waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
mss@netcom.com (Mark Singer) said: >In article <7862@blue.cis.pitt.edu> genetic+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes: > >Well, perhaps if the Braves had no one else worth playing this year it >would be Lopez in there.  But they do have others worth playing, at >least in *their* opinion.    Catcher is their weakest position, with the possible exception of second base. They have a chance to simultaneously replace their biggest offensive problem spot with a well-above-average offensive player *and* acclimate a highly promising potential star with no pressure on him to carry the team, and they want to play *Olson* and *Berryhill* instead?!  >>I disagree, in that I don't think it *is* a _tangible_ skill, any more than >>leadership is.  I don't deny that it is a *real* skill, and that some catchers >>may be much better than others at it, but I really don't see any way that we >>could ever know who they are.  Nichols's Law of Catcher Defense is eerily >>accurate far too often for me to take defensive assessments of catchers very >>seriously. > >Sorry.  New.  Don't know Nichols' Law.    "A catcher's defensive reputation will be inversely proportional to his  recent offensive level of performance."  Thus, Mickey Tettleton goes (in  the media) from being a no-hit defensive whiz to a slugging thumb-finger  in two short years.  The rule doesn't apply to perceived "superstars", who  get the Gold Glove Offensive Transfer effect instead.  Greg Olson is probably  considered to be a good defensive catcher precisely because he can't hit.   >Don't believe in catchers' >era.  But I am interested in pitchers' eras with different catchers.  Aren't they the same thing?  >In other words, we know more than they do, so the only logic behind  >a different decision than we would make must be financial.    Either that or just stupidity.  >I presume >we feel this way about other franchises than Atlanta, no?  Of course.  >>Is it fair to the young players?  No.  Does it make organizational sense?  >>I think it does. > >Well if it does make organizational sense, one can hardly fault them >for their decisions.  I mean, please don't tell me how to run my >business.  Especially when I'm being successful.  One could make the same sort of argument in other cases.  Pete Rose, in pursuing Ty Cobb's record, was a huge gate attraction (and national media magnet).  The Reds made a lot of money off that; they also wasted the prime of Eric Davis.  That may be "good business", but that doesn't mean I don't loathe them for it.
ATTN: Those who live inthe Philadelphia Metro area...  Back in September I was listening to WIP, and I remember the morning guys were talking with Mayor Ed Rendell.  The topic of conversation was a new ball park for the Phillies.  The location for this new park was suggested to be near 30th St Station.  At the time, the mayor was optimisitic that in the future this could become a reality.  Has there been any new news on this subject or is it still a pipe dream? I know the city of Philadelphia has other projects ahead, such as the new convention center and the upcoming Spectrum II.  But it would be nice to see this a reality.  It is planned that the Phillies leave the VET and leave it solely to the Eagles (and if that's the case, the Eagles should make the VET a grass stadium, but that's another story).  I want to see that day!
In <C5HxLK.FIx@andy.bgsu.edu> klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) writes:  >dtate+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes: >> klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) said: >>> >>>I just love how the Alomar fans left RBIs off this list.   >>  >> Of *course* they left RBIs off; we're comparing Alomar the individual with >> Baerga the individual, so only individual stats count.   >>  >>>Give me a break!   >I forgot.  Most runs are scored by players stealing home, so RBI don't >count for anything.  >My mistake.     Oh, oh, we all know what's going to happen now don't we!
Article from as follows >From: bml2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (BRIAN MICHAEL LUCY) >Subject: Re: Let's Talk Phillies >Date: 15 Apr 93 06:29:05 GMT >Organization: Lehigh University >Lines: 9  >In article <Uflkll_00VpcEKW15e@andrew.cmu.edu>, al1x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Amit >Likhy ani) writes: >Excerpts from netnews.rec.sport.baseball: 9-Apr-93 Re: >Let's Talk >Phillies u96_msopher@vaxc.stevens (963) > >> > like this.  Oh >well.  How do we spell CELLAR? > > >>                      p - i - r - a - t >- e - s > >> ` > > >> >NINJA JEW > > >Are there any Philly fans who want to put money on that?   If >not, stop >your woofing.  Ben Rivera got hammered. > True (last week), but >tonight he pitched 6 shutout innings and got 9 runs behind him. THAT'S why >we're 8-1!
In article <1993Apr20.034558.28920@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes: >>Gary Varsho > >Halfway there, and unlikely to make it 3/4 of the way there.  Wait a minute; I could swear that Varsho is white.
In article <1993Apr15.010745.1@acad.drake.edu> sbp002@acad.drake.edu writes: >or second starter.  It seems to me that when quality pitchers take the >mound, the other teams score less runs.  The team that scores the most  >runs wins.  This puts the team with the better pitching at the advantage >(providing they can stop the opposing team from scoring runs).  A low  >scoring game would clearly benefit the Braves.   Not clear to me at all.  I'd certainly rather have a team who was winning 4-1 games than 2-1 games.  In the 2-1 game, luck is going to play a much bigger role than in the 4-1 game.
Why are the Red Sox in first place?  Eight games into the season, they already have two wins each from Clemens and Viola.  Clemens starts again tonight, on three days rest.  What's up?  Are the Sox going with a four-man rotation?  Is this why Hesketh was used in relief last night?  Hm.
In <1r28f6$79f@zippy.telcom.arizona.edu> r4938585@joplin.biosci.arizona.edu (Doug Roberts) writes: [...]  >	Does anyone else out there not like Deon? I think he's all hype. >His .300 season last year was good, but I'm not convinced that he can do >it again. It reminds me (sorry) of the year 1987(?) when Tim Wallach hit >30 or so homers and had 127 RBI. It never even came close to happening  >again. Of course, maybe I just prefer guys who go about their business >and don't play it up for the attention. Just my HO.  Tim Wallach can be explained with the rabbitball.  Deion can be explained as "learning how to play the game".  I'm not betting that Deion will be able to play as well as last year, but I think the odds of Deion playing as well or better than he did last year are better than the odds of Otis Nixon doing the same thing.  When you factor in defense, Otis was more valuable last year.  But I'm not convinced he'll be more valuable this year, and especially next year. --  Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic
In article <C5L9vC.3r6@world.std.com>, Eastgate@world.std.com (Mark Bernstein) says: > >(Which reminds me: do they still serve Kosher hot dogs at the new Comiskey?) >  yup.  with onions, of all things.
In article <1993Apr15.221049.14347@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes: >In article <1qkkodINN5f5@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> pablo@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Pablo A Iglesias) writes: >>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 >>>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.  >>Hank Greenberg would have to be the most famous, because his Jewish >>faith actually affected his play. (missing late season or was it world >>series games because of Yom Kippur)  >The other Jewish HOF'er is Rod Carew (who converted).    Did he ever really convert?  He married a Jewish woman, but I've never heard him say he converted.  Elliot Maddox, on the other hand...  >Lowenstein is Jewish, as well as Montana's only representative to the >major leagues.  >Undeserving Cy Young award winner Steve Stone is Jewish.  Between Stone, >Koufax, Ken Holtzman (? might have the wrong pitcher, I'm thinking of the >one who threw a no-hitter in both the AL and NL), and Big Ed Reulbach, >that's quite a starting rotation.  Moe Berg can catch.  Harry Steinfeldt, >the 3b in the Tinkers-Evers-Chance infield.  Yep, Holtzman.  Saul Rogovin won an ERA title in 1949 or so before blowing out the arm.  >Is Stanky Jewish?  Or is that just a "Dave Cohen" kinda misinterpretation? >Whatever, doesn't look like he stuck around the majors too long.  I'd be surprised.  btw, they may just be shopping Gallego around to make room for AS.
In article <93109.145942IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> Ryan Robbins <IO20456@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> writes:  >Rule 7.09(k) states: "It is interference by a batter or runner when - >in running the last half of the distance from home base to first base >... he runs outside the three-foot line, or inside (to the left of) >the foul line and, in the umpire's judgment, interferes with the field- >er taking the throw at first base..." > >The key word in the rule is "and." A runner isn't out just for running >out of the baseline. He's out for interfering with the fielding of the >ball or throw or fielding of the throw to first. Because the catcher >opted to throw the ball over the batter-runner's head, there's no inter- >ference.  Sorry, I still don't buy it.  You're certainly right that the runner is not out merely for running out of the baseline: he must interfere with the play.  But the argument here is over what constitutes interference. You certainly cannot infer from what you've quoted that the batter-runner must be hit by the ball to be guilty of interference: you haven't posted a definition of interference at all.  IMO this calls for one of the "approved ruling[s]" that go in small print in the rulebook.  Something like:  APPROVED RULING: If in the judgement of the umpire the runner, by running to the left of the allowed path, caused the fielder to make a bad throw, blocks the vision of the fielder receiving the throw, or otherwise impedes the defensive team's making a play on him, the batter-runner shall be judeged guilty of interference.  or  APPROVED RULING: The runner cannot be judged guilty of interference in the unless he makes contact with a fielder or is hit by the thrown ball.  -- In the absence of such an approved ruling I claim that this is a poor rules trivia question--since it cannot be authoritatively answered.
In article <1993Apr15.003015.1@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu>, cvadrnlh@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu writes: >Today (4/14) Cubs activated P Mike Harkey from DL, whom did they move to make >room for Harkey? >Also, are Delino Deshields & John Wetteland of the Expos on the DL? >Thanks for anyone who can give me more info! >/=== >Ken  >Cal Poly, Pomona >  Wetteland is on the DL effective March 26 or something like that.
In article <mjones.735273896@fenway> mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com writes: >fierkelab@bchm.biochem.duke.edu (Eric Roush) writes: >>>(Quick: name a >>>light-hitting black outfielder or 1B who lasted 10+ years in the bigs. >>>I bet you can name two dozen white ones.) >>Otis Nixon.  Stole 300 bases.  (Ok, he's still light-hitting, but baseball managers don't think so, they think he, like Omar Moreno before him, is a perfect leadoff man.  Awesome defense.)  >>Darnell Coles  He's still around because of his 1986, when he hit 20 HR.  >>Henry Cotto  Hasn't played 10+ years in the bigs.  Wasn't a full-time major-leaguer until 1988.  >Manny Mota.  Consistent .300 hitter.  >Billy Hatcher  We'll see if he's still around in 1994 for his tenth year.  >Herm Winningham.  Same goes for Herm.  >Lonnie Smith (not light hitting, but a horror in the field)  Doesn't count then.  >Gary Redus  Redus is hardly light-hitting, plus he stole 300 bases.  Close to 800 OPS career against LHP.  >Dion James  We'll see if he's still around in 1995 to qualify.  >Daryl Boston  Slugged .416 to .440 for three straight years in one of the worst hitters' parks in the NL.  He's going to be one of Colorado's better players this year.  Plus, to make ten you have to count all the time he spent in Denver and Buffalo and Hawaii while with the White Sox.  >Vince Coleman (yeah, he's finally started to have a decent OBP)  Coleman, assuming he makes it to 1994, was never perceived as being weak offensively, though of course he was.  Led NL in SB his first six years in the majors.  >Cecil Espy  We'll see if he's still around in 1997.  >Willie Wilson  Wilson has always been overrated, but hit .300 five times in a six-year stretch and led the league in triples five times.  But we can count him if he's still playing in 1994, though it'll be because he's Otis Nixon deluxe with slightly worse defense.  >Gary Pettis  Okay, if he's in the league this year, he can count, though he's also in the majors because of Otis Nixon syndrome.  >Milt Thompson  He's not spectacular, but he's neither light-hitting nor a ten-year man.  >Gary Varsho  Halfway there, and unlikely to make it 3/4 of the way there.  >OK, I admit to taking a quick browse through the Major League Handbook, but >only after the first 7 or 8. Oh, and there's the all-time light-hitting >black outfielder: Lou Brock. Look it up. And Curt Flood. Cesar Geronimo. >Cesar Cedeno.   Brock suffered from Otis Nixon disease, but he wasn't perceived as light-hitting.  Neither was Curt Flood.  Cesar Cedeno was *not* light- hitting.  >>Note:  These guys may not have reached 10 years yet, but they've got >>to be close. > >Likewise for my list. Oh, and a prediction: Milt Cuyler.  He'll have to steal a lot more bases.
In article <1993Apr19.024222.11181@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs902043@ariel.yorku.ca (SHAWN LUDDINGTON) writes: } In article <1993Apr18.032345.5178@cs.cornell.edu> tedward@cs.cornell.edu (Edward [Ted] Fischer) writes: } >In article <1993Apr18.030412.1210@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes: } >>Howard_Wong@mindlink.bc.ca (Howard Wong) writes: } >> } >>>Has Jack lost a bit of his edge? What is the worst start Jack Morris has had? } >> } >>Uh, Jack lost his edge about 5 years ago, and has had only one above } >>average year in the last 5. } > } >Again goes to prove that it is better to be good than lucky.  You can } >count on good tomorrow.  Lucky seems to be prone to bad starts (and a } >bad finish last year :-). } > } >(Yes, I am enjoying every last run he gives up.  Who was it who said } >Morris was a better signing than Viola?) }  } Hey Valentine, I don't see Boston with any world series rings on their } fingers.  oooooo. cheap shot. :^)  } Damn, Morris now has three and probably the Hall of Fame in his  } future.  who cares? he had two of them before he came to Toronto; and if the Jays had signed Viola instead of Morris, it would have been Frank who won 20 and got the ring. and he would be on his way to 20 this year, too.  } Therefore, I would have to say Toronto easily made the best  } signing.  your logic is curious, and spurious.  there is no reason to believe that Viola wouldn't have won as many games had *he* signed with Toronto. when you compare their stupid W-L records, be sure to compare their team's offensive averages too.   now, looking at anything like the Morris-Viola sweepstakes a year later is basically hindsight. but there were plenty of reasons why it should have been apparent that Viola was the better pitcher, based on previous recent years and also based on age (Frank is almost 5 years younger! how many knew that?). people got caught up in the '91 World Series, and then on Morris' 21 wins last year. wins are the stupidest, most misleading statistic in baseball, far worse than RBI or R. that he won 21 just means that the Jays got him a lot of runs.  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?  } 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?
In article <C5Ky58.12KD@austin.ibm.com>, marc@yogi.austin.ibm.com (Marc J. Stephenson) writes... >In article <1993Apr15.234838.4138@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_millerwl@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes: >>WHO THINKS THE ASTROS ARE GOING PLACES??? >>THEY'RE CURRENTLY FIRST PLACE. >>THEY'RE 5-4, 5-1 ON THE ROAD!  >  >I AGREE, LUMBERJACK (except that they're in 2nd)!  They ARE going PLACES - >San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Cincinnati, Denver, Atlanta, Miami, >Philadelphia, New York, Montreal, Pittsburgh, Chicago, St. Louis...and >points in between.  :-) >  >But, >THEY'RE 0-3 AT HOME!  But,  THEY FACED THE PHILLIES -- A TEAM THAT GOT OFF TO AN 8-1 START.   >  >I'm just not used to an overly enthusiastic Houston fan.  I really shouldn't >discourage it, so HANG IN THERE, LUMBERJACK!  (But, get ahold of that shift >key, will ya?) >  >ObBase:  Apparently the new owner (Drayton McLain (sp?)) doesn't particularly >like excuses.  An item in our paper (the Austin American-Statesman - "If you >read it here, it was somewhere else first") said that he wouldn't take  >injuries as an excuse for losing because that possibility should have been >accounted for.  Uh, oh.  I don't want an owner that'll keep everybody on >edge - I'd never gotten that feeling about him, but who knows?  Does      To be honest, I think the city of Houston loves the new owner.  He has brought baseball back to Houston with key acquisitions -- players that were from the Houston area and wanted to play for the Astros.  I don't think that too many people are fearful that McLane will meddle in the team as he has already admitted that he doesn't know a whole lot about baseball. McLane is a businessman, and doesn't like excuses.  He makes a valid point that injuries shouldn't be an excuse to this club.  Look at the depth of the bench this season.. Canadele can play 7 positions; Bass and James are solid outfielders and can hit well too; Uribe is nice to have as well..  The pitching staff has 6 legitimate starters.  We're dealing with a young Houston team, so injuries shouldn't play a big role.  The only threat is the bullpen -- if Jonesy goes out, we may be in trouble but with the type of starters we have this season, there is less pressure on the pen.
Im trying to find a site that has UPDATED(daily) stats more the 	National league. I'll take both leagues but I'm really interested in the 	National league.
In article <1993Apr20.102857.1@tesla.njit.edu>, drm6640@tesla.njit.edu wrote: >  > DON MATTINGLY IS THE BEST FIRST BASEMAN IN THE HISTORY OF BASEBALL.....ALWAYS > HAS BEEN.....ALWAYS WILL BE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Actually, Keith Hernandez is the best.                                      -Sean
If there is a "USA Today ftp site" could someone please post it to the     newsgroup so everyone will stop posting the "send it to me too" articles.    I'm sure many people woulds like to know so why not just post it to the net    rather than mailing hundreds of people.      Just a thought.        Thanks,    Ryan Robin.
In article <C5sMzy.BDE@ra.nrl.navy.mil>, klinker@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Klinker) says: > > >DJ was a popular player in San Diego, Derek Bell was not faring well in the >clubhouse at Toronto, so no matter how bad he looks now I still think it >was a steal for the Jays just from the perspective of team chemistry. >No statistic can describe it (sorry statheads) and since there are so many >new faces in the clubhouse I think the Jays are still trying to find it. > >(Insert the same comment into the Jack Morris v. Clemens WS Ring string) >   I laugh at you now, and I will laugh at you again, equally publicly, when the Jays finish third due to the severe depletion of their talent. I think Bill James put it best (about Sparky Anderson, _Abstract_ 1983):  "There are a million guys in this country with great attitudes, but there are only about five hundred who can play a major league brand of baseball; which are you going to take?"
|> >In article <1993Apr19.024222.11181@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca> cs902043@ariel.yorku.ca (SHAWN LUDDINGTON) writes: |>  |> > |> Where did Acker get a ring from?  I would have to say that they are about |> even.  |>  I believe Acker got a ring from his wife when they were married    |>  |> >the Blue Jays had such a strong offense?  Don't tell me that Morris has this |> >magical ability to cause the offensive players to score more runs. |>   I don't know why you guys keep bickering about Morris. The stats show he is a mediocre pitcher at best (this year is another case), he just happened to win 21 games. I saw many of his games last year, he did pitch some good games. But this crap about being a clutch pitcher is nonsense, he was  constantly giving up go ahead runs in the 6-8th innings (the clutch innings) and the Jays would somehow scrape a win for him. Another major factor in his 21 wins, is that Cito 'I dont realize i have a bullpen' Gaston would leave Morris in for ever, therefore giving him many more chances to win games (i believe this is the major reason he won 21 games last year).   Barry Walker BNR  Ottawa Canada
Robert C Hite writes > Here are the projected lineups, benches, rotation and bullpen for > the 1993 National League East Champion Philadelphia Phillies:  I think the only Phillies in effect here are Philly Blunts.  Of course, if this   all becomes true, I'll be the first to smoke one myself.
In article <34592@oasys.dt.navy.mil> odell@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Bernard O'farmer by the'Dell) writes: >Being an old time Cardinal Fan-now relocated to the NVA area-I can >recall that Harry was not at all "popular" with old man Busch, who, >as I understand it, fired him and kicked him out of St. Louis. > >I am not quite sure of the reasons, but the old man was certainly >not "enraptured" by ole Harry.    But maybe his wife was :-)     I don't claim to know whether it's true or not, but a couple different people (totally unrelated) have said Harry was 'relieved' of his duties because he had more than platonic relations with Augie Busch's wife. Judgement is left to the individual, cuz I sure don't claim to be an impeachable source in this case.
In article 1@acad.drake.edu, sbp002@acad.drake.edu () writes: >Does anyone know the status of Jeffries or Arocha?
The Royals are darkness.  They are the void of our time. When they play, shame descends upon the land like a cold front from Canada.   They are a humiliation to all who have lived and all who shall ever live.   They are utterly and completely doomed.  Other than that, I guess they're OK.  --
In article <1993Apr20.062222.9960@bnlux1.bnl.gov> kyee@bnlux1.bnl.gov (kenton yee) writes: >>phisto.gatech.edu> tmiller@cimmeria.gatech.edu (Thomas Miller) writes: >>>  Does anyone else think that this weekend's four-game series was a >>>really strange one? >  >yup, I was wondering the whole time why the Braves most  						    ^^^^ >talented outfielder, Neon Deon, was not starting?  Here's   ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ 	Whoa. Aren't you forgetting a couple of guys named Gant and Justice?  >a guy who can hit .300, 20+ hrs, lead-off, and steal 40+   	He can lead off. He'll probably steal 40. He might hit .300. He'll never hit 20+ homers. I think you went 2 for 4 on this one.   >bases... and they start guys like Nixon and Bream ahead >of him!   I can't really see that advantage of Nixon >over Deon except that Nixon is a better defensive outfielder.   		       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 	You said it all right there.   	Does anyone else out there not like Deon? I think he's all hype. His .300 season last year was good, but I'm not convinced that he can do it again. It reminds me (sorry) of the year 1987(?) when Tim Wallach hit 30 or so homers and had 127 RBI. It never even came close to happening  again. Of course, maybe I just prefer guys who go about their business and don't play it up for the attention. Just my HO.  Doug Roberts - Larry Walker is God. Delino Deshields thinks he is.