Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

DEFINITION - team IDs and ballclub IDs

Expand Messages
  • tangotiger
    Let s continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs. For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or continuity id) is an id that
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Let's continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs.

      For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or
      continuity id) is an id that refers to the same ballclub, regardless
      of where they play. For example, the Angels from 1961 to today have
      the same ballclub id (whatever its actual id is), whether they are
      the LA Angels, California Angels or Anaheim Angels. Same thing with
      teams moving from NY to LA or SF, etc.

      I believe that Paul, KJOK, and Sean F were able to agree on every
      ballclub, post-1900.

      Now, the question is what "team id" does each team get?

      For example, do you keep the same id or change it under the following
      conditions:
      1 - The team decides to change its nickname, but continue playing in
      the same park
      2 - The team decides to change its "city/state" name, but continue
      playing in the same park
      3 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park within the same
      city
      4 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park into another city
      altogether
      5 - Team changes name, and changes park, but inside the same city
      6 - The team changes name and change park into another city
      7 - Team changes league
      8 - Team changes division

      Not sure if there's anything else....

      From my standpoint, I think it's easiest to give a new team id if
      there is a change only in team city name or team nickname, meaning in:
      1,2,5,6

      After all, the "ballclub id" that we'll be introducing will have the
      continuity we need to determine "ballclub/franchise" records, while
      making the team id in any year very clear as to which team we are
      talking about.

      The team id should be unique on its own, so that if the Brooklyn
      Dodgers start operations next year, their team id will be different
      from that of 50 years ago.

      Thanks, Tom
    • Sean Lahman
      I think the answer to Tom s question on team IDs is pretty easy to answer. The reason for having the team IDs is to link them to a table that contains
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        I think the answer to Tom's question on team IDs is pretty easy to answer.
        The reason for having the team IDs is to link them to a table that contains
        information about that team. If any of the info in that table changes, then
        a new team ID needs to be issued. As of now, the Team Master table contains
        league, city name, and team nickname. If they change leagues (e.g.,
        Milwaukee Brewers), change city name (Anaheim Angels), or change their
        nickname (Boston Pilgrims), then we need a new ID.

        --SL

        tangotiger wrote:

        > Let's continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs.
        >
        > For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or
        > continuity id) is an id that refers to the same ballclub, regardless
        > of where they play. For example, the Angels from 1961 to today have
        > the same ballclub id (whatever its actual id is), whether they are
        > the LA Angels, California Angels or Anaheim Angels. Same thing with
        > teams moving from NY to LA or SF, etc.
        >
        > I believe that Paul, KJOK, and Sean F were able to agree on every
        > ballclub, post-1900.
        >
        > Now, the question is what "team id" does each team get?
        >
        > For example, do you keep the same id or change it under the following
        > conditions:
        > 1 - The team decides to change its nickname, but continue playing in
        > the same park
        > 2 - The team decides to change its "city/state" name, but continue
        > playing in the same park
        > 3 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park within the same
        > city
        > 4 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park into another city
        > altogether
        > 5 - Team changes name, and changes park, but inside the same city
        > 6 - The team changes name and change park into another city
        > 7 - Team changes league
        > 8 - Team changes division
        >
        > Not sure if there's anything else....
        >
        > >From my standpoint, I think it's easiest to give a new team id if
        > there is a change only in team city name or team nickname, meaning in:
        > 1,2,5,6
        >
        > After all, the "ballclub id" that we'll be introducing will have the
        > continuity we need to determine "ballclub/franchise" records, while
        > making the team id in any year very clear as to which team we are
        > talking about.
        >
        > The team id should be unique on its own, so that if the Brooklyn
        > Dodgers start operations next year, their team id will be different
        > from that of 50 years ago.
        >
        > Thanks, Tom
      • tangotiger
        Exactly my opinion. The only thing I would say is to REMOVE the league information from the team table. Or, if you decide to keep the league in the team
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 1, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Exactly my opinion. The only thing I would say is to REMOVE the
          league information from the team table.

          Or, if you decide to keep the league in the team table, then if a
          team like Milwaukee will go from AL to NL to AL, then it should not
          have 3 ids, but 2.

          The ballclub table should have
          MBREW, MIL, AL
          MBREW, ML4, NL

          *************
          I think this "league" information is going to become important when
          venturing into adding minor league and jap league data. If we are
          going to say "minor league", then we should say "major league". If
          we are going to say ECL, PCL, and the ACTUAL leagues and not the
          umbrella, then we can say AL and NL. Personally, "league" should be
          the umbrella of level of competition (majors, minors, college, high
          school, japanese, Cuban, etc), and not the "sub-leagues" at the same
          level.

          Thanks, Tom


          --- In baseball-databank@y..., Sean Lahman <slahman@b...> wrote:
          > I think the answer to Tom's question on team IDs is pretty easy to
          answer.
          > The reason for having the team IDs is to link them to a table that
          contains
          > information about that team. If any of the info in that table
          changes, then
          > a new team ID needs to be issued. As of now, the Team Master table
          contains
          > league, city name, and team nickname. If they change leagues (e.g.,
          > Milwaukee Brewers), change city name (Anaheim Angels), or change
          their
          > nickname (Boston Pilgrims), then we need a new ID.
          >
          > --SL
          >
          > tangotiger wrote:
          >
          > > Let's continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs.
          > >
          > > For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or
          > > continuity id) is an id that refers to the same ballclub,
          regardless
          > > of where they play. For example, the Angels from 1961 to today
          have
          > > the same ballclub id (whatever its actual id is), whether they are
          > > the LA Angels, California Angels or Anaheim Angels. Same thing
          with
          > > teams moving from NY to LA or SF, etc.
          > >
          > > I believe that Paul, KJOK, and Sean F were able to agree on every
          > > ballclub, post-1900.
          > >
          > > Now, the question is what "team id" does each team get?
          > >
          > > For example, do you keep the same id or change it under the
          following
          > > conditions:
          > > 1 - The team decides to change its nickname, but continue playing
          in
          > > the same park
          > > 2 - The team decides to change its "city/state" name, but continue
          > > playing in the same park
          > > 3 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park within the same
          > > city
          > > 4 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park into another
          city
          > > altogether
          > > 5 - Team changes name, and changes park, but inside the same city
          > > 6 - The team changes name and change park into another city
          > > 7 - Team changes league
          > > 8 - Team changes division
          > >
          > > Not sure if there's anything else....
          > >
          > > >From my standpoint, I think it's easiest to give a new team id if
          > > there is a change only in team city name or team nickname,
          meaning in:
          > > 1,2,5,6
          > >
          > > After all, the "ballclub id" that we'll be introducing will have
          the
          > > continuity we need to determine "ballclub/franchise" records,
          while
          > > making the team id in any year very clear as to which team we are
          > > talking about.
          > >
          > > The team id should be unique on its own, so that if the Brooklyn
          > > Dodgers start operations next year, their team id will be
          different
          > > from that of 50 years ago.
          > >
          > > Thanks, Tom
        • Derek Adair
          ... I disagree here, but that can be addressed easily if/when it ever happens. ... This is very true. Anyone put any thought into my proposal to expand the
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 1, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, tangotiger wrote:

            > Exactly my opinion. The only thing I would say is to REMOVE the
            > league information from the team table.
            >
            > Or, if you decide to keep the league in the team table, then if a
            > team like Milwaukee will go from AL to NL to AL, then it should not
            > have 3 ids, but 2.
            >
            > The ballclub table should have
            > MBREW, MIL, AL
            > MBREW, ML4, NL

            I disagree here, but that can be addressed easily if/when it ever happens.

            > *************
            > I think this "league" information is going to become important when
            > venturing into adding minor league and jap league data. If we are
            > going to say "minor league", then we should say "major league". If
            > we are going to say ECL, PCL, and the ACTUAL leagues and not the
            > umbrella, then we can say AL and NL. Personally, "league" should be
            > the umbrella of level of competition (majors, minors, college, high
            > school, japanese, Cuban, etc), and not the "sub-leagues" at the same
            > level.

            This is very true. Anyone put any thought into my proposal to expand the
            keyspace to improve clarity for when we add minor league and foreign
            league data? This has ramifications on game ID's since those ID's include
            team ID's (in any scheme we've talked about, this has been the case, at
            least).

            Regards,
            Derek Adair
            dadair@...
          • Sean Forman
            ... The ballclub ID s are pretty solid. ... To be honest, I m not a big fan of the change because of a nickname change. I personally would remove the
            Message 5 of 6 , Jul 2, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              tangotiger wrote:
              > Let's continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs.
              >
              > For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or
              > continuity id) is an id that refers to the same ballclub, regardless
              > of where they play. For example, the Angels from 1961 to today have
              > the same ballclub id (whatever its actual id is), whether they are
              > the LA Angels, California Angels or Anaheim Angels. Same thing with
              > teams moving from NY to LA or SF, etc.
              >
              > I believe that Paul, KJOK, and Sean F were able to agree on every
              > ballclub, post-1900.


              The ballclub ID's are pretty solid.


              > Now, the question is what "team id" does each team get?

              > For example, do you keep the same id or change it under the following
              > conditions:
              > 1 - The team decides to change its nickname, but continue playing in
              > the same park
              > 2 - The team decides to change its "city/state" name, but continue
              > playing in the same park
              > 3 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park within the same
              > city
              > 4 - The team keeps the same name, but changes park into another city
              > altogether
              > 5 - Team changes name, and changes park, but inside the same city
              > 6 - The team changes name and change park into another city
              > 7 - Team changes league
              > 8 - Team changes division
              >
              > Not sure if there's anything else....
              >
              >>From my standpoint, I think it's easiest to give a new team id if
              > there is a change only in team city name or team nickname, meaning in:
              > 1,2,5,6


              To be honest, I'm not a big fan of the change because of a nickname change.

              I personally would remove the teammaster table and add, city name and
              nickname to the teams table. If we are looking at the teams and players
              as parallel data sets. The team ID's don't match to the lahman_ID's,
              but the team, lg, year ID's match to the lahman_ID's. Therefore we have
              a name for each player and we should have a name (city and nick, or
              combined) for each team,year,lg combination.

              If you did that, searching for the team leaders of the Colt .45's would
              involve

              Select lahman_ID, max(HR) from teams, batting where
              batting.team_ID=teams.team_ID AND batting.year_ID=teams.year_ID and
              batting.lg_ID=teams.lg_ID and teams.name="Houston Colt .45's";


              > After all, the "ballclub id" that we'll be introducing will have the
              > continuity we need to determine "ballclub/franchise" records, while
              > making the team id in any year very clear as to which team we are
              > talking about.
              >
              > The team id should be unique on its own, so that if the Brooklyn
              > Dodgers start operations next year, their team id will be different
              > from that of 50 years ago.
              >
              > Thanks, Tom

              I like the 3-letter abbrevs for team ID's, but that is probably just an
              emotional attachment.

              We could do something like 3-1 with the last character being blank for
              modern franchises and a numeral for older franchises.

              Getting rid of the numbers will be difficult given there are like three
              different Philadelphia Athletics franchises.

              PHA, PHA1, PHA2

              How should one represent the New York Franchises?

              In these cases I tend to think clarity is the most important
              consideration, and making the year, team combination unique in all cases.

              I also agree that we may need to add a level designation as new data is
              added.

              later,
              sean

              Baseball Stats! http://www.Baseball-Reference.com/
              Baseball Analysis! http://www.BaseballPrimer.com/
            • Paul Wendt
              ... Yes, for the major leagues. New discoveries or interpretations are comparable to those for player identities, as when Fred King and Greg Smith, are
              Message 6 of 6 , Jul 4, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Sean Forman wrote:

                > tangotiger wrote:
                > > Let's continue on the discussion of team IDs and ballclub IDs.
                > >
                > > For those late in the game, a ballclub id (or franchise id or
                > > continuity id) is an id that refers to the same ballclub, regardless
                > > of where they play. For example, the Angels from 1961 to today have
                > > the same ballclub id (whatever its actual id is), whether they are
                > > the LA Angels, California Angels or Anaheim Angels. Same thing with
                > > teams moving from NY to LA or SF, etc.
                > >
                > > I believe that Paul, KJOK, and Sean F were able to agree on every
                > > ballclub, post-1900.
                >
                > The ballclub ID's are pretty solid.

                Yes, for the major leagues.

                New discoveries or interpretations are comparable to those for player
                identities, as when Fred King and Greg Smith, are discovered to be one, or
                when Fred King is discovered to be two.

                I mean "comparable" in at least two respects.

                - momentous. Don't hide such a discovery. Get your name on page one of a
                SABR Research Committee newsletter.

                - exceptional. The data-gatherers and -distributors (that's us) must
                incorporate such discoveries, but planning how to incorporate is separate
                from planning the database design. Or so it seems to me. Sean?

                ==
                For the major league ballclubs, even in the 19th century, the issues
                will be how to use ballclub IDs to cover activities when the club did
                not field a major league team.

                Example: Chicago White Stockings NA1872-73, fielded no team for two years
                in aftermath of the Chicago Fire.

                There are similar examples in independent baseball today, I believe.

                Example: Chicago White Stockings AL1900, one of at least four ballclubs
                that fielded teams in that league and also in the major league AL1901.
                The most recent examples are FL1913-FL1914: fielded a minor league team
                one year and a major league team the next.

                In the 19th century, there are some reverse examples. According to Greg
                Rhodes, author of Redleg Journal, the 1876-1880 Cinci NL ballclub fielded
                a semipro(?) team in 1881. This case is not yet clear to me. According
                to Frank Phelps, "Oliver Perry Caylor", _Baseball's First Stars_, SABR
                1995, the 1882- Cinci AA ballclub was founded in 1881 by Caylor, who
                "nurtured" the team during that year.

                For now, there is no data in the databank concerning the years when these
                ballclubs did not field major league teams, unless there is data on the
                nickname and management of the Arizona Diamond backs and other recent
                expansion clubs before they fielded teams.

                I suppose that AL1900 will be one of the first minor league-seasons whose
                rosters and maybe playing statistics will be included. Perhaps it will be
                the first "historical" minor league-season, from earlier than 1990 or so.
                Sean?

                -- P/\/ \/\/t

                Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
                Chair, 19th Century Committee, SABR
                Owner-Administrator, 19cBB (egroup at Yahoo)
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.