waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
the owners are whining about baseball not being popular among a large enough portion of the population, and have suggested various "remedies", such as shortening the game or trying to convince us that "smoke'embake'emdominatebysheerintimidation" is an accurate description of what is, essentially, a laid-back game.  forget those lame ideas.  here is my new and exciting two-point plan to generate interest in baseball among the masses.  point one: sex. point two: violence.  let's face it, sex and violence are the only things that sell in america.  here's how we can implement them in the game:  sex: cheerleaders, cheerleaders, and more cheerleaders.  dancing on top      of the dugouts.  bringing hot dogs to the umps during the seventh      inning stretch.  running up and down the stands.  (the south bend      white sox actually do this).  violence: baseball players are such utter wuss boys.  the pitcher beans      the batter, and both benches empty in what is called a "bench-clearing      brawl".  EVERYBODY JUST STANDS THERE AND LOOKS AT EACH OTHER. stand,      stand, stand.  look, look, look.  ho, hum.  then, the bullpens      come running in.  when they reach the "fight", they just stand      there, too.       anybody coming off the bench who does not throw at least one punch      should be suspended and fined.  further, the bullpens should fight      it out in the outfield, so as not to waste time and energy running      to the infield.  football: sex, violence. basketball: sex, violence. hockey: violence. baseball: "da pastime of da nayshun!" - yawn.
In <1993Apr15.214133.3371@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> apanjabi@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes: [...]  >BRAVES HIT LIKE A AAA CLUB Shouldn't this read "Braves Hitters are at the AAA Club?" --  Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic
In rec.sport.baseball, CROSEN1@ua1vm.ua.edu (Charles Rosen) writes: >I have noticed that this year has had a lot of high scoring games (at least the >NL has).  I believe one reason are the expansion teams.  Any thoughts? >    Except for the fact that there seems to be a lot of high scoring AL games also and I don't think the expansion teams directly affect them.  K. Scott Day   (kday@oasys.dt.navy.mil) Carderock Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center Code 1252 Bethesda, Maryland 20084-5000  ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *    "The point to remember is that what the government gives        *     it must first take away." *                                        -John S. Coleman
One last infield fly question that has always puzzled me and hasn't yet been addressed.  I believe the rule also does *not* deal with this situation:  If Infield Fly is declared and the ball is caught, runners can tag up and advance at their own risk, as on any fly ball.  However, if the Infield Fly is *not* caught, at what point can a runner legally leave his base w/o fear of being doubled off for advancing too early?  When the ball hits the ground?  When a fielder first touches the ball after it hits the ground?  Enlightenment would be appreciated.
In article <120399@netnews.upenn.edu> sepinwal@mail.sas.upenn.edu (Alan   Sepinwall) writes: >  > Some pleasant (and then some not so pleasant) surprises about the 1993 > edition of the Bronx Bombers so far. >  > 	4)Wickman. A friend made a comparison between Wickman and Jack > 	  Morris - they never have impressive stats but they always > 	  find some way to win (although Morris seems to be losing that > 	  ability). I figured that Wickman would be the least important > 	  part of the Steve Sax trade (best trade since we got that Ruth > 	  guy), maybe winding up as a good middle reliever. But I like   what > 	  I've seen so far. He doesn't pitch pretty, but he gets the job   done. >
jerry@sheldev.shel.isc-br.com (Gerald Lanza) writes:  >	P.S. In 1964, a single team out of 8 won the pennant; no divisions.  Make that ten, not eight. The Mets and Astros joined the N.L. in 1962.
aardvark@cygnus.la.locus.com (Warren Usui) writes:  |>>>So, Alfredo Griffin is better than Barry Larkin. |> |>If rings is what you're judging by, then I don't see your point, since Barry |>has one (1990).  |Yes but Alfredo has at least two!! (1988 Dodgers and 1992 Blue Jays). |Not only that, he has won World Series rings for more different teams than |Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig combined!! (how do we know that the Yankee dynasty |was not due to Lazarri being at third?)   	Warren, I agree with your premise... but... The Babe won on two teams. That's right, he was part of the Red Sox Dynasty of the 1910s. And everyone knows that the Yankee Dynsaty wouldn't have happened without thier famous bullpen catcher whose name escapes me at the moment.
grabiner@math.harvard.edu (David Grabiner) writes:  >In article <C5L40C.9LC@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, David Robert Walker writes:  >> In article <8994@blue.cis.pitt.edu> traven@pitt.edu (Neal Traven) writes:  >>>One also has to separate offense into batting and baserunning, with the >>>split probably somewhere around 49.5% and 0.5%.  >> I'd give baserunning a little more credit than that, maybe 45-5, or >> even 40-10. Give a team of Roberto Alomar and a team of John Oleruds >> identical batting stats (which wouldn't be that unreasonable), and >> even if you don't let Roberto steal a single base, they'll score a lot >> more than the Oleruds by going first-to-third more often. (No offense, >> Gordon).  >I wouldn't give baserunning that much value.  I meant to comment on this at the time.  There's just no way baserunning could be that important - if it was, runs created wouldn't be nearly as accurate as it is.    Runs Created is usually about 90-95% accurate on a team level, and there's a lot more than baserunning that has to account for the remaining percent.
How many runs will be scored in Denver? I don't know.  but some idea can be gotten by looking at the runs scored in  Mile High Stadium during the last few years of the Bears/Zephyrs  tenure in the American Association.  Here's the total runs scored per game in Zephyrs games,  all league games and the ratio. I found the same ratios for HR.  Year  rpg   lea  ratio  hrpg lea ratio    1992 10.22  9.10 1.12   1.65 1.58 1.04 1991  9.53  8.87 1.07   1.41 1.26 1.12 1990 10.71  8.72 1.23   1.49 1.24 1.20 1989  9.07  8.34 1.09   1.27 1.11 1.14 1988  9.90  8.37 1.18   1.29 1.08 1.19 1987 12.55 10.70 1.17   2.39 1.92 1.24 1986  9.45  9.33 1.01   1.35 1.38  .98 1985  9.50  8.54 1.11   1.53 1.34 1.14 1984  9.99  9.10 1.10   1.55 1.59  .97 1983 10.60  9.99 1.06   2.03 1.74 1.17 1982 11.29 10.35 1.09   2.24 1.91 1.17 1981 10.29  9.25 1.11   1.43 1.49  .96 1980 10.59  9.43 1.12   1.63 1.46 1.12       1446/13-->1.11     1444/13-->1.11  It seems pretty clear that Denver will have a large effect  on runs scored (I'll stick with my prediction from last year  that it'll be one of the top 3 in the NL this year)  and a fairly large effect on Homeruns - though apparently not as large as  Atlanta, Wrigley, Cincinnati and San Diego. Still it ought to be a pretty decent home run park.
mss@netcom.com (Mark Singer) writes: >In article <93109.190117RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes: >>In article <mssC5qrrz.91H@netcom.com>, mss@netcom.com (Mark Singer) says: >>> >> >>1) why would owners decrease ticket prices when they obviously get >>   lots of people to pay the price they're asking? >I don't think that it is "obvious" that "lots" of people are willing >to pay the price.  I'm sure someone out there in net-land has some >facts about trends in attendance regarding percentage of capacity >sold.  But even if the trends are relatively flat, you have to consider >what is happening on a team-by-team basis.  Attendance in 1992 was down. By .3%. From an all-time record in 1991. In people terms, attendance was down by 310,000 from 1991 to 1992. Two franchises, the Dodgers and Mets, were down by 1,100,000 from 1991 to 1992. Had either of them not been entirely awful, MLB would have set another attendance record in 1992.   Mike Jones | AIX High-End Development | mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
In article <spork.735077099@camelot> spork@camelot.bradley.edu (Richard Izzo) writes:         B.S. about darkness deleted. >	Oh, lighten up.  What depresses me is that they might actually  >finish last, which I believe hasn't happened since their second season in  >1970. 	nope The Royals are the only team in the majors that have not      finished in last place.    ^^^^    Of course this doesn't include       the marlins and the rockies but they have a good chance at       finishing last also. >rich.
In article <1993Apr5.124526.10219@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> carrd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes: >Has David Wells landed with a team yet?  I'd think the Tigers with their  >anemic pitching would grab this guy pronto!  They did.  For $950K.
In article <1993Apr13.150904.25249@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, Mark B. says: > > Was he better than Balboni? >  this borders on blasphemy.
In article <5086@cvbnetPrime.COM>, cvalcour@ptex.Prime.COM (Sorry I missed the posting) wrote: >  > Could some kind soul please email me a copy of mlb.c >  > Thanks > Chris V. > ------------------------------------------------------ > cvalcour@ptex.Prime.COM > ------------------------------------------------------   mlb.c is archived on the Internet Baseball Archive  anoymous ftp to eucalyptus.cc.swarthmore.edu (130.58.67.44) you must use your full email / username id as a password  cd ./baseball/schedules  it's filed as mlb-schedule-program.c for clarity  schedules pre-generated for east-coast times are there as text files as well, and a couple of teams' TV schedules -- please send me more TV info if you have it on other teams.  - matt  Matt Wall * wall@cc.swarthmore.edu * Hey, I gotta job here, OK?
In article <1993Apr16.011653.7403@Princeton.EDU> roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes: > >As for Ryan, is his W-L better than Morris'?  That's what a lot of voters >tend to look at.  And Morris *was* awfully good for a decade, and doesn't >lead MLB history in walks allowed, either.  Despite walks and loses, Ryan deserves to be in the Hall of Fame (IMHO) based only on his ho-hitters.  The strike-out records are an extra.  What do people think about Andre "400 HR" Dawson for the HOF?  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name:       Ken Kubey  or  QB   |  Reading, editing or printing of this text Address:    kubey@sgi.com       |  without the express written consent of Disclaimer: the usual           |  Major League Baseball is prohibited.
In article <1r6hf4INNc16@gap.caltech.edu>, Tim Shippert writes:  > 	Ideally, DHs "should" be the strongest offensive players, because > any schmoe can play DH if he can hit.  That would take care of position > corrected anomolies such as Frank's.  Since that is not the case (and why > not?  Is it always this way?) then we are going to have trouble finding the > true value of DHs using the same models as that for position players.  There are several reasons for this difference.  The main reason is that good hitters in their prime (such as Frank Thomas and Danny Tartabull) are rarely regular DH's, even if they can't field; it's more commonly a place to put aging veterans.  Another use of the DH slot is to help a player come back from injury slowly, getting his bat in the lineup without forcing him to play in the field.  I would expect such players to hit worse as DH's than they did during the rest of the season.  A third factor is that most player who split time between DH and first or the outfield don't hit as well as DH's for some reason.  Reggie Jackson was a good example; in five years as a RF/DH for the Angels, he hit like the old Reggie when he was in right.  The second and third factors will be lost if players are considered by their primary position only; a player who plays 90 games in right and 60 at DH will count only in the right fielders' averages.  > 	A logical starting place would be to look at defensive replacement > value (if you can find it) for 1B or LF or something.  We can assume that > if forced to play defense they would play at true zero value, even though I > doubt this is actually true for players like Winfield and Molitor.  This > would let us "discount" the time they spend playing DH, because that > forces the team to find another real fielder to play.  This makes sense; you might also look at it another way.  Although the *average* offensive performance of a DH may be lower than for a left fielder, the *replacement-level* offensive performance is certainly lower; if you are a left fielder but can't hit well enough to keep a job anywhere, then you certainly can't hit well enough to keep a job at DH.
In article <15APR93.14691229.0062@lafibm.lafayette.edu> VB30@lafibm.lafayette.edu (VB30) writes: >Just wondering.  A friend and I were talking the other day, and >we were (for some reason) trying to come up with names of Jewish >baseball players, past and present.  We weren't able to come up >with much, except for Sandy Koufax, (somebody) Stankowitz, and  It's Stankiewicz, not Stankowitz, and he's not Jewish - he's Polish (by the way, the correct pronunciation - according to Stanky himself, is "ston-KEV-itch". all the sportscasters get it wrong)  >maybe John Lowenstein.  Can anyone come up with any more.  I know >it sounds pretty lame to be racking our brains over this, but >humor us.  Thanks for your help.  The only other Jewish ballplayer I can think of is Ron Blomberg, who is best known as being the first DH to appear in a major league ballgame.
What's with John Franco?  The Mets are hardly using him.  I heard he was completely recovered, but now I'm not so sure.  If there is anybody out there with information about Franco, I would appreciate it if you could drop me a line.
To really speed up the game umps need to START CALLING STRIKES the way they used to.  I'm talking about making the strike zone start at the knees and go up to the top of the letters.  Forget this "the strike zone is in the general area of the groin".  A lot less 3-and-2 counts and a quicker game.
In article <1993Apr14.203122.12367@iscsvax.uni.edu>   reed5575@iscsvax.uni.edu writes: >      >  Dave Winfield's name does not go > in the same sentence. As Aaron, Robinson, and Ott.            In terms of PEAK, and I repeat PEAK years, Winfield has Done it   all. He has batted in the 340's for a season, drove in 100 and more runs   many times in a row before his injury. Consistently hit at or near 300   while knocking in 35 home runs. Have you even LOOKED at Dave Winfield's   slugging percentage for three or 4 of his best seasons. I still think that   dave was one of the BETTER of all time, but obviously not the best. He was   one of the best athletes evr to play baseball. He hit line drives that hit   the scoreboard in left-center field, a feat np one has done in the new   Stadium. Heck, only 2 or 3 other people have hit it over that green fence   since it has been remodeled. He could field, had a bullet arm, and his   hitting was comparable in many seasons to gary sheffields, and barry bonds   of last season. He is older now, and slowing down, takes more of an   uppercut to lift the ball out of the park, but he will always be my hero,   and my idol. There is nothing that could make me happier than George   inviting Dave back to the Bronx to play his last year of ball with the   Yankees. Of course, he will most likely refuse the offer, but who knows?   For 3 million dollars, he'll play. Heck they are giving gallego 2.5   million this year, having Dave as their DH, while leaving him time to play   the field when Tartabull is injured, or Nokes and mass are traded, should   give the Yanks the inspiration and leadership that will sweep in a new age   of Yankee domination.
In article <8966@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, dtate+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes:  |> Uh, right.  You also forgot that you can't get an RBI (barring a HR) with |> nobody on base.  What fraction of all runs come on solo HR?  Actually, for the Padres this year so far it's 23%.  They are 5th in the league in HRs, and ALL have been solo shots.  Pythagorean projection puts them at .360 winning percentage or 58-104.  Need some pitching help, fast!  Good news, though, is that Hurst has been throwing curveballs w/o any pain.  Threw 80 pitches yesterday.  Should be back in a couple of weeks.  Maybe we can trade him to the Yankees for Militello.  Dave
In article <15APR93.14691229.0062@lafibm.lafayette.edu> VB30@lafibm.lafayette.edu (VB30) writes: >Just wondering.  A friend and I were talking the other day, and >we were (for some reason) trying to come up with names of Jewish >maybe John Lowenstein.   Lowenstein is NOT Jewish.  However, there is a long list including Hank Greenberg, Moe Berg, Rod Carew (a convert), the Sherry brothers, Art Shamsky, and Ron Blomberg.
In article <1993Apr14.153137.1@ulkyvx.louisville.edu> pjtier01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu writes: > >If the Braves  >continue to average 3 runs a game, then 3 is where they will finish. >                                                                    P. Tierney 	So, if the Braves run production falls to 1 per game, which is certainly where it's headed (if they're lucky), does that mean they'll finish first?
WHO THINKS THE ASTROS ARE GOING PLACES??? THEY'RE CURRENTLY FIRST PLACE. THEY'RE 5-4, 5-1 ON THE ROAD!
In article <1993Apr15.093231.5148@news.yale.edu> (Steve Tomassi) writes: >     Hi, baseball fans! So what do you say? Don't you think he deserves it? >I  >mean, heck, if Dave Winfield (ho-hum) is seriously being considered for it, >as  >is Lee Smith (ha), then why don't we give Dave Kingman a chance? Or Darrell  >Evans! Yeah, yeah! After the Hall of Fame takes in them, it can take in >Eddie  >Murray and Jeff Reardon.  Um, what?  Eddie Murray was a superb first baseman for a *long* time.  Winfield as produced consistently for almsot 20 years, and excellently on several occasions.    Dave Kingman's *best* year was like Darryl Strawberry's *typical* year with the Mets.    Darrell Evans, too, did a whole lot more than just hit homers, which  *is* all that Kong did.    >     Well, in any case, I am sick and tired (mostly sick) of everybody >giving  >Hall of Fame consideration to players that are by today's standards, >marginal.  Whom are you talking about?  Yes, Eddie Murray is marginal, but that's because he's 38 years old.  He wasn't marginal for a *long* time.  >Honestly, Ozzie Smith and Robin Yount don't belong there. They're both  >shortstops that just hung around for a long time. Big deal.  Not.    Smith has hung around for a long time AND fielded the position better  than anyone else ever has.  Yount stopped being a shortstop about a decade ago, in case you hadn't  noticed.  One of his two MVP awards was as a centerfielder.  >     Let's be a little more selective, huh? Stop handing out these honors >so  >liberally. Save them for the guys who really deserve it. Face it, if  Like whom?  There are many players in the Hall who aren't anywhere near as goos as the guys you're running down.  >something >isn't done, there will be little prestige in the Hall of Fame anymore. When  That's already the case, by some standards.  But the *bad* players in the  Hall are all from the 20's and 30's.  Recent picks have generally been excellent.  >certain individuals believe that Steve Garvey or Jack Morris are potential >candidates, the absurdity is apparent. Gee, can these guys even compare to >the more likely future Hall of Famers like Kirby Puckett or Nolan Ryan?  No, but who cares?  Was Stan Musial anywhere near as good as Babe Ruth? Not really.  But he obviously belongs there.  The Hall has generally had about the top 1% of major leaguers.  As  more players come through the game, more will be in that top 1%.    And, yes, it's pretty easy to argue that Smith,. Yount, Evans, Winfield, etc. are in the top 1%.  Dave Kingman on the other hand, was a liability throughout most of his career.  Of course, Garvey *hasn't* gotten a lot of HOF press, so I don't know what you mean.    As for Ryan, is his W-L better than Morris'?  That's what a lot of voters tend to look at.  And Morris *was* awfully good for a decade, and doesn't lead MLB history in walks allowed, either.
I only caught the tail end of this one on ESPN.  Does anyone have a report? (Look at all that Teal!!!!  BLEAH!!!!!!!!!)
scott@asd.com (Scott Barman) writes: >In article <1993Apr20.154542.147196@clam.com> sam@steamer.clam.com (Sam Mandelbaum) writes: >>2.  Wade Boggs. >>    I live in Boston and like Wade a lot.  But, his career is  >>    winding down and I would rather see the Yanks start to develop >>    a long term solution (i.e. Hensley Muelins, Russ Davis, Velarde?). >>    Besides, Wade just doesn't have any range.  What a shame about >>    Charlie Hayes, huh? >Who would you have playing 3B, Wade Boggs or Charlie Hayes?  My choice >is Boggs.  No contest.  It will give them time to develop younger talent >in an area the Yankee farm system seems to be deficient.  A-hem. Two words: Russell Davis. Playing in the cavern at Albany (AA) last year (375/410/385 down the alleys and to center), Davis went .285/.355/.483 with 22 homers. There aren't any small parks on the road in the Eastern League, either. He's 23(!) and his MLE was .258/.308/.416, 17 HR. I have no fielding statistics, but from seeing him a number of times last year I'd say that he's not Brooks Robinson, but neither is he Howard Johnson. Unless they think they can win the pennant *this year* (which seems possible) and need Boggs to do it, I think they're making the same sort of mistake with Davis that Boston made with Boggs, leaving him in the minors for two or three years after he'd shown that he was a good hitter.  >>3.  Spike Owen. >>    See Wade Boggs.  I'd much rather see them develop Dave Silvestri >>    or whoever.  Wade and Spike next to each other in the infield is >>    going to raise the Yankee staff ERA 1/2 point.  And these guys >>    are on the down sides of their careers. >Too bad they gave up on Randy Valarde.  Too many trips on the Columbus >Shuttle!  Hrm? They still have him on the roster (16 AB through the first two weeks). They've just never figured out what to do with him. I suspect that he hits enough (especially vs. lefties) to be a reasonable shortstop. One rumor running around during spring training was that they wanted to convert Silvestri to be a catcher(!) because "his body type was wrong for a shortstop".  You'd think that somebody in the same *division*, who plays Baltimore about a dozen times a year, would know better.   Mike Jones | AIX High-End Development | mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
Tigers' manager Sparky Anderson gets his 2,000th career win as moments ago, the Tigers completed a two game sweep over the Oakland A's at Tiger Stadium by beating the A's 3-2. Here are the highlights:   				R    H   E                  Oakland		2    9   0 	     Detroit            3    7   1  Chad Krueter scored Skeeter Barnes from 1st with an RBI double in the  bottom of the ninth against none other than Dennis Eckersley to give the Tigers the victory.  Barnes also had an RBI single to score Thurmond to tie the score in the ninth, also off Eckersley (sp?).  The A's got their runs on an RBI single by McGwire in the 1st and a solo homer by Reuben Sierra in the 6th.  Deer doubled home Kirk Gibson in the 7th for the other Tiger run.  John Doherty pitched another strong game for the Tigers, once again lasting through the seventh inning.  He was relieved by Bolton and then David Haas in the 8th, and Haas got the win.  Bobby Witt started for the A's, and was replaced by Honeycutt in the 6th, followed by Goose Gossage in the 8th, and finally Eckersly in the 9th.  Doherty gave up both of the A's runs, while Witt gave up the first Tiger run and Eckerseley gave up the last two.  In the post game interview (on WJR radio in Detroit), Sparky Anderson said its one of the few times he's gotten emotional in his managing career.  It was a big moment for him, and I'm sure all of us Tiger fans are unanimously very happy for him.  And what a way to get number 2,000!.  Considering the circumstances, I think it might be appropriate to say:                  WOOF!      Go Tigers!