Don Newcombe

[Cowtipper]

I was surprised to not find a Don Newcombe thread. If there is one, forgive me.

Newcombe played only ten years in the big leagues, going 149-90 with a 3.56 ERA. His first six seasons, were obviously his best - he won at least 17 games in five out of those six years, and 20 or more games three times in that span.

He was an All-Star four times, winning the Rookie of the Year Award in 1949, as well as the MVP and Cy Young Award in 1956. In 1956, he led the league in wins, winning percentage and WHIP.

He led the league in other categories throughout the years as well: W%, WHIP, K/BB and BB/9IP in 1955, BB/9IP in 1957, strikeouts/9IP in 1949, strikeouts in 1951 and BB/9IP in 1959 as well.

On the all-time list, he has the 58th best W%, at .623. Statistically, he is similar to only one Hall of Famer: Dazzy Vance. The other players he is similar to are Ray Kremer, Schoolboy Rowe, Dennis Leonard, Tim Hudson, Preacher Roe, Nig Cuppy, Rip Sewell, Mike Garcia and Denny McLain.

He received as much as 15.3% of the vote in Hall of Fame elections.

What do you think? Should Don Newcombe be in the Hall of Fame?

[SABR Matt]

A 114 ERA+ hurler pitching for a winning team for 10 often-injury-riddled seasons...that would be unimpressive without a little DIPS-insight.

Bear in mind that during the early 1950s, the league average K/BB was close to 1. Newcombe fared significantly better than his competition in Brooklyn, with a career K/BB of nearly 2.3. If you normalize his K rate to the league context, he would have struck out 7.9 men per 9 innings in the modern game...a solid line indeed.

PCA is moderately impressed with his first six years and his 1959 season:
Yr Lg Off Def Pit O-M D-M P-M Wins
1956 NL 0.48 0.19 7.97 0.1 0.1 12.4 8.64
1955 NL 2.57 0.16 5.03 4.4 0.2 6.9 7.76
1959 NL 1.16 0.02 5.99 1.5 -0.2 9.0 7.17
1950 NL 0.12 -0.02 6.81 -0.5 -0.4 9.9 6.91
1951 NL 0.22 0.28 6.26 -0.3 0.3 8.8 6.76
1949 NL -0.29 0.08 6.18 -1.2 -0.1 9.0 5.97
1957 NL -0.14 0.45 3.83 -0.8 0.7 4.9 4.14
1958 NL 1.14 0.13 0.61 1.7 0.2 -1.2 1.88
1954 NL 0.32 -0.01 0.97 0.3 -0.2 -0.1 1.28

One important note...he was actually an OUTSTANDING hitting pitcher. The average pitcher produces -0.5 offensive wins per 600 pitching outs...Newcombe stayed in the black in all but two seasons and was even significantly above average (compared to the whole league of position players) as a hitter in 1955 and 1958.

Despite that...7 solid seasons with no tail and no truly dominant peak leaves Newcombe off my list.

[jalbright]

I'm not one who has bought into the Newcombe campaign, but to just consider his major league record without some consideration of the issues that involve the color line barrier that apply to Newcombe dismisses a significant part of the argument for him.

[SABR Matt]

Considering his Negro League years isn't going to help him much...he was entering his prime as he hit the majors, Jim. I don't think a case can really be made that he'd have been a productive major leaguer for more than a couple of years prior to his entrance into the game...he was 23 (!) when he crossed the color line and '49 was not all that great a season for him. What happened in 1952-1953? Was that war time or was he hurt? That could make a difference.

[jalbright]

He was in the military, and supposedly, that's where he became an alcoholic, thereby messing up the end of his career.

[SABR Matt]

Then don't complain about my analysis based on color line commentary...talk about war credit and the issues that military service caused. There is no color line issue. He came into the game plenty early enough that the negro league years shouldn't make any difference.

[jalbright]

Thank you for your wonderfully typical undiplomatic reply. It's still an issue if the guy gets close.

[SABR Matt]

How was that "undiplomatic"?

I'm just saying one or two years of extra time in the big leagues at the start of his career is not going to be a big factor (in your original post, you bemoaned a dismissal of "a significant part of the argument for him")...it's going to be a SMALL factor...something you might toss in if he were right on the fence. He's not right on the fence based solely on his MLB record...he's far from the fence because he didn't last long enough or dominate enough to stand out. The bigger issue is clearly his military service and subsequent failings within the game (although he was outstanding in 195401956 and 1959 so it's not like he was never the same pitcher after the war...and you could make similar arguments about Mickey Mantle losing the end of his career to drinking, so I'm not sure whether we should really go down that road).

If you're going to talk about "significant parts of the argument"...they should be SIGNIFICANT...maybe that's a silly insistence on my part.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I would not give Newcombe any "extra credit" for the Negro Leagues and the segregation issue, unless someone can show me that his stated age is much younger than his real age.

I really wouldn't give him much war credit, either. He hit the ground running at age 23; his rookie year was consistent with a HOF pitcher's rookie year.

Newcombe was a pitcher, not a position player; that's a relevancy as well. If he had come up earlier, he might have been ready, but he might have blew out his arm earlier, and not hit the peak he did. The career progression of pitchers is much different than that of position players; the "lost years" argument isn't quite as relevant as it would be for, say, Jackie Robinson (had Jackie not been quite as great as he was).

I have advocated for Al Rosen's election to the HOF. In many ways, Newcombe has a similar case; he was a truly great pitcher at his peak, and the portion of his career 1949-54 is consistent with the guts of several HOF careers. I voted "maybe". His case is NOT dependent on making allowances for segregation, however; it's a straight peak value case, with a smidgen of considering whether or not the difficulties of being a black major leaguer during the fifties did anything to shorten his career once the going got rough.

[jalbright]

Then don't complain about my analysis based on color line commentary...talk about war credit and the issues that military service caused. There is no color line issue. He came into the game plenty early enough that the negro league years shouldn't make any difference.

If ordering people how to argue is diplomatic in your parlance, Matt, I really don't know what to say.

Newcombe was pitching in the Negro Leagues for several years before 1949. Even two decent years can make a signficant difference in a close call. I'm not going to endorse the whole argument made by AG2004, but here's a link to his Keltner List on Newcombe (http://baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=936149&postcount=21) It outlines the argument better than I would, in large part because he's more convinced by it than I. That said, it is a cogent argument.

[Cougar]

I would not give Newcombe any "extra credit" for the Negro Leagues and the segregation issue, unless someone can show me that his stated age is much younger than his real age.

I really wouldn't give him much war credit, either. He hit the ground running at age 23; his rookie year was consistent with a HOF pitcher's rookie year.

Newcombe was a pitcher, not a position player; that's a relevancy as well. If he had come up earlier, he might have been ready, but he might have blew out his arm earlier, and not hit the peak he did. The career progression of pitchers is much different than that of position players; the "lost years" argument isn't quite as relevant as it would be for, say, Jackie Robinson (had Jackie not been quite as great as he was).

I have advocated for Al Rosen's election to the HOF. In many ways, Newcombe has a similar case; he was a truly great pitcher at his peak, and the portion of his career 1949-54 is consistent with the guts of several HOF careers. I voted "maybe". His case is NOT dependent on making allowances for segregation, however; it's a straight peak value case, with a smidgen of considering whether or not the difficulties of being a black major leaguer during the fifties did anything to shorten his career once the going got rough.

Fuzzy -- Newk missed time to serve in Korea, not WWII.

He missed all of 1952 and 1953, and it appears that he may have lost time in 1954 as well (B-R gamelogs don't go back that far.)

It's not crazy to suppose that Newk might have 40 or 50 more wins without the military service, a higher winning percentage, a lower ERA...choose your metric.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fuzzy -- Newk missed time to serve in Korea, not WWII.

He missed all of 1952 and 1953, and it appears that he may have lost time in 1954 as well (B-R gamelogs don't go back that far.)

It's not crazy to suppose that Newk might have 40 or 50 more wins without the military service, a higher winning percentage, a lower ERA...choose your metric.

So he did.

That he missed 2 years out of his prime to Korea makes him more like Al Rosen.

Newk would have had 30-40 more wins without the military; MAYBE 50 more wins. The ERA vs. league would have been better as well.

I'll give Newk some additional credit for missing 2 years due to the Korean War. That makes him the Al Rosen of pitchers. He's still a maybe, but a stronger maybe than I thought he'd be.

[Los Bravos]

That he missed 2 years out of his prime to Korea makes him more like Al Rosen.

Newk would have had 30-40 more wins without the military; MAYBE 50 more wins. The ERA vs. league would have been better as well.

I'll give Newk some additional credit for missing 2 years due to the Korean War. That makes him the Al Rosen of pitchers. He's still a maybe, but a stronger maybe than I thought he'd be.That's pretty much my opinion in a nutshell, as well. Being a key member of a perennial championship level team is also a plus for him. "A strong maybe" is about perfect as a description of his case.

[SABR Matt]

If you put two more years into the Newcombe career at the same level as his 1951 and 1955 seasons, he ends up with an extra 13 PCA pitching wins (about another 20 marker points)...which would move him up to the level of Tug McGraw, Dave Stieb, and Sid Fernandez. That would be strong maybe territory.

[Cougar]

One might even give Newk a partial mulligan for 1954, as he was "getting his groove back" after two years off.

That's really bending over backwards, though, I'd admit. But I've seem more ridiculous arguments.

[SABR Matt]

maybe...not sure I'd go that far, but I guess I can see how you might support Newk given certain conditions. It's still a no for me though...my hall of fame is kind of strict and I don't like putting people in on a bunch of guesswork as to what they might have done.

[KCGHOST]

I don't see much of a candidacy here. If you were to give Newcombe four years credit at his highest level for his Negro League time and military service time he would only become a marginal candidate.

Even as a staunch Brooklyn Dodger fan I can't support Big Newk.

[Paul Wendt]

Fuzzy -- Newk missed time to serve in Korea, not WWII.

He missed all of 1952 and 1953, and it appears that he may have lost time in 1954 as well (B-R gamelogs don't go back that far.)
Every player page at BaseBall-Reference includes a link to the corresponding player page at Retrosheet.

Newcombe pitched four games during April 1954 with three decisions 2-1.
The Dodgers won three and lost one: 6-4, 9-7, 3-9, 6-3.
What happened in the third set?
1954 Brooklyn Dodgers (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1954/VBRO01954.htm)

[Paul Wendt]

Then don't complain about my analysis based on color line commentary...talk about war credit and the issues that military service caused. There is no color line issue. He came into the game plenty early enough that the negro league years shouldn't make any difference.
I'll complain about your analysis on substantial grounds that you overlooked both color line and military service and on methodological grounds that it never occurred to you to do anything but turn the crank.

[gman5431]

Thank you for your wonderfully typical undiplomatic reply. It's still an issue if the guy gets close.

I think what he is referring to is that you are somewhat blowing off that this is a black man breaking into the majors in 1949. His race was a big issue at the time. I give the trail blazers credit. That combined with his war service and the issues encountered there - Big Newk is a HOF pitcher to me.

G Man

[Macker]

I've never understood how players should get extra credit for HOF consideration due to time served in the military. I don't see the military giving out medals to men who would have been greater soldiers had the war lasted longer.

[SABR Matt]

I'll complain about your analysis on substantial grounds that you overlooked both color line and military service and on methodological grounds that it never occurred to you to do anything but turn the crank.

Turn the crank?

If by that you meant search my database for his verifiable accomplishments, this is always step one for me...that doesn't mean I'm necessarily DONE thinking about an issue, but it's certainly the first thing I'll do in a thread like this...the historians in the audience are free to make comments about what the MLB data might be missing and as I demonstrated in this thread, I am more than willing to take multiple additional looks and scrutinize what is being said with additional estimated quantitative analysis work...that's not turning the crank. Step one is to verify what can be verified. Step 2 is to gather further information (I don't know everything about the lives of every historical figure in baseball...I haven't been alive long enough and studying the game long enough to know all of that cold). Step 3 is to make a subjectively quantitiative analysis based on that information.

This, you should be aware, is a pattern with me. I've been known to simply ask the room (metaphorically) what might have caused a sudden statistical change...example: what theories do people have as to why Joe Morgan rates as an inferior defensive second baseman until he arrives in Cincinnati whereupon he suddenly has 3 great defensive seasons in a row and then falls apart? My primary avocation in the history of baseball is numerical analysis...I defer to historians to fill in the gaps. And I don't think that's the wrong approach.

As for "overlooking" the color line...as I've already pointed out...there's no evidence that he missed significant major league playing time to the negro leagues. When he entered the big show, he was merely 23 and just entering his prime years. What little MLB time he may have missed isn't going to make much of a difference. Now missing two years right in the middle of his prime to the Korean war does make a big difference and that information I needed filled in by the history buffs here. I don't go around assuming that missing years are necessarily war-time until someone confirms that they were.

[jjpm74]

Turn the crank?


In a nutshell, you tend to expect a great deal from the posters in this forum, forgetting that this is just a message board and no one is writing their dissertation on what is being discussed here to the best of my knowledge. There are better ways to get information out of people than your approach and sometimes people have to agree to disagree without throwing in a backhanded dig suggesting that your opinion is the only valid opinion. Using some tact would be nice. Throwing around insults and attacking everyone who has a differing opinion from your own is a sign of weakness and insecurity. It severely weakens your case and causes many to glaze over your work, despite the fact that it is detailled, well researched work. Try toning it down a bit and understanding that most of us don't write about baseball for a living or feel like backing up every opinion expressed with a 5 page persuasive essay and spreadsheets. ;)

[Fuzzy Bear]

I've never understood how players should get extra credit for HOF consideration due to time served in the military. I don't see the military giving out medals to men who would have been greater soldiers had the war lasted longer.

Players deserve some credit for missing time (especially if "time" meant whole seasons missed) due to war, because the wars that caused players to miss huge amounts of time (WWII, Korea) were not something the players brought on themselves. Bill James has pointed out that WWII was a condition of the era that the players played in, just as much as the deadball was a condition of baseball during the first two decades of the 20th century. Missing time due to war is something beyond the player's control (unlike, say, Newcombe's alcoholism or Dave Parker's drug addiction) and is not a consequence of a player's particular skill base (unlike an arm injury that would end a pitcher's career). Joe DiMaggio is no less great because he missed 3 seasons to war. Ted Williams lost parts of five (5) seasons to war; does this make him any less great a player? It is not unreasonable in THOSE particular instances to imagine what those guys might have done if there were no war.

Newcombe missed 2 years to Korea, and was not in top form the year he came back. I am not sure that Newk is a HOFer if he gets those two years back (although if he gets those years back, he's close to Lefty Gomez's career totals), but he does deserve some credit for seasons missed to war.

[dgarza]

Missing time due to war is something beyond the player's control (unlike, say, Newcombe's alcoholism or Dave Parker's drug addiction) and is not a consequence of a player's particular skill base (unlike an arm injury that would end a pitcher's career). Enlisting is beyond one's control (conscription is different)? More so than addictions?

[SABR Matt]

Enlisting and fighting for your country > playing baseball. Ballplayers who are man enough to realize this deserve to be treated with respect and that includes discussions of their relative greatness that make space for war credit.

[Domenic]

Missing time due to war is something beyond the player's control (unlike, say, Newcombe's alcoholism or Dave Parker's drug addiction) and is not a consequence of a player's particular skill base (unlike an arm injury that would end a pitcher's career).

I cannot help but nitpick here - saying alcoholism and drug addiction are not beyond a person's control is a bit improper. While it is a person's decision to utilize drugs, addictive personalities exist, and addictions, once they begin, are very difficult to overcome. Drug addiction is certainly not worthy of the same level of consideration as a player serving his country... but to place the onus squarely on an addict is wrong, as well.

[Macker]

Enlisting and fighting for your country > playing baseball. Ballplayers who are man enough to realize this deserve to be treated with respect and that includes discussions of their relative greatness that make space for war credit.

It might make them a more admirable man, but it doesn't make them a greater baseball player. Besides, we don't know which players would not have joined the military if they had a choice.

[SABR Matt]

I cannot help but nitpick here - saying alcoholism and drug addiction are not beyond a person's control is a bit improper. While it is a person's decision to utilize drugs, addictive personalities exist, and addictions, once they begin, are very difficult to overcome. Drug addiction is certainly not worthy of the same level of consideration as a player serving his country... but to place the onus squarely on an addict is wrong, as well.

Who was the one who decided binge drinking would be fun? Who was the one who smoked that first cigarette, took that first cocaine? Addictive personalities certainly exist, but that doesn't take responsibility away from the person who is addicted. Sociopaths are predisposed to committing murder, but guess what? If they do...they go to jail.

[SABR Matt]

It might make them a more admirable man, but it doesn't make them a greater baseball player. Besides, we don't know which players would not have joined the military if they had a choice.

That depends on how you define greatness. Even I (a sabermetrician by trade) believe that there is a component of greatness outside of the raw facts.

[Domenic]

Who was the one who decided binge drinking would be fun? Who was the one who smoked that first cigarette, took that first cocaine? Addictive personalities certainly exist, but that doesn't take responsibility away from the person who is addicted. Sociopaths are predisposed to committing murder, but guess what? If they do...they go to jail.

I am not entirely taking the responsibility away from the addicts. I am merely stating that being a drug addict or an alcoholic isn't entirely the fault of the afflictee. Predisposition to addiction isn't something that is necessarily a known condition. There is a wrinkle, here, that was being ignored. That is, that addiction is not not beyond someone's control - rather, it falls into a gray area.

[SABR Matt]

The fact that people can and have successfully beaten the worst addictions...even those predisposed to addiction...proves that in the depths of addiction, a person can still choose to be clean and sober and accept responsibility for their actions. As long as that choice exists, then anyone who is addicted and acting out on that addiction is making a CHOICE to continue...it is therefore entirely their responsibility.

[Domenic]

That seems to be a fairly thickheaded argument. It takes time to beat an addiction - a great deal of time, a great deal of patience, and a great deal of effort. It is plainly incorrect to say that a person that is unable to kick the habit is making a conscious choice to continue. Drugs interfere with brain function, and certain types of personalities make it very, very difficult to allow the body to stop use. As someone who has worked in clinics and performed studies on the matter, I can say this out of experience.

It is proper to place the onus on the person for trying something for the first time - if you choose to do an illegal drug, you are clearly putting yourself at risk. If you become addicted, which can happen after only one utilization of a given drug, there is a certainly level of blame that can be placed on you - certainly a great deal more than can be placed on a player who was injured, served in the military, or anything of the sort. However, to say that a person that is an addict and is physically unable to rehabilitate immediately is completely inaccurate.

[SABR Matt]

Do you think I know NOTHING about medicine, Domenic? Three different people in my extended family have had problems with addiction. Yes drugs interfere with brain function. And yes there are real physical barriers between an addicted state and a clean/sober state. But to believe that a person who is addicted has no choice is a lie of modern invention. It will be difficult, but from the depths of the worst addictions, it is ALWAYS possible to choose to turn the corner...choose to start working toward beating the addiction...choose to get help. As long as the choice exists, then not making that choice is...in itself...a choice. One chosen by the person.

[Domenic]

I didn't say that you are blind as it pertains to medicine, nor did I indicate that a person who is an addict has no choice. Whether a player is an addict abusing drugs or an addict going through a recovery process, their career is going to be sabotaged for a certain amount of time - on this we agree, I believe.

My original post was made in contrast to a remark that placed serving in the military and drug addiction at opposite ends of the spectrum - the former was not a choice, the latter was entirely a choice. I believe that addiction is within a gray area, and cannot fully place the blame on the addict. They have a certain level of fault, of course, but the blame cannot be entirely placed on them.

[VIBaseball]

I think you're both right in many respects. Newcombe has apparently been sober since 1967, which was well after he was finished in the majors (1961) and Japan (where he hung on for a while). To me there's no doubt that his problem diminished his skills and left his career short of being Hall-worthy.

His work of many years as a substance-abuse counselor is admirable.

[gman5431]

That depends on how you define greatness. Even I (a sabermetrician by trade) believe that there is a component of greatness outside of the raw facts.

Thats good to hear.

In any event, lets get back on topic here. Taking everything in - i like Newk in the HOF - to me he and Satchel are the Jackie Robinson of pitchers. Sure, the war and alcohol hurt shortened and diminished his career. But i consider him one of the great pitchers and want to see him with a plaque.

G Man

[Domenic]

I voted 'no.'

I give Don Newcombe some credit for Negro League considerations (as the Dodgers brought up many pitchers younger than he contemporary to Newcombe), but not a great deal because an earlier call to the show may have hastened his decline, caused him to blow out his arm, etc. I also give Newcombe credit for time served in the Korean War.

Newcombe was undoubtedly a very good pitcher, and was likely hindered a great deal by the Korean War, and his subsequent issues with alcohol. However, the fact remains that he only had one or two truly 'great' seasons, several good ones, and a couple of bad ones. Factoring in two years similar to his first three for 1952-53 and accounting for rust in 1954 might provide a nice nine season peak, which would likely put him in the Hall - but, given his inconsistency, that is too big a 'what if' for me.

[Macker]

Even I (a sabermetrician by trade)

By trade or by hobby?

[Paul Wendt]

. . .
It is proper to place the onus on the person for trying something for the first time - if you choose to do an illegal drug, you are clearly putting yourself at risk. If you become addicted, which can happen after only one utilization of a given drug, there is a certainly level of blame that can be placed on you - certainly a great deal more than can be placed on a player who was injured, served in the military, or anything of the sort. However, to say that a person that is an addict and is physically unable to rehabilitate immediately is completely inaccurate.
At the same time,

Some injuries are predictable consequences of playing styles that are matters of choice at least in part; others are predictable consequences of "lifestyles" and decisions off the field of play.

Military service by mlb players has been a matter of choice at least in part. At one extreme, of course, time off from major league baseball has been mandatory, because resisting a draft would preclude continuing to play in the United States or in Organized Baseball outside the US.

[SABR Matt]

By trade or by hobby?

It's a figure of speech Macker...don't take everything so damned literally. Sheesh.

I intend on making it an official trade in the not-too-distant future, but at the moment I would describe it as a very serious hobby.

[AstrosFan]

Is everything okay, Matt? You seem really peevish. None of the statements made here have really warranted the reaction you're giving them.

[Macker]

It's a figure of speech Macker...don't take everything so damned literally. Sheesh.

I was merely asking, because I didn't know.

[SABR Matt]

Sorry guys. The last two days have been VERY bad for me...I have to go through the school's judiciary hearing process to indict a number of my students for cheating...this after they had over a month to do the assignment and yet I got like 14 panicked e-mails begging me to allow them to submit it slightly later than the deadline hour...suffice it to say, it has been a very disheartening week.

[highpockets]

Sorry guys. The last two days have been VERY bad for me...I have to go through the school's judiciary hearing process to indict a number of my students for cheating...this after they had over a month to do the assignment and yet I got like 14 panicked e-mails begging me to allow them to submit it slightly later than the deadline hour...suffice it to say, it has been a very disheartening week.
I'm very sad to hear that, Matt.

For anyone who cares as much about sharing knowledge as you obviously do, that must be a punch in the heart.

I think that anyone who isn't just drawing a paycheck hopes that they're not just teaching content, but setting an example of intellectual integrity. Still, as you observed, your students made their own choices. Even if we could be responsible for them, it would be worthless.

[digglahhh]

The fact that people can and have successfully beaten the worst addictions...even those predisposed to addiction...proves that in the depths of addiction, a person can still choose to be clean and sober and accept responsibility for their actions. As long as that choice exists, then anyone who is addicted and acting out on that addiction is making a CHOICE to continue...it is therefore entirely their responsibility.

This is a complex issue. The medical-ization of addiction is something of a square peg round hole situation. While use, and even abuse begins as a choice, long term, high-level exposure actually changes the chemistry and functioning of the body, so at some point it goes from choice to biochemical "necessity." Not to mention, the concomitant psychological evolution. That element must be recognized.

However, a physical disease is not the best paradigm to compare addiction to, IMO. Ostensibly you have pathological behavior, actions that a person knows are extremely dangerous, but that they ostensibly powerless to stop on their own. To me, this seems more like a mental illness, in terms of understanding it. I mean, by the strict disease model, cigarette smoking would be considered a disease in and of itself as well, right?

What the adoption of the disease model has done is open the to the huge commercial marketplace of addiction treatment to the medical establishment/community. It is in the financial interest of the medical community to continue to push this model as the accepted way to understand addiction. I'll temper my signature style of rant here.

What is interesting with Newk, in the context of the dichotomy between enlisting and developing an addiction is that the two seemed to be related with him. Newk had lots of demons. He had family issues, relationship issues, anger management issues, and who knows what else, in addition to his alcoholism.

When you combine the color line, military service, the personal issues, the addiction, the injuries, and the whole picture, Newk is one of the most rich subjects for baseball what if-ing.

[SABR Matt]

No disagreements there digg

I have an unfortunately large history in my family of people battling addiction and it definitely seems more like a mental weakness than a physical one. Even the initial choice to use drugs seems to come from mental difficulties most of the time. No one in their right mind would ever want to do drugs knowing that they might never recover from the consequences...the reason people use them is usually related to low self-esteem, rage issues, or depression...or some combination of those...with the exception of people suffering from chronic pain who end up addicted to pain medication (that's a whole different problem).

And Newk is definitely a guy you could build a complex circumstantial case for as HOF deserving if you make enough allowances for the various factors that interfered with his playing career...of course I wasn't fully up on the history of his personal problems when I made the first post in this thread...but that's why I come here...I learn something new every day when it comes to the biographical stuff that comes with the playing careers of these guys.

[Honus Wagner Rules]

Sorry guys. The last two days have been VERY bad for me...I have to go through the school's judiciary hearing process to indict a number of my students for cheating...this after they had over a month to do the assignment and yet I got like 14 panicked e-mails begging me to allow them to submit it slightly later than the deadline hour...suffice it to say, it has been a very disheartening week.

Oh the irony as I sit here at my university library writing my paper on "Numerical Solutions for Laplace and Poisson Partial Differential Equations" that is due in about seven hours (I'm about 65% done!). It was assigned over six weeks ago. I have gotten better over the years. I did start my paper last night. :D I could say I have been busy with my aerospace job, my two graduate engineering classes, my wife and I are decorating our townhome, the startup high tech company I working on the side but really I have no excuse. :silent:

Did you given you panicked students a slight extension on their papers?

[SABR Matt]

It was out of my hands HWR...the professor has the power of veto and ordered the TAs not to cut them any slack. I did everything I could just to push the deadline from 2:20 PM to 5 PM

[Cougar]

Every player page at BaseBall-Reference includes a link to the corresponding player page at Retrosheet.

Newcombe pitched four games during April 1954 with three decisions 2-1.
The Dodgers won three and lost one: 6-4, 9-7, 3-9, 6-3.
What happened in the third set?
1954 Brooklyn Dodgers (http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1954/VBRO01954.htm)

Thank you. I hadn't realized this resource was available.