is. Unless Lefebvre takes
>Andre out of the lineup, we should see 25 HRs out of him.

We should see 25 HR out of almost *any* hitter with any power at all, if he
plays half his games in Wrigley.  25 HR in Wrigley is not impressive.  For
Andre, who no longer has his speed or defense, and never had any OBP, 25 HR
is totally inadequate, since it represents the greater part of his personal
contribution to the offense.

>      3.  I do see Andre get K'ed a lot, but I've seen Sandberg go through
>similiar slumps. I have seen Andre intentionally walked twice in the same
>game. I have seen him draw a couple of walks besides. (Sorry, no stats avail-
>iable on this one).

Andre Dawson walks *very* infrequently, compared to anyone except Shawon 
Dunston.  "A couple" is a pretty accurate summary.  Andre could double his
walk rate and still have it be on the low side of average.

And nobody really cares about his strikeouts or lack thereof.  The point is
"How much does he help the team score the runs they need to score in order
to win at Wrigley?", and the answer is "Not nearly as much as he did a few
years ago."  It's also "Not much more than a league-average right fielder,
if any."  It's also "More than he will next year, in all probability."

Signing Andre Dawson to a multi-year contract at this point would be like
selling Life Insurance to Evel Knievel.  You *might* get lucky and come out
ahead, but it's a sucker bet.

-- 
        David M. Tate        | "And that inverted Bowl we call The Dome
   dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu   |  Whereunder crawling coop'd we field and bat,
   Edward "Mike" Fitzgerald  |     Lift not your eyes to *it* for help--for it
     from "The Ruthaiyat"    |  Will drop the tow'ring fly upon your hat."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (roger maynard)
Subject: Re: Value of Stats
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:02:02 GMT

In <1992Jul27.153614.27645@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:

>In article <1992Jul25.030944.22822@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> 91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (roger maynard) writes:
>>Forget about Salazar.  Who would you rather have: Bonds or Puckett?  Playing
>>for an underdog Kirby has two rings.  Playing for a favourite Bonds has
>>zip.

>Why do you think that number of World Series rings is a useful determiner
>of value?  It takes a lot of luck to get through two 7-game series
>successfully.  Ernie Banks never got a World Series ring.  Ted Williams
>never got a World Series ring.  Does that make Kirby Puckett a better
>player than Ted Williams?  Is Mickey Hatcher a better player than Ted Williams?

I think we have had this dance before.  Mickey Hatcher?  

IF, going into an infinite series, two teams were statistically equal - very 
big IF - AND one team was to win a significantly greater amount of games than 
the other team, you would attribute the total difference to luck.  I would 
attribute some of that difference to luck and some of that difference to
the slippery essence of all human endeavors.  No, I don't know what that essence
is nor do I know how to measure it.  When people talk about character or
attitude they are trying to describe it.  I can't do much better than that. 
I am not arrogant enough to assume that reality is only that which can be 
measured.  The sun used to revolve around the earth.  Aristotle measured it.

It is almost a question of faith.  I have faith in something that you don't
have faith in.  That faith makes my life a little richer.  And knowing that
my faith is unfounded probably makes your life a little richer - either way
there is not much to be gained by fighting over it.

rm

>Sherri Nichols
>snichols@adobe.com
-- 
roger maynard                    
91287041@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: yl44729@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Rick Lin )
Subject: Re: MLB Standings and Scores for Wed, Jul 29th, 1992
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:23:06 GMT

rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson) writes:

>Boy, talk about wishful thinking!!!?!?! This guy probably bet on the cubbies
>to win it all at the beginning of the season! :-) :-) :-)

>ps not a flame. these standings are the main reason i read r.s.b. thanks!

For your information, the Cubs are only 3 1/2 (pending the outcome of the
Expos-Cardinals, possibly 4 games out) games out of first place.  Bring out
them brooms!!!  SWEEP!!!   I'd say the Cubs chances are very good now.  Best
staff ERA in baseball and if their hitting start to come around (20 runs in
3 games against the Pirates), they'll be tough to beat.  GO CUBBIES!!
 
Anyone think Greg Maddux will sign with the Cubs?  Especially if the Cubs
stay in contention.  
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: zelek@remus.rutgers.edu (Grey Wolf)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cone threw how many pitches?
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:47:35 GMT
Organization: Rutgers University

msw10@nepenthe.as (Michael S. Wong) writes:


>Wim a few games this year at the expense of a Cy Young caliber pitcher's career.
>Makes a lot of sense to me. I guess Roger Craig isn't the only manager that has no
>clue about how to handle pitchers. At this rate, I'll bet Cone's career won't last
>more than 2 more years.

   
 Who says that making a pitcher work a little harder will shorten his career?
There's considerable debate going on these days on whether or not it's the 
LACK of consistant use that does a pitcher in these days.  Not terribly long
ago staff aces used to throw 20+ complete games a year and well over 300 
innings per season.  That's probably enough pitches for almost two full
seasons in today's game.  Two pitchers in all of baseball have manaed to throw
250+ innings in each of the last four years.  [Roger Clemens and Greg Maddux]
 Besides, look at ole Nolan.  How many pitches do you think *he's* thrown so
far?  [So far meaning he's not done *yet*!]

Chris [zelek@aramis.rutgers.edu]
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball