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!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!princeton!astrovax!fisher!david
From: david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin)
Newsgroups: net.sport.baseball
Subject: Re: Response to David Rubin
Message-ID: <683@fisher.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Jun-85 08:30:28 EDT
Article-I.D.: fisher.683
Posted: Sun Jun 23 08:30:28 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Jun-85 06:21:14 EDT
References: <309@ltuxa.UUCP>
Organization: Princeton University Department of Statistics
Lines: 69

[">" = Jon Hanrath]

>In response to David Rubin's latest comments on the Cubs WS games
>at night:

>1) Apparently I didn't make myself clear.  The point was not what the
>Cubs should do about night vs. day baseball, but rather what right 
>the networks and/or commish have to require a team to change drastically
>for the WS, like requiring the Cubs NOT to play at Wrigley.

Attributing the entire blame for the possibility of the Cubs playing
"home" games away from Wrigley to the Commish/ABC is an oversight.
The primary cause is the intractability of the neighborhood denizens,
combined with their political clout (South Siders would never get away
with something like this).

>2) You say that night baseball is "good", which, of course, is 
>totally subjective.  Some would say the DH is "good", which you
>would disagree with.

Night baseball, whether it suits your tastes or not, has an
indisputable virtue (unlike the DH): it permits more people to see
more games.

>3) Of course Dallas Green and the Tribune Company would prefer
>night baseball!  It makes more money.  However, as far as the good 
>of the teams and fans, who knows?  The fact remains that the 
>Cubs over the years have a much better record in day ball than
>other teams in the NL, and to deprive them in the WS would be unfair.
>The day record percentage in 1982, 1983, and 1984 was better than
>their home record percentage, so it is not just attributable to
>the home field.  A team that plays mainly in the day during the season
>appears to have an advantage in day games, and vice versa.

An impressive argument...if it weren't just FALSE.  I do not have the
figures for 1982.  In 1983, the Cubs were 8-17 in day away games (a
slightly worse percentage than their overall road record of 28-53; not
enough to show that they had a DISadvantage during the day, but enough
to throw cold water on the supposition that they had an advantage); in
1984, they were 20-5; this year, they are 1-19 (that is not a typo!)
thus far.  It seems that some years the Cubs fare well in away day
games, and in others not.  Your claim is justified for 1984 and maybe
1982; it is dead wrong for 1983 and (most impressively) for 1985.
Perhaps this is due to something other than the collection of players
the Cubs have.  It may be that the advantage or disadvantage a team
enjoys in day ball may actually be due to the quality of the team's
fifth and spot starters (who pitch disproportionately often in 
doubleheaders and the final games of series -- both things tend to be
day games).  It may be due to randomness.  Etc.

>4) I agree that WS games are not like regular season games, but don't
>you think requiring a team to play away from home is a little drastic?

Yes, it's drastic.  So complain about the intransigence of the
neighborhood rather than the desire of baseball fans to be able to see
the World Series.  If I had my druthers, I druther have weekend games
played during the day, and I druther have temporary lights installed
at Wrigley for post-season play, if necessary.

>Anybody else have any comments?  Or maybe I'm making a big deal over
>nothing.  It may never come to pass (I mean if someone else wins the
>NL East).

I think we are making a big deal over nothing.  In the end, I'll lay
long odds that temporary lights would go up at Wrigley before the Cubs
would play at Riverfront...

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