HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wildcat@niwot.scd.ucar.edu (Wes Wildcat)
Subject: Re: Hall of Fame voting (read - Disgusted)
Organization: Scientific Computing Divison/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:38:48 GMT

In article <93021.181359RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>uh, the hof has a zillion pitchers, or at least 50 or 60.  the 25th best
>pitcher of all time clearly deserves to be in the hof.
>
>bob vesterman.
>

	I think if a pitcher is good enough or stays in the game long enough to earn 300 wins, he will get in the Hall, but not necessarily on the first ballot.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:11:09 GMT

In article <93021.180901RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes:
>"regardless of what defensive position is played, beating the average
>ops for that position by n points will give the same amount of wins
>to the team."

>bzzzzt.  a first baseman with 50 points of ops more than the average
>first baseman will bat somewhere in the middle of the lineup.  a shortstop
>with 50 points of ops more than the average shortstop will bat, what,
>eighth instead of ninth? whoop-de-doo.  the first baseman contributes
>more, since he comes up to the plate more often, and has runners on base
>more often when he comes up, and is on base more often when a decent
>batter comes up.

Not sure.  If his OBP is high and his SLG low, he may bat leadoff or 
second.  (If he plays for certain managers, he may bat there no
matter what...)  That could mean *more* PA than the first baseman.  

Also, even if he bats 9th, he's one of the guys the 1B is going to drive in
on occasion.  

Roger
From: twhite@mozart.amd.com (Tom White)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Change the game?
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:48:25 GMT
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas

In article <1k3k7sINNr7l@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bz832@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wesley R. Kemmerlin) writes:
>Greg Ridsdale <greg_ridsdale@ausqml.sps.mot.com> writes:
>
>>I am in favor of either no DH or both leagues using the DH. The
>>current system is awkward for both leagues in the Series and the
>>All star game.
>
>(stuff deleted)
>
>I personally prefer having no DH. The biggest disadvantage of the
>DH is it takes away the strategy of pinch-hitting for the pitcher.

   Strategy?  It's little more than an "if...then" decision.
   IF the pitcher is coming to bat in the late innings, THEN pinch-hit
   if the score is close.  If not, watch said pitcher either (a) whiff
   on three hanging curves or (b) lay down sac bunt.  

   yyyyaaaawwwwwwwwwnnn.

>It is the bottom of the seventh and your team is behind 3-2. The
>pitcher who has been pitching great after giving up 3 runs in the
>first is leading off. Does the manager pinch-hit for the pitcher
>to have a better chance to get more runs or does he stick with
>the pitcher. This decision is ELIMINATED with the DH and also I
>think it eliminates a big part of the game.

   Yeah, the nonsense about the pitcher being in the on-deck circle,
   then getting the pinch hitter announced, then the reliever coming into
   the game, etc.  Like games don't last long enough as is.

>The obvious advantage of the DH is that it generates more offense,
>but I would not sacrifice it for the elimination of strategy.
>
>I have a solution to this problem:
>
>The pitcher has to bat, but there can be a DH for another position
>player.
>
>This solution would keep the strategy in the game while adding more
>offense. What do all of you pro and anti DHers think about this
>solution?

   I hope it dies in committee.  The DH is weird, yes, but it's also
been working for 20 years.  This would _really_ make it obnoxious.
PITCHERS CANNOT BAT.  For every Don Robinson, there's 35 others who'll
get two scratch/lucky-hop singles in a season.  Even the weakest shortstop
(cf. Steve Jeltz, Ray Oyler) is better than that.


--
 Thomas White          |  Comparison is always a losing game. 
 Austin, Texas         | 
                       | "I've never seen a government document that had 
 twhite@mozart.amd.com |  only one copy." -- Jack Blum 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: kirby@athena.cs.uga.edu (Steven Kirby)
Subject: Re: Sandberg (was Re: Ty Griffen)
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 07:02:20 GMT

OK, I'm biased and I admit it.  I'm a Cubs fan and have been ever since I
made a foray up North to grad school at the U of Illinois back in '81.  I've
enjoyed watching Ryne Sandberg develop into a very fine ballplayer (tho I
seem to recall he started his career an most inauspicious 1 for 38, or
something like that.  Not that it matters much.)  Maybe I can suggest a
compromise in this discussion of Sandberg's status.  I think it is at least
plausible to suggest that Sandberg is the best 2nd baseman of his era.  The
question can be argued, I suppose, but I doubt it can be dismissed outright.
I am at least satisfied in that no one challenged his selection when I put
him on my list of best players who began their careers during the period
1975-1985.  To my mind, that's enough.  I fact, I'm not sure we really can
say much more that Ryno (or anyone else, for that matter) was the best
player at a given position of his day.  Asking how Sandberg would have
faired if he had played in the 1930s reminds me of an old Saturday Night
Live skit that asked "What if Spartacus had had a Piper Cub?".  Certainly
his skills would not be as refined as they are today.  There were no off
season conditioning programs then, to cite but one obvious difference.  There
are others.  I must admit it is tempting to compare Sandberg's career with
Joe Morgan's.  (It's especially tempting for me, since I grew up in
Kentucky in a house full of Reds fans.)  But even this comparison has some
problems.  Much of Morgan's outstanding career was played prior to the 
advent of the "dominant closer", which I think of as a creature of the
mid to late 70s.  The nuances of the game changed, even withing the fairly
short time span of 1965-1980.  These changes don't necessarily invalidate
any comparison, but they do interject a qualitative difference that has to
be taken into account.  And qualitative differences, by definition, are
tough to measure.  The further back in time we go, the more difficult it
is to account for those qualitative factors.  So I believe that Sandberg
is the best second baseman of his era.  The best ever?  I'm not sure that
we can say.

Steven Kirby
University of Georgia
kirby@athena.cs.uga.edu
From: fls@econ.duke.edu (Forrest Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: 1993 MLB WS odds
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:25:12 GMT
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.


	Prior to the 1991 season, a friend was visiting back east from his new
job at UNLV.  I told him to put $10 for me on the Braves to win the Series.
The odds were 100 to 1 or 200 to 1.  I never heard from him.  
But when the Braves went up 3-2 over the Twins, I had this awful feeling of
almost not wanting them to win, for fear of feeling like I'd been out when
Ed McMahon called.  Of course, last year I got my wife to plunk down $10 while
she was on a conference out West--at I think 12-to-1.  I wouldn't have minded
cashing the ticket.  But 3-1?  Even if they won this year, it wouldn't even
pay off the air fare. 
-- 
   __  __                                     
  |__ |__                             %  
  | |  __|  fls@keynes.econ.duke.edu  %  See what the bears in the
    |__                               %  back room will have.
From: cabanrf@wkuvx1.bitnet
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Change the game?
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:31:39 CST
Organization: Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, KY

In article <roney.728078448@sfu.ca>, roney@beaufort.sfu.ca (Chris J. Roney) writes:
> bz832@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Wesley R. Kemmerlin) writes:
> 
> 
>>I personally prefer having no DH. The biggest disadvantage of the
>>DH is it takes away the strategy of pinch-hitting for the pitcher.
> 
> (stuff deleted)
> 
>>I have a solution to this problem:
> 
>>The pitcher has to bat, but there can be a DH for another position
>>player.
> 
>>This solution would keep the strategy in the game while adding more
>>offense. What do all of you pro and anti DHers think about this
>>solution?
>>-- 
>>WESLEY
> 
>     I'm one pro-D.H.er that doesn't want any part of it.  Personally,
> I think the strategy part is overrated in the N.L.  I haven't noticed

I dunno. I seem to recall a world series game played in Atlanta two
years ago when the bat boy nearly got in.  :-)  Did I understand the
intracicies of what was happening?  No.  Did I enjoy it?  YES.  Did I
spend a lot of time the next winter thinking of thAt game and wondering
why the heck certain things happened?  YOU BETCHA!  So I don't
overrate strategy.  I'll be the first to admit, that that was one of
the few times when managers decisions had such obvious impacts.  It
contributed to my enjoyment of the game.

> any gravitation of "genius" managers to the N.L., and idiots to the
> A.L. (both seem to have a good representation of both types of

Hear !  Hear!  :-)
> manager).  There seems to be a trade-off between watching people do
> what they do best, and strategy, in people's minds.  Maybe this is
> true to a small extent, but again, I think it's been overblown.
> Again, I'm not sure that it is so bad having one league have the d.h.
> This way we can watch guys like Winfield and Molitar play (every day)
> for an extra year or two, and those of you who find the N.L. more
> strategic can watch more N.L. games.  Where's the problem?

No problem really.  I think a large part of this discussions is based
on from whence we derive our enjoyment of the game. 

> -- 
> Chris Roney  (e-mail chris_roney@sfu.ca)
-- 
Roy F. Cabaniss......................*Wait till Tommy meets the Lord and
Western Kentucky University..........*finds out that He's wearing pinstripes.
All opinions contained herein........*Gaylord Perry (talking about Lasorda)
Are all mine own, and that's the sin.*Baseball, what a way to spend a day!!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: "NL has more speed, less power than AL"
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 22:51:53 GMT

In article <C1J8LG.EFz@zoo.toronto.edu> rising@zoo.toronto.edu (Jim Rising) writes:
>The old assertion that the NL has more speed and the AL
>depends more on the long ball has emerged again.  Does
>anyone have data on this?  The simplest indicator would
>be the number of SB and HR in each league last year, 
>corrected for DH.

If you throw out DH and pitcher stats, then the number of HRs between the
two leagues per team is virtually the same.  In 1991, the AL averaged 114.5
HR/team, the NL 114 HR/team.  The Non-DH SLG for the AL was .393, compared
to the non-pitcher SLG for the NL of .390.  The non-DH, non-pitcher OBAs
for the two leagues were the same.  The batting averages differed only by a
point.  

I don't have non-pitcher, non-DH stolen base totals, but the NL does have a
substantial margin here: the NL teams averaged 137.6 stolen bases, while
the AL teams averaged 104.9.

Note, however, that correcting for the DH wouldn't seem to be the right
thing to do here.  The American League *does* play with a DH, and that
contributes to the perception that the AL depends more on the long ball.
If you throw pitchers and DH's back into the mix, then the AL average 139.5
HR/team, while the NL averaged 119.2.  

So, yes, there are more HRs in the AL, and more SBs in the NL.  That the
difference in HRs (and most other offensive stats) disappears when you
remove DHs and pitchers would seem to indicate that the other alleged
differences between the leagues (junk-ball vs. fast-ball pitchers,
different strike zones, smaller ballparks) don't seem to have much effect.

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com






Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham)
Subject: Re: A newcomer's guide to rec.sport.baseball
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Distribution: na
Date: 22 Jan 1993 11:57 EST  

In article <21546@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu 
     (Gary She's Making Eyes Huckabay) writes...

>Anti-Stathead Camp - It should be noted that these people are not anti-
>		     statistic, but anti-'statistics explain everything.'
>		     They also often object to the *tone* of the stathead
>		     posts, rather than the content.  This group is 
>		     slightly more transitory, but is anchored by Ron 
>		     Graham, Roger Maynard, Gary Blickhan, and probably
>		     quite a few lurkers.

This may seem like a fine point, but I, for one, exclusively object to
tone - when I object at all.  As far as what statistics explain and what
they don't, if you don't use statistics for something, you have no means
of modeling or predicting baseball trends at all.  And that could be 
disastrous for participants in fantasy leagues ;-).

And if this camp depends on me as an anchor, it's in bad shape.

RG

"We'll just sign Mark Price.  He has great quickness...shortstop quickness."
 -  Tribe GM John Hart, on their shortstop controversy
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: ecaxron@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Graham)
Subject: Re: The Jesse & Marge Show
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 25 Jan 1993 10:19 EST  

In article <1993Jan19.182013.23700@Princeton.EDU>, roger@astro.princeton.edu 
     (Roger Lustig) writes...

>>Why should Jackson not "do" foreign investment
>>in baseball, knowing (as has been pointed out in this newsgroup several
>>times) that such investment has significant potential impacts on all other
>>areas that he does "do?"

>Because he doesn't dance to your tune.  

Good, well-thought-out answer.  Not.

>Now tell me all the things YOU have done to further improved race relations.
>Do you walk the walk even a little?

I am not challenging you to air your personal triumphs.  I will not air mine.
I have them, all right, and they are none of your business.  And they have
not one thing to do with this newsgroup.  You will say, "so why should anyone
listen to you?"  No-one has to.

>Your case seems to involve holding others to a standard you would probably
>have a hard time holding yourself to.  Again, what do YOU do to improve
>race relations?  What political activities do you undertake?

Still, none of your bloody business.  Just asking the question at all 
shows that you are no longer interested in the subject at hand.

Let me repeat the standard I hold Jesse Jackson to, so you can decide
whether I (or anyone else) is willing to hold to the same standard:

o  Jackson should air his view of the Mariners sale.  It's not too late.
o  He should appeal to the fans for their opinion of Schott, baseball
   in general, and his handling of his own involvement.
o  He should modify his existing action plan to include "short term,"
   "long term," and "wish list" items.  The latter should include restoring
   absolute power to the office of Commissioner.
o  He should offer to work with baseball to implement the short-term 
   parts of the action plan.  Those should include race-relations training
   for all existing front-office personnel of all clubs, the identification
   of solid minority candidates for front-office positions, and the final
   fate of Schott.
o  This should all face public scrutiny, not sound bites.

Sure, this is a standard I'm not willing to live up to myself.  Right.
Anything you say.

I still say Jackson is a hypocrite.  I can offer an example of his backing
off of publicly stated stands to make political gains, but it's not a 
baseball-related example, so I will not air it here.  What I want is for
him to be willing to do for all related cases (and I am not convinced that
the Mariners case is not related) what he does for one.

>Could you post a few examples of the things you've "watched"?  

This is a common defense.  I haven't been saving these things to date,
because I need my work-space for work.  And I question whether actually
showing you cases of non-civility will actually have any effect.  But if
that's what it takes...

RG
From: v393qp56@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Viktor Brenner)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Brewhas intereseted in Brunansky?
Date: 27 Jan 93 23:45:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1k6ei0INN6b8@uwm.edu>, paul@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul R Krueger) writes...
>I heard on the local news last night that Milwaukee was interested in
>signing Tom Brunansky. Anyone heard any other news? I suppose it wouldn't
>be the worst thing that could happen. It would allow Garner to play
>Hamilton in center for Yount occasionally and sub Bruno for Vaughn when
>Vaughn is slumping. Bruno tends to be a streak hitter right? Between him
>and Vaughn, Milwaukee would probably have one of the best outfielders in
>baseball for a two-week interval about four times next season. Of course
>they'd have a rally-killing .180 hitter the rest of the season.
> 
Anyone have home/away numbers on Bruno?  i worry about offensive numbers
piled up by Boston hitters when they get away from the fens.

vik
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: pjtier01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Q for Cleveland fans
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:56:24 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

A guy named Paul Byrd grew up in my neighborhood.  He had a good
year for Cleveland's AA squad and I am curious if their are any
projections for his future.

Also still looking for info on the minor leaguers in the Expos/Brewers trade.

                                                           Thanks,
                                                                   P. Tierney
Date: Wednesday, 27 Jan 1993 10:49:17 EST
From: <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-(
 <2473@blue.cis.pitt.edu> <C1H2nF.HI6@news2.cis.umn.edu>

stupid analogy time:

i'd like to make a bazillion dollars a year.  i make nowhere near
a bazillion a year.  however, the salary that i do make by no means
has a "negative use value" to me.

bob vesterman.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball
From: tloughin@IASTATE.EDU (Thomas M Loughin)
Subject: Relative Merits (was Re: Cecil signs :-( :-( :-()
Reply-To: tloughin@IASTATE.EDU (Thomas M Loughin)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:39:56 GMT

In article <GRABINER.93Jan20140019@kovalevskaia.harvard.edu>,
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:
> In article <1993Jan19.125019@IASTATE.EDU>, Thomas M Loughin writes:
> 
> > But is a firstbaseman who slugs 50 points above average more or less
> > valuable than a shortstop who does the same (everything else held at
> > average)?  What about 50 below.  
> 
> Offensively, the difference is the same; if your shortstop slugs 50
> points below league average for a shortstop, while your first baseman is
> 50 points above, your team offensive totals will be the same as if both
> players were league average.  One extra hit provides the same number of
> runs, no matter who gets it.
> 
Stop making sense--you're confusing me! :-}

> > My view of these distributions is
> > that a firstbaseman with an SLG of .365 is either jobless or gets
> > traded from California to Montreal, while I can think of quite a few
> > who come in at .465 or better.  It appears to be a highly skew
> > distribution (in _my_ imagination, anyway).  
> 
> This is correct, because talent is normally distributed, but then
> baseball selects from the far right end of the distribution.  There are
> only a few people who play first base and can slug .530; there are
> hundreds who can play first base and slug .300, but none of them have
> jobs.
> 
> > On the other hand, a
> > .400-slugger at short is a definite keeper, while a .300 slugger at
> > short is called "gloveman."
> 
> This is why it is more likely that a .300-slugger at short can stay
> around, because he can be a good glove man for a shortstop and thus save
> a lot of runs.  If he isn't, he won't keep his job.  A poor offensive
> player for his position at first base cannot be valuable enough
> defensively to be a good player.
> 
You're right, of course.  My thinking on the matter is largely motivated by 
drafting strategies for fantasy leagues.  Suppose your first-round pick came 
down to a choice between a .450-slugging SS or a .515-sligging firstbaseman.  
Which would you tend to lean toward?

My feeling is that it is easier to replace the firstbaseman with someone around
average than it is to find a comparable replacement at short (since even the 
"poor-hitting" regulars at first aren't as far below their position's average 
than the poor-hitting shortstops).  

This was particularly true at second a few years ago, before guys like Alomar, 
Baerga, and Deshields came along.  EVERYONE wanted Sandberg, and EVERYONE 
wanted Will Clark, but since the dropoff in replacing Sandberg was potentially 
larger, I valued Sandberg a bit higher.  Of course, I never drafted high 
enough to get either of them, anyway...

It's tough to evaluate drafting strategies purely, because the GM's subjective 
judgement and relative knowledge always interfere.  Maybe a simulation would 
work...  

-Tom.
From: nlu@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: i want.
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:36:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.170253.2399@adobe.com> snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols) writes:

>Most sources will contain pitching records for non-pitchers, but the only
>source I'm aware of (though I don't own it, sad to say) that contains
>pitcher batting records is the original edition of the Big Mac, published
>in 1969.  

If I am not mistaken, the Macmillan encyclopedia still does have pitchers'
batting records, albeit not a complete one: there's a section next to the
pitchers' pitching records that deals with the pitchers' hitting, but it is
incomplete.

===============================================================================
GO CALIFORNIA ANGELS!
===============================================================================
Nelson Lu (claudius@leland.stanford.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball