waashk/20ng huggingface dataset:
In article <C5w7zo.5xL@eskimo.com> stevet@eskimo.com (Steven Thornton) writes: [stuff deleted] >Mattingly scores badly on both counts. He doesn't get to very many >balls, and he lets a lot of balls go through. The fact that he "looks >smooth", "has great hands", and makes few errors means NOTHING. This is >traditional brainless reliance on observations that can easily be >misled. Like a lot of bad fielders, Mattingly actually makes himself >look better by not having any range. He's nowhere near as bad as Steve >Garvey, but that's not much of a compliment.   I agree with the flavor of this post, but disagree with one specific argument.  That "has great hands" means nothing.  It seems to me that a first-baseman's defensive value is not entirely (or even primarily) from his ability to field grounders or catch popups.  How many such chances does he get during a game?  Many fewer than he gets chances to catch throws from 2B,SS,3B and P (I mean the total of these is much higher than Grounder/Popup totals).  This implies to me that there is value in catching these throws well, even if they are high, up-the-line or in the dirt.  "Good Hands" are needed for such plays, and thus have value.  I don't have any numbers for the relative number of occurences of these plays, but I'd guess that the values of these abilities are similar.  It's just like: you don't judge catcher's defense primarily on how they field bunts and popups. (But not as marked I suppose).
And then cjkuo@symantec.com (Jimmy Kuo) quoth: >Does it strike anyone else how silly it is to impose a 3 game suspension on  >Morris? > >"Let's see...  I expect to be back June 15th.  How many games do we play  >before June 15th?  Take me off the DL 3 games before June 15th." > >It would be a lot more meaningful if the suspension went into effect some  >number of games after he came back.  Well, either way, the Reds have to play a man down for 3 days.
Once again, the Rockies bullpen fell apart.  Andy Ashby pitched six (somewhat shaky) innings giving up just one run.  Then game the dreaded relief.  Three picthers combined to give up 3 runs (one each I believe) in the 7th inning and blew the save opportunity.  (Final was 4-2 vs Expos).  Despite their problems in the pen, I think the Rockies are a team that wont be taken lightly.  Going into today's game, the had the league's leading hitter and RBI man (Galarraga), two of the leaders in stolen bases (Young and Cole) and increasingly strong starting pitching. --  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Rex Wood -- davewood@cs.colorado.edu -- University of Colorado at Boulder
In <C5sysG.KAD@odin.corp.sgi.com> luigi@sgi.com (Randy Palermo) writes:  >In article <13586@news.duke.edu> fierkelab@bchm.biochem.duke.edu (Eric Roush) writes: [...] >> >>When Gant turned away, Hirschbeck IMMEDIATELY motioned for Gant >>to step into the box.  IMO, at this point in time, Hirschbeck >>was determined to show Gant exactly WHO was in charge of this game. >>Gant wasn't dawdling; he hadn't had a chance to dawdle.  And Hirschbeck >>was simply exercising a power play.  Gant resisted, as many of >>us might to what we thought was an unreasonable request, and >>Hirschbeck called for the pitch.  At that point, Cox came out on >>the field, the pitch was thrown, and many other Braves left the >>dugout.  Cox was tossed "protecting his player".  I was pleasantly >>surprised that Gant kept his cool enough to stay in the game. >> >Did you see the same game I saw? Gant, most reasonable, argued a >horrible call which Hirschbeck, correctly, did nothing about. Gant >then proceeded to walk halfway to 3rd base, lean on his bat and >glare at Hirschbeck. While I don't necessasarily subscribe to the >theory of showing people up, this was an obvious attempt by Gant to >do so to Hirschbeck. He left Hirschbeck no choice but to take control >of the situation. The bottom line is: Gant started a dangerous >power struggle with Hirschbeck when his team needed him most and >he lost.  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] 6)  Gant ignores Hirschbeck and walks off. [bad move] 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) 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. --  Dale J. Stephenson |*| (steph@cs.uiuc.edu) |*| Baseball fanatic
Could some kind soul out there e-mail me the 411 on where I can find the mlb.c   program?  I'm interested in some road trips this year....
In article <1pqvusINNmjm@crcnis1.unl.edu> horan@cse.unl.edu (Mark Horan) writes: >Sandberg is not particulary known for his stolen bases.  What competition did  >Alomar have?  Sandberg came in a year after Ripken, and the same year as Boggs, >Gwynn, and the other magicians.  So less attention was given to Sandberg.  >Alomar is the only one in his class to be worth a mediocre.  Besides the  >numbers don't count.  National league pitchers are much better pitchers.   You're right: Thomas, Gonzalez, Sheffield, and Griffey don't even begin to compare with Ripken, Boggs, and Gwynn, so no wonder Alomar gets so much attention.  Sandberg got no attention his rookie year because his rookie year was terrible.  So was his sophomore year.  National League pitchers are "much better pitchers"?  That certainly explains Sheffield's 1993, hm?  Are you confusing "have ERA's that are 0.40 lower because they don't face DH's" with "much better"?
In article <1993Apr20.033504.13966@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) writes: >Uh, Bill James doesn't sell statistics.  He sells books with statistics, >but he is not in the business of providing stats like Elias, STATS, >Howe, Baseball workshop etc. are.  Bill James is, however, very closely tied to STATS.
In article <14APR199316550695@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu> hasch@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu (Bruce M Hasch) writes: >In article <1993Apr14.193114.2328@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, paula@koufax.cv.hp.com (Paul Andresen) writes... >>I feel as if I might be causing some bad karma by doing this, but I just have >>to know...... >>  >>Is the Ack man still in organized baseball?  > >	Glad you asked!!  The Ack-man, and nine of his relatives, are currently >impersonating the Baltimore Orioles pitching staff.  Personally, I believe  >that the Evil Ackers kidnapped the real O's staff, and are currently in the >process of impersonating Mussina, Sutcliffe, McDonald, Olson.   	No, no no. The Ack man is apparently an alien life-form, much like the pod people from planet Mars, who can take on any form (the ability remains the same, however). The Ack-people have been spotted on many teams to date, but it appears that the Orioles staff (mentioned above) and the Expos bullpen (Barnes, Walton, Fassero, Gardiner and Rojas) have been the prime target. Apparently John Wetteland was roughed up by the Ack-people during spring training due to the fact that his system rejected the takeover, and has been on the DL ever since. Contact the authorities! This evil plot must be stopped! (the Ack-people can keep Jack Morris and Juan Guzman, though. I enjoy watching Toronto fans suffer too much to want these guys returned to normal ;-)  Scot.   --  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Scot Hughes        | Department of Chemical Engineering | Expos in '93! falcon@cs.mcgill.ca| McGill University, Montreal, Quebec| {witty saying here}
In article <1qmrciINNoin@gap.caltech.edu> shippert@cco.caltech.edu (Tim Shippert) writes: [about the infield fly rule] >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.   > 	Unless he's Deion Sanders, in which case he just heads back to the dugout and waits for his next base-running-blunder opportunity.
You can't call time when there's a play in progress.  Ryan Robbins Penobscot Hall University of Maine
icop@csa.bu.edu (Antonio Pera) writes:   > Hispanic magazine(April 1993) had a couple of interesting articles about >Hispanic players including its Hispanic All-Star team.  >Some of the major points are:  	NPR's Morning Edition aired a report this morning (4/19) on 	Hispanic/Latin American players in MLB and how they have many of 	the same problems faced by black/negro/African American players 	when they first entered the league.  However, although baseball 	has adjusted to the presence of black players, many Hispanic 	players still labor under the stereotype of being "fireballs, 	hot blooded, flashy".  The report also emphasised that despite 	the rantings (my word) of Jessie Jackson about baseballs 	discrimination against black players in its upper echelons, 	baseball has actually done much better by black players than 	Hispanic players.  	Another interesting point was the language barrier problem.  The 	reporter elaborated on an interview with Ruben Sierra which he 	gave in Spanish to a Spanish speaking newspaper reporter with 	the fact that there are maybe 2 major baseball writers that 	speak Spanish, despite the fact that Spanish is one of (if not 	the) easiest languages to learn, so easy that the author Cormac 	McCarthy learned Spanish at age 50 in order to research his 	book, _All The Pretty Horses_.  Yet, few MLB organizations 	employ Spanish speaking personel, one of the exceptions being 	the Oakland A's.  	Another point:  	Nearly 90% of Latin American players have some African blood. 	Yet, most report that they'd never really felt black until 	playing ball in the US.     	Ironically enough, it is the early presence of Latin American 	baseball players in the Major Leagues that support the idea that 	baseball was integrated before the arrival of Jackie Robinson, 	as many "light black" or "brown", Latin Americans were 	incorporated into baseball.   	/S
Joe Torre has to be the worst manager in baseball.  For anyone who didn't see Sunday's game,  With a right hander pitching he decides to bench Lankform, a left handed hitter and play jordan and gilkey, both right handers.  Later, in the ninth inning with the bases loaded and two outs he puts lankford, a 300 hitter with power in as a pinch runner and uses Luis Alicea, a 250 hitter with no power as a pinch hitter.  What the Hell is he thinking.  Earlier in the game in an interview about acquiring Mark Whiten he commented how fortunate the Cardinals were to get Whiten and that Whiten would be a regular even though this meant that Gilkey would be hurt, But torre said he liked Gilkey coming off the bench.  Gilkey hit over 300 last year, what does he have to do to start, The guy would be starting on most every team in the league.  Furthermore, in Sundays game when lankford was thrown out at the plate,  The replay showed Bucky Dent the third base coach looking down the line and waving lankford home,   I can't take this anymore  brian, a very distressed cardinal fan. --
In article <1993Apr16.073051.9160@news.cs.brandeis.edu>, st902415@pip.cc.brandeis.edu (Adam Levin) writes: > Just curious if anyone has started to standout early in the season in the > BB DDD this year. ... >  > A concerned fan of the BB DDD,  I am hoping to produce the first update of the BB DDD this week; please send info about the most significant (longest, most critical, etc.) home run that you have seen yet this season.
In article <1993Apr20.033504.13966@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, gspira@nyx.cs.du.edu (Greg Spira) says: > ><RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes: > >>In article <franjion.734996049@spot.Colorado.EDU>, franjion@spot.Colorado.EDU >>(John Franjione) says: >>> >>>Also, I have the impression from reading this group and Bill James >>>that Elias is a bunch of money-grubbing jerks whose mission is to >>>charge as much as they can for baseball statistical info >>> > >>and bill james is not? yeah.  sure.  do you own "the bill james players >>rating book"? > >Uh, Bill James doesn't sell statistics.  He sells books with statistics, >but he is not in the business of providing stats like Elias, STATS, >Howe, Baseball workshop etc. are. > >Greg  funny, it seems to me that the stats major league and minor league handbooks, which are nothing BUT collections of statistics, are authored by "bill james and stats inc. (and howe, for the minor league handbook)".  and i am not sure how the 1993 bill james player ratings book qualifies as a "book with statistics", while the elias analyst is a "statistics book". the analyst contains more stats, sure, but it also contains more dialogue.  finally, the point was not about the word "statistics".  it was about "money-grubbing".  i don't see how anyone who has looked at the bill james player ratings book cannot consider him money-grubbing.
As the heading indicates, it is impossible for me to fathom why Barry is not batting 4th for the Giants behind Will Clark.  Barry is such an awesome and consistent hitter -- definitely the best in the National League.  IMHO, to  have Williams, a streaky hitter (and not really a clutch hitter) batting 4th ahead of Bonds is simply an injustice to the Giants and fans of the Giants.
Giants Win the Pennant!!  Giants Win the Pennant !! Gi... OOOPS I guess I'm a little early here... See you in October...
In article <93110.200825RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> <RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu> writes: >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. > >  I think what Bob is describing here is a game which MAD magazine called 'Basebrawl'.  I have no idea what issue, but it sure did cover the violence issue.  paul
I thought I'd post my predicted standings since I find those posted by others to be interesting.  Sorry this is after Opening Day.  I certify that these were completed before the first pitch. :-)  AL East 1.  New York Yankees - the most (only?) improved team in this division 2.  Toronto Blue Jays - Stewart and Morris?  No way. 3.  Milwaukee Brewers - they always seem to do better than I expect 4.  Baltimore Orioles - Pitching, but Devareaux, Anderson, and Hoiles will drop 5.  Cleveland Indians - Still don't seem to know what they are doing 6.  Detroit Tigers - All key players but Fryman are another year past peak 7.  Boston Red Sox - Any team with Clemens and Viola might be beter than 7th  Al West - this division was the toughest for me to pick.  Whoever of the top           4 gets pitching should win it. 1.  Minnesota Twins - young pitchers seem to have best chance for success 2.  Texas Rangers - I don't know why I have them here.  Jose Canseco? 3.  Chicago White Sox - Frank Thomas but no pitching. 4.  Oakland A's - LaRussa is the best manager and would keep any team close 5.  Seattle Mariners - I like Pinella, but don't see much here 6.  Kansas City Royals - will score no runs 7.  California Angels - will win no games  NL East 1.  Montreal Expos - good all around, plus no Wallach! 2.  St. Louis Cardinals - (Jeffries + Whiten) >> (Jose + Clark), no Galarraga 3.  Pittsburgh Pirates - youngsters will take up more slack than expected 4.  New York Mets - some good players, still not a "team" 5.  Philadelphia Phillies - they don't impress me 6.  Florida Marlins - they know what they're doing 7.  Chicago Cubs - they don't know what they're doing  NL West - The 2 best teams in baseball are in this division. 1.  Atlanta Braves - Awesome starters, but offense could be a concern 2.  Cincinnati Reds - Would not surprise me if they won it all 3.  Houston Astros - Any team that signs Uribe won't contend. Closer to 4 than 2 4.  San Diego Padres - Plantier could be the Sheffield of 1993 5.  Los Angeles Dodgers - better pitching than the Giants 6.  San Francisco Giants - because the Rockies just stink 7.  Colorado Rockies - will become the Seattle Mariners of the NL.   NLCS  Montreal d. Atlanta  (Braves fans, yes I'm probably contradicting                             what I said in my NL West comment.) ALCS  New York d. Minnesota  World Series  New York d. Montreal - Hating the Yankees will be                                      fashionable again  NL MVP:  Barry Bonds, or maybe McGriff NL Cy Young:  Jose Rijo AL MVP:  Frank Thomas will deserve it (again), but Fielder might win it AL Cy Young:  Roger Clemens (at least will deserve it (again))  --
In article <C5svp3.FJA@ra.nrl.navy.mil> klinker@itd.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Klinker) writes: >In article <93110.115219IOR@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> Thomas Hyer <IOR@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU> writes: >>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. >>> >>  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. > >The Jays will finish third because of the depletion of their pitching staff, >NOT because Derek Bell was traded for Darrin Jakson.  I couldn't agree more.  The Jays have a lot of power in their line-up.  So far pitching has been the biggest problem.  Maybe we can get Acker back? :-)  >But anyway the point of my post, if you missed it, was that Derek Bell was >traded because he was basically in the doghouse with Cito and the rest of >the team.  One incident that sticks out in my mind was when Derek Bell ran back out on to the feild after the Jays had won the division and all the players were back in the clubhouse.  Bell ran around the field with his arms in the air, waving a big towel over his head.  He looked like a big jerk, especially when you consider he did not contribute much to the team over the whole season.  The next day, Winfield and Carter somehow got the keys to Bell's Jeep and brought it out on to the feild before the game started.  The stadium announcer said that there was going to be a draw later in the game for Bell's jeep.  Bell really freaked out. I don't think Bell was to popular after that.  I think that Jackson might be trying a little too hard right now.  He's known for being a great outfielder,  and he's not the only Blue Jay who has been booting balls and playing generally awful.   andrew
In article <1993Apr14.190432.1706@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> paula@koufax.cv.hp.com (Paul Andresen) writes: >In article <1993Apr13.151809.1286@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, sparky@balsa.lle.rochester.edu (Michael Mueller) writes: >|> Hi All, >|>  >|> Does anyone know who were the 4 pitchers for the 1961 Orioles  >|> that were referred to as the "Kiddy Corp" because they were so young? > >Steve Barber  22   18-12 >Chuck Estrada 23   15-9 >Jack Fisher   22   10-13 >Milt Pappas   22   13-9 >  	This list brings to mind possible the worst trade since Babe for 	NONO NANNETTE, i.e., Milt Pappas for Frank Robinson, I think in 	1965 ?. Robinson proceeded to win the triple crown in 1966 and 	may have beaten out Yaz in '67 but was injured on a slide into  	second when he collided with the mighty Al Weis (Chisox).
In article <mjones.735411536@fenway> mjones@donald.aix.kingston.ibm.com writes: > >It would help if his OBP were higher than his batting average. Yes, the >April 12 USA Today lists Le Grand Chapeau as having a .422 batting average >and a .413 OBP.  Okay, I'll bite.  How can OBP be *lower* than batting average? Sac flies or something?
In article <1993Apr15.132741.11322@scott.skidmore.edu> jrogoff@scott.skidmore.edu (jay rogoff) writes:  >> I agree, though I'd also be happy with a stadium that looks >> like new Comiskey. The new park was also made for baseball. >> Unlike Three Rivers, the Vet, Riverfront, etc., it's not a >> football park in which they also play baseball.  >While we're on the multipurpose subject, let's not forget Shea, which >was designed to accommodate both the Mets & Jets.  It was the first >stadium (I think) to have the box seats on rollers so they could be >oriented at right angles for baseball & in parallel for football.  Not the first.  RFK, olim DC Stadium, was built 2 years earlier. Nowadays they don't move the seats back for the few exhibition games; but the 3rd-base/LF lower deck used to move.  It was all  metal, which was pretty noisy on Bat Day.  >Of course, with the Jets gone to Jersey (and a truly good football >stadium), the Mets are saddled with a multipurpose stadium where, >because it's circular, the seats are almost always too far from the >action.  The Mets announcers--Kiner & Murphy in particular--have >always hyped it as "beautiful Shea >Stadium," a tipoff to how unbeautiful it truly is.  It's vastly better than it was before they fixed it, though.  Back in the late 70's it was a *dump*.
f67709907@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin) writes:  >RVESTERM@vma.cc.nd.edu writes:  >> i'm watching a cubs-rockies spring training game, and i thought you'd >> all like to know the particular way that harry caray butchers "maldonado".   >> it seems to be "mal-n-dal-nado".  >But I like the way he butchers Andres Galarraga's name.  >It comes out like "gahlah rrrraggggah".  >And don't forget his frequent references to the great SF Giant star >Bobby Bonds!  What about Thaaammy Thotha? I for one was really sorry to hear that the Cubs had sent Heathcliff Slocumb to the minors!  :-)