Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 11/03/84 (WLS Mods); site fisher.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.sport.baseball
Subject: Suprising Starts
Message-ID: <618@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-May-85 10:30:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.618
Posted: Sat May 18 10:30:07 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 00:22:18 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: Princeton University Department of Statistics
Lines: 97

Semi-random notes on the baseball season so far:

We are now about 20% into the season, and four teams have
substantially defied my expectations.  I'm sure most others who have
ventured guesses on the outcomes on this year's races have been defied
by at least a couple of the following.  So, let us ask those musical
questions, beginning with:

ARE THE PIRATES THIS BAD?

I could've sworn that the Pirates did some reasonable things during
the offseason to correct their offensive deficiences (acquiring Kemp
and Hendrick).  Moreover, Madlock HAS to have a better year and
Thompson looks to me like he's going to have a good one.  So what
gives?  I've got two suggestions, one concrete and one speculative:

	(a) Injuries.  The New York Times recently ran a list of
	    man-days lost to injuries by major league teams, and the
	    Pirates topped the list.  Only the Mets were close (though
	    I would have weighted starts missed by Berenyi more
	    heavily than days missed by regulars, and thus would have
	    put the Pirates second in a more reasonable measure).  The
	    question arises, though, why would injuries rock this team
	    so badly while evidently not crippling the other hard-hit
	    team in the majors?  Thus, the speculation...

	(b) Grand Juries.  Are too many places on the Pirate roster
	    occupied by men awaiting the results of the grand jury
	    probe into drug dealing at Three Rivers?

ARE THE PHILLIES THIS BAD?

Piece of cake.  No, the Phillies aren't this bad.  We can list the
Phillies' difficulties as:

	(1) Mike Schmidt.  So, he's off to a slow start.  Given the
	    fact that he's been by far the most productive player in
	    baseball over the last ten years, he's entitled.  The
	    question is: have his skills deteriorated, or he will he
	    rebound?  Yes, his defense has gone from spectacular to
	    competent.  Yes, he can no longer steal the base at the
	    killing moment.  But I see nothing wrong with the bat;
	    Schmidt will be back.

	(2) John Russell.  It looks like he's going to wash out (at
	    least for this season) and be sent back to AAA.  Compound
	    this with their too causual dumping of Matuszek, and the
	    first base position becomes wide open.  For now, the
	    Phillies are platooning Corcoran with Russell, but they
	    are going to need a right-handed first-baseman to replace
	    Russell if he fails to hit lefties as well as righties.
	    I've heard a rumor that the Phils are trying to talk Greg
	    Luzinski out of retirement (probably would have been a good
	    idea in March, but seems to be much riskier in May), but
	    they'll probably settle for Wockenfuss, who was productive
	    in that role last year.  This problem, too, shall pass.

	(3) Jeff Stone.  Seems as though he forgot how to run.  Some
	    experimenting with alternative left fielders is likely all
	    that's needed to remind Stone that speed HURTS a team if
	    it isn't used wisely.

	(4) Steve Jeltz.  Another wash-out (though, unlike Russell,
	    I'm not so sure he'll make good in the future).  I can't
	    see Aguayo as an every day shortstop, and they've dumped
	    De Jesus and Garcia (though I can't see either of them as
	    an every day shortstop).  There may be some real trouble
	    here.  Will the Phils be forced to trade Diaz for a real
	    shortstop, instead of for bullpen help?  (And when ARE
	    they going to move Diaz?)

	(5) The Bullpen.  It's not as bad as everyone says.  It's just
	    not good.  Rumor had it that before the Mets began getting
	    close to acquiring Carter, they offered the Phils Sisk for
	    Diaz --- and the Phils refused.  Despite Sisk's rough
	    start (to phrase it mildly), if it were true, I'd have to
	    say the Phils erred badly.
	    
ARE THE EXPOS THIS GOOD?

I'm not sure.  Dawson's back, and that helps, and Brooks and Law
have contributed what the Expos were hoping for.  It could be just a
collective hot start (which I suspect), or maybe the Expos as a team
are MORE than the sum of their parts (wouldn't that be a change from
Expo tradition).  Something which was disturbing me was: why is 
Fitzgerald fifth in the league in OBA?  Last year, it was something
around .300.  Now it's about .350.  The Expos have been batting him
low in the order (as the Mets did last year) -- has he really become
more selective at the plate?

ARE THE ANGELS THIS GOOD?

No.  Emphatically not.


					David Rubin
			{allegra|astrovax|princeton}!fisher!david