waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
Heard minutes ago on KOA radio, Denver.  Nolan Ryan to have arthroscopic on a knee, and to miss 2 - 5 weeks.  Rockies (Nied) lead Mets (Gooden) 4 - 0 in 7th. All runs in first inning.
Can anyone out there tell me why they call left-handed pitchers "Southpaw"?  Also the story on how the term originated.  Thanks!!    Go Cubs!
Does anyone have a list of Vegas odds for teams making the World Series?  I'd appreciate a mailing.  Thanks,
On a cold, damp night last night at Tiger Stadium, Dave Wells, David Haas, Bob  MacDonald, and Mike Henneman combined for a 3-1 victory over the Texas Rangers.  Here are the highlights:               R     H     E Texas       1     4     1 Detroit     3     5     0  Wells gets the win, he's now 3-0 with an ERA just under 1, and Henneman gets his third save in three chances.  Ken Rogers started for the Rangers and  gets the loss.  He was relieved by Burns in the 7th.  The Rangers got their only run on a solo home run by Dean Palmer in the 7th. The Tigers opened the scoring with an RBI single by Fryman in the 3rd, then took the lead for good in the bottom of the seventh when Whitaker greeted reliever Burns with an RBI double which scored Tettleton.  Whitaker in turn crossed the plate on an RBI single by Phillips (who has been red hot) for  the third Tiger run.  This afternoon, it's another battle of southpaws, Bill Krueger for the Tigers vs. Craig Lefferts for the Rangers.  --Randy
Ladies and gentleman,  	Step one was taken on the Phils' triumphant trip this year tonight!  			(Yes, that was English!)  	Mulholland's ERA after tonight's game? 0.00...nice try Drabek!
In article <05APR93.13661642.0023@lafibm.lafayette.edu>, VB30@lafibm.lafayette.edu (VB30) writes: |> Does anyone know where I can get a list of nationally televised |> games, such as ESPN and TBS?  I live on the East coast and I'd |> like to catch as many Giants games as I possibly can!  This list is published every week in Baseball Weekly. --  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Brian Curran                 Mead Data Central              brian@meaddata.com
In article <franjion.735593116@spot.Colorado.EDU> franjion@spot.Colorado.EDU (John Franjione) writes: } dietz@parody.Data-IO.COM (Kent Dietz) writes: }  } >Oh, yea, and Chris Bosio pitched a NO-HITTER.  One over the minimum, two }  } Have there ever been any other no-hitters in Mariner history?  Randy Johnson, June 2, 1990 against the Tigers.
As a Philly fan as as a Penna. baseball fan, I'm anxious to see the Penna. series.  Anyone know when it starts and where the first games will be played?  This is (I think) always good baseball (to me); and the Pirates are also off to a good start.
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. > >First, the pleasant: > >	1)Spike Owen.  All through spring training, this guy was  >	  looking like the second coming of Mike Gallego, but with >	  even worse hitting. Now the guy is third in the major leagues >	  in BA, and he's ranked pretty high in total hits and runs >	  scored. I know it's still early in the season, but he and  >	  Pat Kelly (more on him in a minute) have provided a lot of  >	  spark at the bottom of the order that's given the big guys >	  (Mattingly, Tartabull, O'Neill) plenty of RBI opportunities. >	  Let's hope he keeps this up. > >	2)Pat Kelly. The guy is finally showing some of the ability >	  that led Stick Michael to label him a "star for the 90s". >	  I wouldn't go that far, but Kelly looks infinitely improved >	  at bat (I guess the tips he took from Boggs in spring training >	  really paid off. Huh! And here I thought Boggs would never >	  do anything to help anybody besides himself!). And his glove, >	  like always, has been terrific (he and Mattingly comprise the >	  best defensive right side of the infield in all of baseball IMHO). > >	3)Paul O'Neill. We had to get rid of Roberto Kelly, partly  >	  because he was under too much pressure in NY to be the next >	  Barry Bonds (he won't do that in Cincy, either), and partly >	  because he had this real unprofessional tendency to give up >	  in the second half of the year. I just felt that we could've >	  gotten more for him than O'Neill. Well, so far, O'Neill is >	  turning out just fine. He looks like he should be able to >	  duplicate (if not surpass) Mel Hall's numbers from last year, >	  and he keeps opposing pitchers from pitching around Tartabull. >	  Now, if only Buck would play him against lefties some more to  >	  see what he can do! > >	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. > >	5)Key. What's going on here? Key was just supposed to provide >	  the rotation with some stability (you know, shore up the left >	  side, provide experience, get maybe 15 wins), and here this guy >	  is *dominating* everybody he faces! Who needs Maddux or Cone (0-2)? >	  I'll take Key any day. > >And now, the not so pleasant surprises: > >	1)Spike Owen. Sure, he's hitting like crazy, but the guy *cannot* >	  field to save his life! And they said he was brought in to >	  provide defense? Velarde, Stankiewicz, and even Silvestri >	  are better defensively than Owen.
hmm - i thought francesca's predictions ALWAYS hovered at or below  .500, especially in the nfl.  (not counting college football  bowl day).  he's a nice analyst for explaining past tense, and for mapping out  what plays teams might do - but for predicting the future, he only  looks good whne compared to russo.
How about changing team names! Post your choices!  Here I'll start: How about the  Baltimore Baseblazers San Francisco Quakes
In article <1993Apr17.212119.13901@coe.montana.edu> warped@cs.montana.edu (Doug Dolven) writes: > >Has anyone heard anything about Mel Hall this season?  I'd heard he wasn't >with the Yankees any more.  What happened to him? > >				Doug Dolven  Mel is alive and well and playing in Japan. (The Yanks let him go because he was asking for too much money, and because they thought that they were going to get Barry Bonds, making Hall obsolete. Oopsie! Well, at least they got O'Neill to replace the Mel-man).   --I'm outta here like Vladimir! -Alan
Went to the Dodgers game tonight -- it was cap night.   Astacio pitched ok, but had control trouble all night. In the first, he walked a batter, balked him to second, then a single scored the run, with the batter taking second on the throw home.  Another single made the score 2-0 Cards.   Lasorda tried a new line up featuring Butler, Reed, And Piazza batting third!  Darryl and Eric were benched in favor of Snyder and Webster.   Piazza homered in the first to make the score 2-1 Cards. The Dodgers tied the game in the second on a two out single by Offerman.   By the fourth inning, Astacio had already made about 80 pitches, but the score was still 2-2.  The Dodger defense made SEVERAL impressive plays.  Piazza looked GREAT behind the plate, gunning down a runner trying to steal second, throwing a runner out at first who had strayed a bit from first base, etc.   Karros also made a spectacular play, keeping a ball from going into the outfield.  The runner on first was so sure that ball was going through, he just kept running past second.  Karros got up and threw to third and EASILY got the runner at third.   My heart sank in the 7th when Gross got up to warm up in the bullpen.   Astacio was lifted for a pinch hitter, and when Gross entered the game with the score still 2-2, Dodger fans just KNEW it was over.   Gross was relieving because he stunk on Tuesday, pitching just 2 1/3 innings, forcing Lasorda to use much of his bullpen.  The 15 inning game had the same effect the next night...so only Gross was fresh given his light work out Tuesday.   Gross lived up to his name.  He walked the first batter, gave up a hit to the second, and walked the bases loaded.  After a grounder resulted in a force at home, Zeile lifted a scoring fly ball to make it 3-2 Cards.  Gross paid little attention to the runners, and the next thing you knew, the Cards had stolen a fourth run.  The runner on first was eventually tagged out in the run down, but the 4th run had scored long before that.   Meanwhile, the Dodgers mounted little offense after the second inning. Lee Smith pitched the ninth.  He had little trouble getting Karros and Wallach (does anyone have trouble with Wallach these days?). Cory Snyder collected his first hit as a Dodger, a single, but that was all the offense the Dodgers could mount.  Smith got his third straight save against the Dodgers and all I got was my free Dodger cap and a good look at Piazza.  If Piazza keeps this up all year, he will be a strong candidate for rookie of the year honors.  Though its really early, Karros is already showing signs of a sophomore jinx year.   The final score...Cardinals 4 runs on 7 hits. Dodgers 2 runs on 7 hits.
In article <93108.1841463321628@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <3321628@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes: >Why are we continuously putting down other universities? Queen's is not >as great as is makes itself out to be. This place has only got a good rep >because it's been here so long. If someone would take the time to look around >and see how dissatisfied people are with the disorganization and the constant >misuse of the Bell Curve they could see that Queen's needs some major >improvements. I would personally start with hiring professors who can >actually teach, not people who are here with the attitude that this place >would be okay if it wasn't for all the students running around.
In article <C5wEwD.Kto@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> drw3l@delmarva.evsc.Virginia.EDU (David Robert Walker) writes: >In article <9729@blue.cis.pitt.edu> dtate+@pitt.edu (David M. Tate) writes:  >>Winfield can't touch Frank Robinson or Mel Ott, as far as I can tell.   >>You'd also have a hard time convincing me to rate him better than or >>equal to Clemente.    >Two sets of numbers; career equivalent average and equivalent runs > >1. Ruth     .377, 2721 >2. Aaron    .318, 2808 >3. Ott      .318, 2197 >4. Robinson .313, 2245  >7. Clemente .289, 1745 >8. Winfield .288, 1921 > >Ruth is in a class by himself for both rate (eqa) and total (eqr) >performance, Aaron runs over everybody in the total category. Ott and >Robinson, who lead Winfield in both categories, could be safely put >ahead of ahead of him. Reggie too, although he is barely ahead. These >numbers are normalized for league and park. Clemente is held down by >some really anemic offensive production in his earliest years, and was >still productive when he died; it is reasonably safe to assume he had >150-200 runs more he could have gotten. Still, Jackson, Waner, >Clemente, and Winfield form a pretty tight knot.   Yes, but  	(a) we were talking about peak level, not career averages and 	(b) Clemente was the best fielding RF of all time, as far 	    as anyone can tell  I did a quick scan last night, looking for players with a peak comparable to or better than Winfield.  In my quick-n-dirty subjective judgement, you could make good cases for Ruth, Aaron, Ott, Robinson, Clemente, Kaline,  Maris, Klein, Jackson, Waner, and probably a few others.  This is not a knock on Winfield, but a comment on his consistency: all of those other players had awesome stretches and very good stretches, while Winfield has been more uniformly excellent.  Hall of Fame?  Absolutely.  Top-10 peak? I'm not so sure.  Top 10 total career value?  Yes, almost certainly.
I heard they were posted somewhere, but I can not find them.  Please e-mail location.  Thanks, 	-Jody  --  Jody Hagins -- hagins@avlin8.us.dg.com Data General Corporation, Linthicum, MD
I had heard the rumors about LA, Cin, Hou, and SD all being interested in Mark Davis, so it doesn't surprise me that a team had to give up something and cash to actually get him.  Lynch "MOB"
kingoz@camelot.bradley.edu (Orin Roth) writes:  >   Well, my guess is because America loves underdogs. Every year, no matter >   the Cubs' talent or the predictions, they never (as close to never as >   possible) win anything. Over the years, as the losing has mounted, America >   has fallen in love with these perennial losers. The Cubs have more fans >   in Chicago then some teams do worldwide. The Cubs have more fans  >   worldwide than most of the teams in their division combined.  >   An aura of excitement surrounds the Cubs at the beginning of the season >   like no one else. (including the WS champs) It must be that Eternal Hope.  Actually I admired the spirit of the fan at the Cubs opener several years ago who held up a sign that said "Wait Till Next Year".
mikef@bvc.edu writes: >In article <1993Apr23.135139.18749@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>, cs902060@ariel.yorku.ca (GEOFFREY E DIAS) writes: >> 	The subject line says it all. What is the rule that qualifies >> a pitcher as making a save? >IMHO this is the most untrustworthy, silly stat, by today's rules, in all  >of baseball.  My understanding is to qualify as a save a pitcher cannot  >pitch more than three innings and the potential tying run must at least  >appear in the on-deck circle.  Also, the lead a pitcher enters with cannot  >excede three runs.  This is a phenomenon known around work as ready-fire-aim. I am astounded at the number of times people post strong opinions about things they not only don't understand but publicly admit to not understanding. In fact, there's a plausible argument that saves are a more rational stat than wins.  For the record, there are two ways that a reliever can get a save: He must finish the game and either 1. have entered the game with the tying run on base, at bat, or on deck. 2. have pitched at least three innings effectively. A pitcher may not get a win and a save in the same game.  >I believe that the official scorers must assert more of their authority in  >determining winners/savers/etc.  For instance, a pitcher can come in in the  >ninth with a lead, blow the lead, fall behind, have his team come back in  >the next half inning and earn the win.  Has this pitcher earned a win, no  >way.  But this is an argument that *wins* is a dumb stat, not saves.  >I guy could pitch five strong innings of middle relief and see his  >teammates rally to tie the score.  Assume he came in to start the fourth  >and left after the eighth.  His teammate holds the opposition scoreless in  >the ninth and they score a run in the bottom of the ninth to win.  The  >third pitcher earns the win and the middle reliever gets no "stat"  >satisfaction.  This again doesn't support your claim about saves at the beginning of your post.    Mike Jones | AIX High-End Development | mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com
> That's a joke!  (Alomar might not be a gold-glover, but he's certainly > no worse than Baerga defensively.) Actually Alomar is a two-time gold-glover (91-92).  >  > -Valentine
In a previous article, steinman@me.utoronto.ca (David Steinman) says:  >cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (OrioleFan@uiuc) writes: > >>	The defenition of the Underdog is a team that has no talent and comes >>out of nowhere to contend.  The '69 Mets and '89 Orioles are prime examples, >>not the Cubs.  > >Sorry, but it is *virtually* impossible to win a division with "no talent" >over 162 games. > >I would amend your definition to: > >underdog:  a team expected to lose, but which wins thanks to underestimated >           talent. >-- >Dave! >  OK, the Mets and O's are good examples, but what about the '90 Reds?  Do you really think that anyone expected them to sweep the A's?  I know people who didn't even think they'd win a game, let alone win the Series.  We proved  them wrong, though, didn't we?  As for this year, ignore their record now.  They've had a rocky start, and that has nothing to do with Colorado.  They shall rise again.  The hunt for a Reds' October continues. (with all due respect to WLW)  Bye.
A few weeks ago I posted about the Phillies team personalities.  Did anyone see the ESPN feature on the Phils on Monday Night.  John Kruk had a great line.  He was talking about people on the team always playing and not sitting out because of a minor injury.  He said if they do they know we'll kick their ass.  The  time I saw in was in the afternoon and it was not bleeped.  When I saw it at they bleeped "ass."  Mitch Williams talked about the team being a bunch of  throwaways from other teams, and that is why they are so close.  Kruk said that they all get along this year.  Last year, he said, they hated the pitchers.  I  assume he was joking, but he always keeps a straight face when he talks.  Oh, What a team!!!!!  Rob Koffler
In <1qvag7INNsvo@lynx.unm.edu> kbos@carina.unm.edu (K. Mitchell Bose) writes:  >In article <1993Apr19.214008.8199@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca> maynard@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Roger Maynard) writes: >> >>>Manuel Lee is better than Jeff Blauser. >> >>Again, if you had Lee on your team last year you would be wearing a ring >>this year. >> >Er..no.  Er..yes.  If Manny Lee was on your team last year, your team would have been the Toronto Blue Jays.  >_My_ team is the Albuquerque Leftturns.  If Manny Lee were on my team, I would >not be wearing a ring.  Nor would he.  If, however, I were on Manny Lee's team,  Again.  If Manny Lee was on your team last year your team would not have been the Albuquerque Leftturns.  It would have been the Toronto Blue Jays.  >the Toronto Blue Jays, I might well be wearing a ring.  (Not that that's such >a big deal...everybody got a WS ring from the Jays win.)  That's the whole point isn't it?  Clemens didn't get a ring but Morris did.  >In the same way, the Blue Jays did not win because Jack Morris was on the team. >Jack Morris won because he was on the Blue Jays.  It was a team effort, not >an individual one.  Exactly.  And Morris was part of the team.  Would the Jays have won with  Clemens?  We will never know.  But we do know that the Jays won with Morris. So how could you possibly say that Clemens had a better year?  No pitcher in baseball could have had a better year than Morris had last year.   --
In article <1993Apr22.025018.23003@Princeton.EDU> roger@crux.Princeton.EDU   (Roger Lustig) writes: > In article <1993Apr21.202344.14524@alleg.edu> luriem@alleg.edu(Michael   Lurie) The Liberalizer writes: > >In article <1r3dln$oqm@transfer.stratus.com>   > >jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann) writes: > >> In article <1993Apr20.202808.11395@alleg.edu>   > >> luriem@alleg.edu(Michael Lurie) The Liberalizer writes: >  > >> > Very interesting, Gehrig below bonds and schmidt. RICKY HENDERSON?   > >> He   > >> > could steal bases, but his hitting stats are not even close to   > >> dimmagio's. > >> > uhhhh. Where is Winfield? >  > >> Henderson's stat's are probably closer to DiMaggio's than you > >> think. >  > >Then give me NUMBERS MAN!!!!! >  > >Winfield could WHIP henderson's butt. >  > At what?  >  > Basestealing? Not.  Henderson's all-time leader, and is good for about > 170 runs worth of SB lifetime.  Winfield is about 800 SB behind, and  > has a net 10 runs. >  > On-base average?  Winfield's best year (1984) was .397, nine points > below Henderson's *lifetime* OBA.  Lifetime, the diff is 47 points. >  > Slugging?  Winfield by 40 points.   >  > They're both good OFs, though Winfield looks better with his huge > bod. >  > Winfield's best year: 1979.  308/396/558.  Henderson: 1990.    325/441/577. > TB III gives Henderson a Total Player Rating of 67, Winfield of 40. > They have Rickey as a much better fielder, which I don't buy; but > Henderson is simply the best leadoff hitter of all time, and Winfield > isn't the best anything of all time.
In article <1993Apr23.151050.8995@sctc.com> macomber@sctc.com (Chuck Macomber) writes:   > >Wednesday's game marked the first opposing left-handed starting pitcher for the >Twins this year (Rickey Bones).       Nice post Chuck, but you made just one mistake. Bones is a right-handed    pitcher. However, Hrbek's grand slam came off Graehme Lloyd, a lefty.
In <randall.734911319@moose> randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea) writes:  >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.  	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.  Never mind that Gubizca is 0-2 with a 16.50 ERA, Gardner at 7.50, our main recent acquisitions (Lind, McReynolds, Jose) are averaging .210, David Cone is 0-2 (about how he was doing in KC before joining the Mets  several years ago), our hitting sucks, and our pitching has collapsed,  and we've won one game at home; they've won more games in their first ten games than last year, and Brian McRae is actually batting over the  Mendoza line!
cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (OrioleFan@uiuc) writes:  >	The defenition of the Underdog is a team that has no talent and comes >out of nowhere to contend.  The '69 Mets and '89 Orioles are prime examples, >not the Cubs.   Sorry, but it is *virtually* impossible to win a division with "no talent" over 162 games.  I would amend your definition to:  underdog:  a team expected to lose, but which wins thanks to underestimated            talent.
In article <1993Apr15.093231.5148@news.yale.edu> (Steve Tomassi) writes:  >Honestly, Ozzie Smith and Robin Yount don't belong there. They're both > >shortstops that just hung around for a long time. Big deal.  Are you for real?  How many Gold Gloves does Ozzie Smith have?  If a guy hung around and hit 30 homers a year for 15 years, wouldn't he be a given for the Hall?  Is defense not just as important?  And if Robin Yount couldn't hit, why would he have stuck around long enough to get 3,000 hits?  Are you saying 3,000 hits is a fluke?  3,000 hits is no big deal?    >     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 >something > >isn't done, there will be little prestige in the Hall of Fame anymore. When > >certain individuals believe that Steve Garvey or Jack Morris are potential > >candidates, the absurdity is apparent. Gee, can these guys even compare to I agree, Garvey and Morris don't deserve it.   >the more likely future Hall of Famers like Kirby Puckett or Nolan Ryan?  Well, based on your argument, Nolan Ryan doesn't deserve the Hall of Fame.  He is just a right hander who stuck around for a long time and could throw hard.  Very few 20 game winning seasons, lots of losing seasons, lots of walks.  No Cy Young awards.  How does Nolan Ryan compare to a guy like Steve Carlton who dominated 5 or 6 Major League seasons, won 7 divisons, 2 World Series, and won half of his teams games in 1972?  He doesn't compare.  Not even close.
The subject line says it all. What is the rule that qualifies a pitcher as making a save?
In article <1993Apr14.222601.21160@cabell.vcu.edu> csc2imd@cabell.vcu.edu (Ian M. Derby) writes:   > > >After reading my local paper today, I found out that the Phillies >started the 1964 season at 10-2.  I am not as old as 1964, but I've >heard many talk about the serious choke job the Phillies did that >season. They were ahead of the Cardinals by 15 games that season in >mid-August.  They managed to lose a bunch from then on and the >Cardinals took the division.  15!!! games ahead and lost it.... I >hope this season is MUCH different. >