waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
mss@netcom.com (Mark Singer) writes: >In article <Apr.4.19.42.08.1993.12176@pilot.njin.net> gajarsky@pilot.njin.net (Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite) writes: >>javier lopez is a better catcher than greg olson. >But has there ever in the history of baseball been a 22-year-old (or >younger) *rookie* catcher who compared favorably among all league >catchers in terms of defense and brought a .247 bat?  Wasn't it  >Sandy Alomar who was supposed to be that good in his rookie year? >Not.  Wasn't it Benito Santiago who was supposed to be that good >in his rookie year?  Not.  Hrm. Sandy Alomar, 24 year old rookie: 132 games, .290/.326/.418. Threw out a few baserunners. Benito Santiago, 22 year old rookie: 146 games, .300/.324/.467. He threw out a few baserunners, too. Ivan Rodriguez, *20* year old rookies: 88 games, .264/.276/.354. Didn't exactly suck behind the plate.  >I can continue this thread with the others mentioned, but you get >the point.  You and others seem to be so quick to dismiss the  >seasoned veterans in favor of the hot *young* rookies.  Perhaps - >just perhaps - the management team of the pennant-winning Braves >knows something more than you do.  And perhaps what they know is >that very, very few 21- and 22-year old rookies come up to the majors >and make an impact.   True. Which only makes it more important to realize when you have one of the few. Lopez' season last year, adjusted to major league equivalencies, was .306/.330/.472, 15 HRs. How bad does he have to be behind the plate for that to not be better than Olson's .238/.316/.328?   Mike Jones | AIX High-End Development | mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
In article <steph.735349318@pegasus.cs.uiuc.edu>, steph@pegasus.cs.uiuc.edu (Dale Stephenson) says: > >The events I saw were: >1)  Called strike by Hirschbeck >2)  Shocked-looking Gant asks for appeal to first >3)  No appeal to first >4)  Gant steps out of batters box. >5)  Hirschbeck *immediately* orders Gant back in.  [bad move]  Even I noticed that Gant's demeanor was not one of a batter attempting to regain his concentration.  Gant was stalking off. I wonder if Gant said something to the ump?  >6)  Gant ignores Hirschbeck and walks off. [bad move]  Actually, there was a small hand wave by Gant...as if to say 'Don't bother me'. Gant may have said something here, too.  >7)  Hirschbeck yells at Gant.  Gant is silent. >8)  Hirschbeck calls for the pitch. >9)  Pitch is called a strike. >10)  Cox argues (couldn't see when he came on the field)  Cox was already halfway to the ump when the strike was called.  >11)  Cox is ejected, players everywhere >12)  Play finally resumes. > >Gant shouldn't have ignored Hirschbeck.  Not returning made the strike >call fairly likely.  Although I suspect an argument might have gotten >Gant tossed altogether.  But if Hirschbeck had let Gant step out, the >whole incident probably would have been avoided.  My impression was that Gant was not 'stepping out.'  He was making a protest about the lack of an appeal to first.  As has been pointed out earlier, there is no appeal to first on a strike. I can understand Gant feeling a little pressure in a two-out, RISP, 1 - 0 game, ninth inning.  He let it get to him.  The ump also overreacted.  Gant was stalking off, but I doubt he would have been gone long.  Hirschbeck should have let him have a moment to compose himself before telling him to come bat. IMHO, umpires should be more flexible than what Hirschbeck showed.  Gant was disturbed to the point it was pretty likely he would not get a hit.  A very bad finish to a pretty good game. >-- >Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic > >  "It is considered good to look wise, especially when not >   overburdened with information" -- J. Golden Kimball
In article <C5K7nK.7tv@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rkoffler@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Bighelmet) writes: >csc2imd@cabell.vcu.edu (Ian M. Derby) writes: > > >>Since someone brought up sports radio, howabout sportswriting??? > >I happen to be a big fan of Jayson Stark.  He is a baseball writer for the  >Philadelphia Inquirer.  Every tuesday he writes a "Week in Review" column.   >He writes about unusual situations that occured during the week.  Unusual >stats.  He has a section called "Kinerisms of the Week" which are stupid >lines by Mets brodcaster Ralph Kiner.  Every year he has the LGTGAH contest. >That stands for "Last guy to get a hit."  He also writes for Baseball  >America.  That column is sort of a highlights of "Week in Review."  If you  >can, check his column out sometime.  He might make you laugh. > >Rob Koffler  Isn't Stark that idiot who writes in Baseball America?   Twice a month he writes a "Who woulda thunk it" article which is really the same piece every time.   "Who would have thought that [Buddy Biancalana] would have more home runs than [the Colorado Rockies, Babe Ruth, Omar Vizquel and Nolan Ryan] COMBINED!"   He's an idiot, if it's the same guy.  > >--  >****************************************************************** >|You live day to day and                rkoffler@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu| >|dream about tomorrow --Don Henley                               | >******************************************************************
In article <C4yxMJ.BLE@news.udel.edu> philly@bach.udel.edu (Robert C Hite) writes:  [Most of tirade deleted .. I have an editor and know how to use it]  > >Okay we've been conservative and added about 18 wins so far.  Now >we're adding about 4 more wins thanks to the expansion teams... >Okay, thats 22 wins.  Lesse dipshit math genuious, 72 + 22 = 94 >Hmmm... I think thats good enough to win the worse division in >baseball? > >Next time, before you say something foolish, get a clue first!    Either this is an example of *great* sarcasm or I'm really, really worried.
Bob Gajarsky - Hobokenite writes: >jayson stark (i trhink that's him) fits perfectly in this category. > >anyone who writes "dean palmer has 2 homers  - at this pace, he'll > have 324 home runs!" should be shot.  Bob, I think that Stark does this sort of thing as a joke, not as a serious prediction.  I don't really see why we should shoot him for that.  The guys who ought to be shot are the ones who keep claiming how great the Royals' chances are in the AL West, since all evidence indicates that they aren't joking and actually believe it.
In article <1993Apr13.202037.9485@cs.cornell.edu>, tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes: |> In article <rudyC5Fr3q.1CL@netcom.com> rudy@netcom.com (Rudy Wade) writes: |> >In article <C5FMxD.2pM@cs.dal.ca> niguma@ug.cs.dal.ca (Gord Niguma) writes: |> >>reference to history because he certainly didn't have the best season for     |> >>second basemen in history. He probably didn't even have as good a season as |> >>Alomar last year. |> >   |> >What?  Do you have some measure (like popularity in Toronto doesn't count) |> >that you are basing this statement on? |>  |> Uh, yes.  Baerga has a lot of flash, but Alomar was the better hitter |> last year. |>  |> BATTERS        BA   SLG   OBP   G  AB   R   H  TB 2B 3B HR RBI  BB  SO SB CS  E |> BAERGA,C     .312  .455  .354 161 657  92 205 299 32  1 20 105  35  76 10  2 19 |> ALOMAR,R     .310  .427  .405 152 571 105 177 244 27  8  8  76  87  52 49  9  5 |>
In article <13247@news.duke.edu> fierkelab@bchm.biochem.duke.edu (Eric Roush) writes: >In article <1993Apr14.160447.17835@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu >(Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes: > > >>We won't really be able to say anything for at least another couple of >>weeks.  But so far it looks like a homerific season!  (Might the umps >>be squeezing the strike zone?) >> > > >Watching the Braves on TBS, I would have said that the strike zone >in the NL has expanded this season.  Specifically, it appears that >the strike zone has moved above the belt.  Yeah, the announcers >have commented on that also, but it was also my perception. > >However, the strike zone hasn't climbed all the way up to >"the letters".  It's more like a little ways under the letters. > >Any other perceptions out there?  Judging by the way the Reds' pitchers have performed thus far, it appears to me that the zone has been squeezed to the size of a grape.    1/2 :-)
Since Roger is a Canadian who probably knows nothing about baseball I am gonna try to explain it to him in terms of hockey...  according to his logic... I can say that since 1988...Bob Errey is better than Wayne Gretzky  hey...Errey contributed to 2 Cups while good old Wayne has won nothing... (I think the Kings should trade Gretzky for Errey....what do you think Roger?)
Melido came off the DL today and will start tonight against the Rangers. (Now, if only he can go the distance so that the bullpen doesn't have to come in.....)  --I'm outta here like Vladimir! -Alan Sepinwall
I was watching the Dodgers/Marlins game yesterday and a couple of things impressed me.    First is that the way the sun was shining in Miami, it had a summer atmosphere in early spring for baseball.  In comparison Wrigley Field in early April still has a wintry look to it with the dead ivy and bundled up fans.    The second and most important was the fans.  I like these guys/gals! I will admit I am a football fan first but I still enjoy baseball. It was interesting because most of these fans are only accustomed to the Miami Dolphins.  The way they were cheering, I thought it was the AFC playoffs.  Of course opening day may have A LOT to do with it, but I really got feeling of electricity that I think is lacking with a lot of baseball fans in other cities.    Baseball certainly needs a charge and I hope these two expansion teams bring back some excitement.  We'll find out Friday how Denver Bronco fans respond.
In article <1993Apr21.165206.13060@ac.dal.ca>, arishem@ac.dal.ca writes: >  > Well, thanks to Matthew Wall, the Major League baseball logos which I've been > posting over the past number of weeks now have a home at the Internet > Baseball Archive. > To get them, FTP to eucalyptus.cc.swarthmore.edu, login anonymously as per > usual, and cd to the baseball/misc/graphics directory.  Both the GIF files > and the uuencoded versions are available. >  >   Darren >  >  Darren Reiniger                   reiniger@ug.cs.dal.ca || arishem@ac.dal.ca >  Centre For Marine Geology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, N.S., Canada > | People who wonder where this generation is going should remind themselves   | > | where it came from in the first place.                                      |   I have successfully copied all of the uuencoded versions of these logos to my local directory, but when I tried the GIF files, it said "Permission denied". Could you explain why, and also how to execute the uuencoded files?  Thanks,  Ken
------------------------- Original Article ------------------------- Newsgroups: rec.sport.baseball Path: butch!netcomsv!netcom.com!csus.edu!wupost!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.ed From: scunning@louven.berkeley.edu (Sean Cunningham) Subject: Candlestick Message-ID: <1993Apr21.041620.27894@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Sender: nntp@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU (NNTP Poster) Nntp-Posting-Host: louven.berkeley.edu Organization: University of California, Berkeley Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 04:16:20 GMT Lines: 24  Hey folks,  Saw the Giants play ball at the 'Stick Saturday, April 17.  It was the game where Pendelton broke up the scoreless tie in the ninth with a two-out, two-run homer to right to win it.  (It wasn't the game where the fans threw the give-away "fotoballs" onto the field in response to the homer -- too bad, huh?)  Well, the 'Stick is still cold.  The Saturday game ended at 5:45pm, and it was cold then.  I can't imagine night games in April at the 'Stick.  The wind kicked up a little, too, and I got this idea.  At most games, there's a pile of hot dog wrappers and cups and trash on the field a lot of the time.  I propose a Kid's Clean-up Corps composed mainly of 10-12 year old kids who would love nothing better than to run out on the field in the fifth inning (when the guy in the Toro smooths the infield) and grab the trash.  It might not be glamorous, but at that age I probably would have given anything to be on the field with the ballplayers.  Everybody wins here!  Whaddaya think?
Just to add to this vein, consider that range of a first baseman is not the only important thing.  He is IMO the best fielder of bad throws from the other infielders.  I have seen him scoop balls out of the dirt, catch balls off a large bounce, take down balls over his head, wide, etc. ad infinitum.  *And* he gets the out, much of the time.  Some of the things he does to save his infielders of errors are amazing.  You have to give Mattingly credit for being able to do all of that while keeping his foot near the bag (yes, I am sure he gets a few calls because he is Mattingly :-)
jrogoff@scott.skidmore.edu (jay rogoff) writes:  >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:  >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?    	The runner can leave his base at any time.  If the ball is caught, he's got to tag up.  If it isn't caught, he _doesn't_ have to tag up at all.  So, if he's feeling lucky, your runner at second can sprint for glory as soon as the ball is popped up.  If it isn't caught, he's probably scored a run.  If it is, he's probably headed for AAA.    	The only effect the infield fly has is to make the batter out, thereby removing the force on the runners on base.  All other rules apply, as if you were standing second with first open and the ball is popped up.
In article <1993Apr20.102857.1@tesla.njit.edu>, drm6640@tesla.njit.edu says: > >DON MATTINGLY IS THE BEST FIRST BASEMAN IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL.....ALWAYS >HAS BEEN.....ALWAYS WILL BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  why?
In article <sfoVX7O00WB4MIUm0d@andrew.cmu.edu> Mamatha Devineni Ratnam <mr47+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:  >So far Simmons looks like a total idiot.  >5) Leyland should accept a part of the blame for the LaValliere situation. I >can't understand his and management's fear of losing Tom Prince through >waivers. Even if they do, what's the use. He is aright hander like Slaught. >Not a very smart platoon. Also, I am blaming Leyland in this case, since he is hcurrently    convinced that LaVAlliere is through, while giving him >way too much time last year in the regular season AND the playoffs(SLaught >should have played in all 7 games; he has a good average against right handed >pitching). Didn't Leyland and Simmons forsee this last year, and attempt to >trade LaValliere last year itself? Any fool could tell them LaVAlliere >wasn't very fit last year.  Sorry, but this is the biggest load of bunk I've seen in a while.  a) The Pirates have been trying to trade LaValliere for some time now. Nobody was even vaguely interested. b) Several other teams had made it known that they would grab Prince, who was out of options. c) LaValliere's release had nothing to do with him being through. He was released, because, in the event of an injury to Slaught, LaValliere is no longer capable (they believe) of being the everyday catcher.  Since Slaught is as good against righties as he is against lefties, the offense should actually improve with this move.
g_waugaman@nac.enet.dec.com (Glenn R. Waugaman) writes: >>Gary's list of the ten slowest bats in baseball: >>8.  Andre Dawson  >What?!  Peter Gammons' Andre "Tremendous Bat Speed" Dawson?  Bat speed so  >great that Dawson has trouble hitting the ball to the right side of the  >left field line without counting to 100 before swinging?  Bat speed never  >before seen from a 38-year-old man, much less from any Red Sox player to  >precede him?  Yes, that's him.  Was I not specific enough?  Just because someone consistently pulls the ball does not mean that they have a quick bat.  Dawson's release is slow, and he *IS* 38, after all.  He may swing early, and rotate his hips so that he hits the ball to  the left side all the time, but he swings slowly.  As for me disagreeing with Peter Gammons... Whoa!  That's never happened before!  Next thing you know, I'll probably believe Dave Campbell is the biggest imbecile even to come near a mic, and that Ray Knight has the IQ of drained crankcase oil.
fls@keynes.econ.duke.edu (Forrest Smith) writes:  >	The situation with the Giants' bleachers is a case in point for the >need for a commissioner.  Okay, I'm curious. Why? Are you expectin the Commissioner to fly in and stand on the pitchers mound to yell at the fans to sit down, or what?
Well, as long as folks are sharing their esteemed wisdom, Li'l Karnak sez:  	AL West		AL East 	NL West		NL East  	1) Chicago	1) Toronto	1) Atlanta	1) St. Louis 	2) Texas	2) New York	2) Cincinnati	2) Montreal  	3) Minnesota	3) Baltimore	3) Houston	3) New York  	4) Oakland 	4) Boston	4) Los Angeles	4) Philadelphia 	5) Seattle	5) Detroit	5) San Diego	5) Pittsburgh  	6) Kansas City	6) Milwaukee	6) San Fran. 	6) Chicago  	7) California	7) Cleveland	7) Colorado	7) Florida     Details to follow later. Pick it apart as you like.     Also, if anyone is still taking entries for prediction pools/contests, could you snag mine and add it to the list? Thanks.     I'm just glad it's opening day; makes up a little bit for the gloom/doom weather patterns here.     Lundy,
Well, Maddux looked excellent as the Braves shutout the Cubs 1 - 0. Justice drove in the only run with an RBI single in the first. Get ready for him to have a monster year. He is now hitting the ball to the opposite field with a lot of power to go with his natural  power to right field and his good batting eye. If he stays healthy which he should (his back is full strength this year) he should get over 100 RBI and close to 30 HR.  In another note, the Marlins got off to a good start beating the Dodgers. I believe the score was 6 - 3 but I'm not sure. I wish them and the Rockies well this year. Hell. I think it would be funny to watch the Dodgers hit the cellar again this year.
In article <1qt6ooINN7gd@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes: > >the only really valid retort to Valentine is: weren't the Red Sox trying >to get Morris too? oh, sure, they *said* Viola was their first choice >afterwards, but what should we have expected they would say?  Lou wanted Morris all along.  The idiot.  Giving the man $40 million to play with is like giving a five year old a loaded Uzi with the safety off.  The only question is how many shots he will get off before somebody is wise enough to take it away.  >} And don't tell me Boston will win this year.  They won't  >} even be in the top 4 in the division, more like 6th. > >if this is true, it won't be for lack of contribution by Viola, so who cares?  I don't see why people expect Boston to finish sixth.  The bottom four teams last year were essentially tied.  Boston, in seventh place, had 73 wins.  The Yankees and Indians, tied for fourth place, had 76 wins.  Now I should think it is obvious that the Red Sox improved more than the Indians or Tigers.  Basically, the Red Sox are stronger this year at 1B, DH, SS, LF, and RF.  They have healthier starting pitchers (so far, at least) and better relievers.  I see no reason why they shouldn't win ~85 games.  Meanwhile, the Indians are in shambles and the Tigers *still* have no pitching.  They will win some 20-3 blowouts, but they will lose an awful lot of 7-5 games too.  *MAYBE* the Sox will play poorly, win 78 games, and finish fifth. But I think third or fourth place is more likely.
In <C5sFvE.Aq@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker) writes:  >We cannot isolate completely, Roger, but we can make a pretty good >estimate. I won't claim to split hairs and say that we can really >measure who was better, Robby Alomar or Carlos Baerga, last year; the >difference is too close to call. But Larkin and Lee? Clemens and >Morris? The differences are too great there.  >In your measure of the game, why should a team that has just won it >all ever replace a single player? Since they are now clearly "best", >how can they do better? Yet every team can always find someplace where >they beleive they can improve the team; they can always find a player >a little better than one they already have. (BTW, by my definitions, >the "best" player is the one who does the most things to help his team >win. I will allow that this could vary depending on who else is on the >team, by having aptitudes one team needs more than others.)  Well then given your definition of "best" is it not conceivable that Alfredo Griffin could bring something to a team that that team needs to win while Larkin might not have that something the team needs? Would Griffin then be better than Larkin?    >Baseball is a team game, but it is made of individual talents. It is >absurd to judge the success or failure of an individual by the success >or failure of his teammates, whom he did not choose (at least in most >cases.) Morris won last year because he played on a team with Joe >Carter, Robby Alomar, Tom Henke, Juan Guzman, John Olerud, et al. >Clemens lost because he was surrounded by such lesser performers as >Herm Winninham, Luis Rivera, and Jeff Reardon. To define the quality >of the team as a sum of its components (as I do, albeit imperfectly) >is a lesser error than defining the quality of an individual as the >mean quality of the team (as my reading of your arguments suggests you >do)  No, I am not trying to define the quality of an individual, at least not for the purpose of ranking them.  Toronto won with Olerud.  They might have won with Fielder.  They might not have won with Thomas.  Detroit might have won with Thomas.  Chicago might have won with Fielder.  You can't rank these individuals.  You can only look at who might contribute more to the team effort, which is winning the WS.  Thomas could not have contributed to that goal any more than Olerud so I cannot say that Olerud is less of a player.    --
In article <C5w2LE.JpK@ucdavis.edu> ez027993@dale.ucdavis.edu (Gary Built   Like Villanueva Huckabay) writes: > (Michael Lurie) The Liberalizer writes: > >> Henderson's stat's are probably closer to DiMaggio's than you > >> think. >  > >Then give me NUMBERS MAN!!!!! > >Winfield could WHIP henderson's butt. >  > Well, you're absolutely, completely dead wrong, but thanks for playing. > As soon as I get to my office, I'll be happy to post Rickey and Dave's > career lines.  Both are very fine players, but Henderson has   consistently > been better. >  > As for Rickey 'slacking' due to his contract problems this year -- any > comments?  Considering he's basically picked up the entire team and put > them on his back, I think he deserves a little slack, and I think he > deserves a 4-year extension at $6M per year.  Quickly. >