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

Refresh my memory

Expand Messages
  • ucraimx
    During the one of the player s strikes in the 90 s, wern t temp players called in? Did those go as official Major League games? Mike C
    Message 1 of 13 , Jul 30, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      During the one of the player's strikes in the 90's, wern't temp
      players called in? Did those go as official Major League games?


      Mike C
    • kjokbaseball
      Mike: No, they never did that, although the owners did threaten to do it. The only temp players I know of in major league history are when Ty Cobb was
      Message 2 of 13 , Jul 30, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Mike:

        No, they never did that, although the owners did threaten to do it.

        The only "temp players" I know of in major league history are when Ty
        Cobb was suspended and the Tiger players went "on strike" for 1 game,
        causing Detroit to have to round up local players to play the game.

        THANKS,
        KJOK

        --- In baseball-databank@y..., "ucraimx" <ucraimx@y...> wrote:
        > During the one of the player's strikes in the 90's, wern't temp
        > players called in? Did those go as official Major League games?
        >
        >
        > Mike C
      • Paul Wendt
        ... Mike, et al: The MLB clubs signed replacement players in Winter 1995, completed the entire schedule of Cactus and Grapefruit games with them, and
        Message 3 of 13 , Jul 31, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          On Tue, 30 Jul 2002, ucraimx wrote:

          > During the one of the player's strikes in the 90's, wern't temp
          > players called in? Did those go as official Major League games?

          Mike, et al:

          The MLB clubs signed "replacement" players in Winter 1995, completed the
          entire schedule of Cactus and Grapefruit games with them, and nominally
          prepared to play the championship schedule with them. A settlement with
          the MLB Players was announced on the morning of the last Spring game.
          (As I recall, it was a getaway game, scheduled for 11:00am, 31 March 1995,
          at Ho-ho-kam Park in Mesa AZ. Brewers at Cubs.)

          They played that game with the replacement teams, held abbreviated Spring
          Training for the MLB Players at the usual sites, and played a
          partly-rebalanced 144-game championship schedule beginning in late April.
          (The intradivision schedule was restored to its usual length and balance,
          and home:away schedule was balanced 72:72, by rearranging everything else
          as convenient. So the inter-division schedule was extremely unbalanced.)

          SABR has a Spring Training research committee, new this year, which must
          decide how to handle the playing, roster, and biographical data that is
          special to that offseason.

          bb-db must decide how to handle those records when the time comes for the
          database to cover each player's entire professional baseball career, with
          a list of dated affiliations with ballclubs.

          Outside the Spring Training Cmtee, replacement status in Winter 1995 is
          now like activity in AL 1900: maybe valuable to flag in a personal copy of
          the database for some particular research project.

          -- P/\/ \/\/t

          Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
          at Ho-ho-kam Park on getaway day, Spring 1995
        • tom tom
          ... That s an interesting question. What does Tom R s transaction database have? (My copy is on my work computer, but if someone knows off-hand...) I think
          Message 4 of 13 , Jul 31, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            --- Paul Wendt <pgw@...> wrote:
            > bb-db must decide how to handle those records when
            > the time comes for the
            > database to cover each player's entire professional
            > baseball career, with
            > a list of dated affiliations with ballclubs.
            >

            That's an interesting question. What does Tom R's
            transaction database have? (My copy is on my work
            computer, but if someone knows off-hand...)

            I think it's a mess to consider the spring training
            stats, or even regular season stats (say like the NFL)
            in the same class as the MLB players. Just because
            they are on MLB teams doesn't make them a "majors"
            class, regardless of what MLB and the NFL decide to
            designate them as such. They are an independent minor
            league level class.

            Thanks, Tom


            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
            http://health.yahoo.com
          • Derek Adair
            ... Nothing related to replacement players. Charles Gipson and Benny Agbayani (two examples) have nothing related to replacement status in their entries. The
            Message 5 of 13 , Jul 31, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, tom tom wrote:

              > That's an interesting question. What does Tom R's
              > transaction database have? (My copy is on my work
              > computer, but if someone knows off-hand...)

              Nothing related to replacement players. Charles Gipson and Benny Agbayani
              (two examples) have nothing related to replacement status in their
              entries. The transaction types also have no replacement info.

              > I think it's a mess to consider the spring training
              > stats, or even regular season stats (say like the NFL)
              > in the same class as the MLB players. Just because
              > they are on MLB teams doesn't make them a "majors"
              > class, regardless of what MLB and the NFL decide to
              > designate them as such. They are an independent minor
              > league level class.

              If we ever have spring training data, I see no reason why their stats
              should not be included. We can deal with majors when that happens (I'd
              imagine there would be some sort of ruling to determine records and the
              like, and we'd adhere to that). I say keep the records and interpret them
              differently if there's an extenuating circumstance; don't segregate the
              data.

              Regards,
              Derek Adair
              dadair@...
            • Paul Wendt
              ... If I understand correctly, Transactions http://www.retrosheet.org/transactions/tran.out includes only those transactions in which a player begins or ends
              Message 6 of 13 , Jul 31, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                31 Jul 2002, Derek Adair wrote:

                > On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, tom tom wrote:
                >
                > > That's an interesting question. What does Tom R's
                > > transaction database have? (My copy is on my work
                > > computer, but if someone knows off-hand...)
                >
                > Nothing related to replacement players. Charles Gipson and Benny Agbayani
                > (two examples) have nothing related to replacement status in their
                > entries. The transaction types also have no replacement info.

                If I understand correctly, Transactions
                http://www.retrosheet.org/transactions/tran.out

                includes only those transactions in which a player begins or ends
                affiliation with some MLB club (signings, releases, trades, etc), not
                changes in status within some MLB club organization (activations,
                disablings, etc). Maybe the replacement players were all reassigned from
                inside the MLB organizations. But anyone signed as a free agent, to help
                compose a replacement roster for the Cactus or Grapefruit games, would
                show up simply as a free agent signing. Same for anyone traded.

                -- P/\/ \/\/t

                Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
              • ucraimx
                Just a side question: Is this transaction database available? MikeC ... Agbayani ... stats ... (I d ... the ... interpret them ... the
                Message 7 of 13 , Aug 1, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Just a side question:

                  Is this transaction database available?

                  MikeC



                  --- In baseball-databank@y..., Derek Adair <dadair@i...> wrote:
                  > On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, tom tom wrote:
                  >
                  > > That's an interesting question. What does Tom R's
                  > > transaction database have? (My copy is on my work
                  > > computer, but if someone knows off-hand...)
                  >
                  > Nothing related to replacement players. Charles Gipson and Benny
                  Agbayani
                  > (two examples) have nothing related to replacement status in their
                  > entries. The transaction types also have no replacement info.
                  >
                  > > I think it's a mess to consider the spring training
                  > > stats, or even regular season stats (say like the NFL)
                  > > in the same class as the MLB players. Just because
                  > > they are on MLB teams doesn't make them a "majors"
                  > > class, regardless of what MLB and the NFL decide to
                  > > designate them as such. They are an independent minor
                  > > league level class.
                  >
                  > If we ever have spring training data, I see no reason why their
                  stats
                  > should not be included. We can deal with majors when that happens
                  (I'd
                  > imagine there would be some sort of ruling to determine records and
                  the
                  > like, and we'd adhere to that). I say keep the records and
                  interpret them
                  > differently if there's an extenuating circumstance; don't segregate
                  the
                  > data.
                  >
                  > Regards,
                  > Derek Adair
                  > dadair@i...
                • ucraimx
                  I just saw the 1900 to present, but is anyone working on a Pre1900 (OR is that even available)? ... and ... segregate
                  Message 8 of 13 , Aug 1, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I just saw the 1900 to present, but is anyone working on a Pre1900
                    (OR is that even available)?


                    Mike C--- In baseball-databank@y..., "ucraimx" <ucraimx@y...> wrote:
                    > Just a side question:
                    >
                    > Is this transaction database available?
                    >
                    > MikeC
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In baseball-databank@y..., Derek Adair <dadair@i...> wrote:
                    > > On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, tom tom wrote:
                    > >
                    > > > That's an interesting question. What does Tom R's
                    > > > transaction database have? (My copy is on my work
                    > > > computer, but if someone knows off-hand...)
                    > >
                    > > Nothing related to replacement players. Charles Gipson and Benny
                    > Agbayani
                    > > (two examples) have nothing related to replacement status in their
                    > > entries. The transaction types also have no replacement info.
                    > >
                    > > > I think it's a mess to consider the spring training
                    > > > stats, or even regular season stats (say like the NFL)
                    > > > in the same class as the MLB players. Just because
                    > > > they are on MLB teams doesn't make them a "majors"
                    > > > class, regardless of what MLB and the NFL decide to
                    > > > designate them as such. They are an independent minor
                    > > > league level class.
                    > >
                    > > If we ever have spring training data, I see no reason why their
                    > stats
                    > > should not be included. We can deal with majors when that happens
                    > (I'd
                    > > imagine there would be some sort of ruling to determine records
                    and
                    > the
                    > > like, and we'd adhere to that). I say keep the records and
                    > interpret them
                    > > differently if there's an extenuating circumstance; don't
                    segregate
                    > the
                    > > data.
                    > >
                    > > Regards,
                    > > Derek Adair
                    > > dadair@i...
                  • Paul Wendt
                    ... The record for early 20th century is skimpy because much of the database comes from published sources whose complete or nearly-complete coverage begins
                    Message 9 of 13 , Aug 1, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, ucraimx wrote:

                      > I just saw the 1900 to present,

                      The record for early 20th century is skimpy because much of the database
                      comes from published sources whose complete or nearly-complete coverage
                      begins later. The Rusie-Mathewson trade is included, and precisely dated
                      1900-12-15, because it is famous. There were other trades, purchases, and
                      releases in 1900 ;-)

                      > but is anyone working on a Pre1900 (OR is that even available)?

                      It is not available in one place, not even annually, if you mean a nearly
                      complete paper record that needs only teeth-gritting transcription to
                      digital. Here or at Retrolist, someone guestimated the completeness of
                      annual and weekly (TSN) reporting of transactions at some early dates -
                      but even those were early 20th century dates, as I recall.

                      The Sporting News is weekly since 1886. Spalding's Base Ball Guide is
                      annual since Spring 1877 or Spring 1876. The reasonably complete
                      publication of transactions, weekly or annual, begins much later.
                      In general, the transactions data must be recovered from daily newspapers.
                      There will always be gaps, even for players who appeared in MLB games.

                      At the annual public meeting of the 19th Century Cmtee five weeks ago,
                      I introduced the Transactions Database and full Game Log (with Starting
                      Pitchers), by briefly visiting the Transactions subset for trades
                      http://retrosheet.org/transactions/trade.new
                      and the Game Log for Boston AL1901
                      http://retrosheet.org/boxesetc/VBOS1901.htm

                      These projects need workers. They are among the "outside" projects (not
                      organized by the 19c Cmtee) that I will introduce to people this year.

                      -- P/\/ \/\/t

                      Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
                      Chair, 19th Century Committee, SABR
                      Owner-Administrator, 19cBB (egroup at Yahoo)
                    • Sean Lahman
                      Adding my two cents on 19th century transactions... I think that it s important to note that trades did not become common place until the 20th century. The
                      Message 10 of 13 , Aug 1, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Adding my two cents on 19th century transactions...

                        I think that it's important to note that trades did not become common place
                        until the 20th century. The 19th century teams were largely run by players,
                        and while they sometimes jumped from one club to another, the concept of
                        trading players just hadn't developed yet. Most of the 19th century
                        transactions involve players being added to a roster or dropped from a
                        roster, independent of anything else.

                        --S
                      • ucraimx
                        I know that the 1900 American League is not recognized as a major league . I seem to recall it being talked about, and I m still searching some other
                        Message 11 of 13 , Aug 29, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I know that the 1900 "American League" is not recognized as a "major
                          league". I seem to recall it being talked about, and I'm still
                          searching some other archives to piece it all together. Was their
                          justification in possibly declaring it a major league? Was stats
                          available for that year?

                          Mike Crain
                        • Paul Wendt
                          ... I named it here as an example minor league. Sean Forman observed that it is not a priority but he will add AL1900 data and other minor league data. Tip: A
                          Message 12 of 13 , Aug 29, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            29 Aug 2002, ucraimx wrote:

                            > I know that the 1900 "American League" is not recognized as a "major
                            > league". I seem to recall it being talked about,

                            I named it here as an example minor league. Sean Forman observed that it
                            is not a priority but he will add AL1900 data and other minor league data.

                            Tip: A search for "AL1900" or "1900AL" will sometimes hit.

                            > and I'm still searching some other archives to piece it all together.
                            > Was their justification in possibly declaring it a major league?
                            > Was stats available for that year?

                            Some paper sources for AL1900 data:
                            1900 newspapers,
                            1901 baseball guides,
                            S.C. Thompson _All-Time Rosters of [MLB] Clubs_ (1967),
                            David Nemec _The Great Encyclopedia of [19c MLB]_ (1997).

                            Nemec acknowledges:

                            "Most of the team vs. team and batting and pitching statistics were
                            furnished by Bob Tiemann, Ray Nemec, and Bob Hoie, who have all done
                            extensive research on the 1900 American League season." [p670]

                            "As yet, complete fielding statistics are unavailable, as are accurate
                            team batting and pitching statistics and accurate total games played at
                            each position." [p671]

                            _The Great Encyclopedia_ publishes some of those inaccurate statistics:
                            team W-L, team Batting Avg, individual games played by team and position.
                            The first-listed glaring imprecision is Chicago, second base:
                            "Padden 130, Brain 1, O'Leary 1", where Chicago played 137 games. [p672]

                            --
                            I don't know any electronic source with full coverage of the players,
                            not to mention full scope of playing statistics.

                            "Regular Teams, American League 1900"
                            http://world.std.com/~pgw/Deadball/al1900.html
                            is my presentation of this and that. The heart is "three pitchers and
                            eight regular players for each team, identified by [Joe] Wayman".

                            Wayman, David Shiner, and Art Ahrens are three SABR members who have
                            worked on AL1900, in addition to David Nemec's three acknowledged sources
                            for statistics --Tiemann, R.Nemec, Hoie.

                            -- P/\/ \/\/t

                            Paul Wendt, Watertown MA, USA <pgw@...>
                            Chair, 19th Century Committee, SABR
                            Owner-Administrator, 19cBB (egroup at Yahoo)
                          • Paul Wendt
                            By the way, what has been decided about IDs for minor league players in the complete version of the bbdb? ... Ah, its minor league status has been debated for
                            Message 13 of 13 , Sep 4 7:58 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              By the way, what has been decided about IDs for minor league players in
                              the complete version of the bbdb?

                              29 Aug 2002, Mike Crain asked and I replied:

                              > > I know that the 1900 "American League" is not recognized as a "major
                              > > league". I seem to recall it being talked about,

                              Ah, its minor league status has been debated for years. In my opinion,
                              the only good argument for calling AL1900 "major" is that that will spur
                              research on that league, and the 1899-1900 offseason.

                              > I named it here as an example minor league. Sean Forman observed that it
                              > is not a priority but he will add AL1900 data and other minor league data.
                              . . .
                              > Some paper sources for AL1900 data:
                              > 1900 newspapers,
                              > 1901 baseball guides,
                              > S.C. Thompson _All-Time Rosters of [MLB] Clubs_ (1967),
                              > David Nemec _The Great Encyclopedia of [19c MLB]_ (1997).
                              . . .
                              > I don't know any electronic source with full coverage of the players,
                              > not to mention full scope of playing statistics.

                              I compared the rosters (player names for each team-season) published by
                              Thompson and Nemec and sent the differences --one difference in each of
                              five teams-- to David Nemec with comments. I will pursue this with a
                              focus on whether there is a consensus among those who have studied AL1900,
                              regarding the list of players and their teams. If no consensus of the
                              experts, is a "best guess" clear to me?

                              Because 1900 is a gap in the MLB career of many players, and because of
                              what the reconstituted league accomplished, AL1900 should have some
                              priority over other minor leagues. Maybe the record of affiliations
                              between players and teams is valuable to others (it is to me), even
                              without playing statistics.

                              > "Regular Teams, American League 1900"
                              > http://world.std.com/~pgw/Deadball/al1900.html
                              > is my presentation of this and that. The heart is "three pitchers and
                              > eight regular players for each team, identified by [Joe] Wayman".

                              Wayman reported a count of 201 players and a count of 126 with NL
                              experience through 1900. By my count, Thompson listed 200 in 1967 and
                              David Nemec has 202, including Thompson's 200 and two others. For the
                              200 in common, the list of teams is identical.

                              -- 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.