Quincy

One fan review, based on watching the big screens above the band noted he thought that Page was playing 3 fingered the whole night. At least on the "Good Times, Bad Times" clip you can see that he's not using the fret pinky. This guy claims he thought he saw Page try to use on "Stairway" (which is or was also on Youtube) and it failed on him. Something to watch for I suppose as more clips appear.

Ghost, I might have seen you at that show, not that I had parental permission to drive 300 miles to Chicago. The cellphone footage is coming in! *edited - If that's overloaded, a bunch in a row here: at Q107

About 30 seconds of broadcast footage without any newscaster talking over it. Mediafire link Supposedly a brief bit on the NBC national news tonight, but being on the west coast I haven't seen it.

I can happen! Luckily classical music can be very inexpensive, relatively speaking (SACDs excluded.) Plus your local library might be decently stocked. Instead of Dead tour years, it becomes conductors, orchestras, etc. Finds nicely into the obsessive compulsive Grateful Dead mindset.

I hope there is one. If the show sucks, we can get it for free as a boot! There's supposed to be a DVD. Whether it'll take a year to be released because Jimmy will want to do overdubs is the question. With the stories of Comcast trying to slow down bit torrent traffic I wonder if they'll have a special team ready to go today. The torrent site servers are going to get hit hard tonight!

Hee hee. Yes there is. Her contributions to "Scarlet" during the '74 tour. The Portland '74 show might have my favorite room clearing moment. Imagine a cow with intestinal blockage... Weirdly enough though, I always feel obligated to do her part on the DP 14 "Playings" as she was off on maternity leave. I'm so used to the "Yeah Yeah Yeahs!" it somehow doesn't feel right without her. I have a friend who when his kid was a 3 year old always loved to scream her part on Playing too. (Not sure if he outgrew that habit, I'll have to ask.) I also think she usually makes the Weather Report Suites better too. And the "Music Never Stopped." It's always said in her defense that they didn't have proper monitors for her, so she couldn't hear herself. (Have I set up a joke or what?) She sure did alright on Elvis's "Suspicious Minds" and the Pure Jerry release (Warner, 3/18/78.) Okay, the defense rests. But yeah, there's some damning evidence out there.

It's not thread drift in itself, nor is it knocking down heroes. I think most of us are grown up to know that all artists (well, 'cept Monk ) have their bum notes & problems. It's more nuanced and there's more backstory than that, at least from my understanding. I don't really consider myself one of the offended, but I am very concerned about losing members over what in part seems to be cultural differences in how to behave, along with the philosophical differences about "free speech." The latter problem, especially how Che's (changing the name for the sake of the "Googles") nut-see-ism was handled by board members has led me to rethink how one handles that ideology. Several European members (and a few Americans) wanted that crap squashed immediately saying that it had no place here. The classic "free speech" response, which is one thing that American liberals & conservatives tend to agree on, is let the nut-see speak his ignorant mind and our wonderful smart & witty replies back will prove what a fool the nut-see is. I think that maybe our Founding Fathers didn't foresee bulletin boards, internet stalking, and how fast things move. Having witnessed it a few times elsewhere too you can now file me under an ACLU type who now favors instant squashing if a pro nut-see poster popped up here causing trouble. A contradiction? I guess, but oh well. That's a lot of backstory (but you usually appreciate that) and the nut-see-ism is something that thankfully hasn't reoccurred, but I think those of us who aren't easily offended should try to understand why the words "free speech" don't make some posters feel all warm & fuzzy. It can get very ugly in extreme situations, and I think the that's probably the first thing that pops into the mind for some every time "free speech" is mentioned. So there's all that, and then maybe simply this: the cattiness quotient has been especially high for awhile. I like some cattiness, hell, I read Maureen Dowd. I relish the occasional poke and snide remarks, hearing some "inside dirt," even the slag fests against the favorite whipping boys. But there's a place for cattiness and a certain level that can be tolerated. It's very much like salting your food. A pinch makes the dish delicious, pour too much on your food and you don't want to eat it. And obviously it's not good for the blood pressure. A lot of verbiage above and I don't think I addressed all of the nuances (such as concern about the band's reputation for being associated with the board), or even if I'm correct in my understanding. Cattiness can be expected in artist & album discussions, but it can be dialed down to not pop up everywhere. Hmm, you know, I think the movie & film threads have been free of this - maybe I'm wrong. So perhaps that could be an example of what some people would prefer more of - critical discussion without or with less cattiness. Apologies if I'm way off on my understanding of the situation(s). I don't think anyone wants to sanitize the board or dumb down discussion, or have posters withhold "bad news" about artists. It's just all a matter of degree I think. As long as we keep trying to seeing things from the other perspective and have some appreciation for it, maybe we can all work it out. (Another apology to some for almost invoking the Beatles.)

There's a high degree of testing by STATs and Baseball Prospectus in trying to fine tune their measures. While I can certainly understand the desire to have independent testing, I think it's fair to say that when examining the predictive value of their own measures these outfits can be very critical of their own (and other's) measures. I'm not really sure where one can go for free data sets - it all depends on what you want to test and how much detail is desired. Over the years Bill James tweaked his "runs created" formula. Fielding measures such as Zone Ratings as get tune ups as well. One of the great debates about Zone Ratings had to do with Ken Griffey Jr.'s Mariner years in CF. He'd win gold gloves and many thought he was a fine CF, but his Zone Ratings were usually near the bottom in the league. Fielding stats continue to be the most difficult, as one can't be charged with an error without touching the ball, so if you're so immobile that you don't get to a ball you can have a high fielding %. So that lead to new & different ways to score a game. Project scoresheet was one way; here's the hit location diagram at Retrosheet. I think there's another outfit that might even have a different system. As I said earlier, thankfully I don't know this stuff in the level of detail that I used to. Has the pitchf/x tool appeared here? It's by Josh Kalk. "Basically, what I have done is stored the 300,000+ pitches tracked by PITCHf/x into a database and added a simple form for users to query and then look at the location of where the selected pitches crossed home plate. Note that the perspective is from the catcher (or umpire) so a negative horizontal value is closer to a right handed batter. Currently, you can choose any pitcher or batter who has either thrown or been at the plate for 50 tracked pitches. You can also select the type of pitch thrown (e.g. Fastball, Curve, Splitter etc...) or any combination of the three as long as either a pitcher or batter is selected. This means you can look at all of the Curves Barry Zito has thrown, or all the change ups Geoff Jenkins has flailed at, or match ups like Brad Penny against Barry Bonds, or whatever you would like." I usually roll my eyes at people who don't like sports who whine about wasting one's time on baseball when instead we all should be out curing cancer and working for world peace. But sometimes I do wonder if maybe too much time is being spent on this stuff. (Actually given all the money at stake, it makes perfect sense.)

Why not stay and talk about the Dead with the guys in this forum? Because we won't be here come Jan 1, 2008. :( What happens Jan. 1 2008 ? Where have you been! You've missed a lot of drama! For awhile there it looked like the board was going to shut down on that date. Not the case anymore. Our own little Dead corner lives on!

re. Murphy's decline There's been too much trade talk of the great players of today lately that I've forgotten my favorites of the '70s. Yeah, those are both 2 good examples, and like you say Foster even better. Foster's last year was spent on the '86 Mets. Of course he wasn't with them when they were winning the world series, he had finished his career wearing this beautiful uniform. It's so much easier for me to remember the bad backs (Mattingly, Juan Gonzalez) or drugs (Parker, Strawberry) that I forget about guys who just lost it. I mean Foster didn't even get fat either, which is another thing that can lead to decline. One of my favorite confrontations was a Monday Night Baseball telecast of the Cards vs. the Reds. I don't think it was the year Foster hit 52 because Al "The Mad Hungarian" Hrabosky still had his Fu Manchu, which idiot Vern Rapp made him shave off in his last Cardinal season. Would have been the 8th or 9th (it was the '70s, none of this 1 inning closer crap ) and Hrabosky stepped off the mound rubbed the ball and went through his motions to psyche himself (and the crowd) up. Electric crowd, Foster's black bat wiggling. Foster jacked it. I suppose I should dig into Retrosheet sometime to see if I could find it. He's in the Hall of the Very Good. It's a special place, with many players who I liked more than some Hall of Famers. Not that they were better than Hall of Famers, though for 3 or 5 years they were as good, if not better. Don Mattingly is there, Dave Parker, Dick Allen. Some guys like Dwight Evans are there where I personally could see getting into the real thing through some sort of future vets committee that valued defense, but that's not going to happen so into the Hall of Very Good he goes. Guidry is there, what the hell, the troublesome twins of Gooden & Strawberry. Al Oliver. It's a very good place to be. For many years he was the focus of debates as to whether he was a Hall of Famer, and I'm pretty sure Bill James favored his entry back in the day, though I'm not sure where he stands now. In his 1994 book Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame (which is kind of a mess) he predicted that Dale & Kirby Puckett would be elected in the HoF in 2008. (Poor Kirby.) Clemens got in last year. (Shows you how long ago 1994 was, um, nutrition & physical fitness-wise.) I have a sneaky feeling some of this has been posted before, but I hope y'all cut me some slack, it's late.

That's where I'm at too. I can get glassy-eyed when wins are brought in. As a VORPy aside, I didn't bother win fantasy baseball until 4 years ago. I thought it used dumb stats, and that it was silly to reward W, SV, batting average but not OBP or slugging. I didn't want to become one of "those guys" who obsesses about his pretend team or be put in a position where you have to root against your real MLB team because of a fantasy player. But for social reasons I was asked to play in a couple of leagues and thought what the hell. I mean they may be friends, but I can beat those schmucks. I ended up using projected VORP as my main criteria for drafting. (Keeping the hitters under 32 and guessing at who might be injury prone were secondary factors.) Of the 5 teams I've had in the past 3 years I have 4 first place finishes and 1 2nd. So yeah, I like VORP lots. I believe!

Wikipedia has some definitions. The more important ones, or at least often used are VORP, PECOTA, and to a lesser extent EqAvg (and other "Eq" stats.) Baseball Prospectus has a mix of pay & free, and it can be frustrating as a freeloader (which I am) finding just the free stuff without getting a teaser paragraph. But if you have the time & energy, just keep clicking a bunch and see what comes up, at least for one visit. Their books (with Baseball Prospectus in the title) might be in your public library too, which may be your best bet. Other than perhaps what a good number for VORP and EqAvg, this stuff isn't automatic with me either, and I've bought the Baseball Prospectus book 3 out of the past 5 years. While I still love the game and I guess still qualify as a Stathead, I'm less so than I used to be and no longer spend as much time with it. Musical minutiae is pushing that stuff out of the brain! I grew up inhaling the Bill James Abstracts. I didn't start with his homemade Xeroxed ones but '83 was fairly early on. I didn't always agree with some of the new stats. I thought VRBI (or Very Important RBI) was silly & a waste of time. After the Abstracts stopped, 2 years later he did 3 years of Baseball Book(s). Following that the Stats Scoreboards were great collections for career projections, attempts to measure fielding stats, and questions such as does lineup protection matter. That series died off and now Baseball Prospectus is what's left in the "best of" the stat field. They tend to take a more player oriented approach in their annual at least, and while there are some funny observations sprinkled throughout it's much more stat heavy than the old James stuff, and it starts to read like Klingon after awhile. It's been noted by others that Bill James is a good writer, and what a waste that he decided to devote his energy to baseball.

Ouch! You're right too. Say, not to make it sound like I wasn't listening as you just said "no good reason," but are there any theories as to why Murphy did indeed, just start sucking. A refresher with old-time stats : 1987-Age 31-44 HR, 105 RBI, .295/.417/.580 1988-Age 32-24 HR, 77 RBI, .226/.313/.421 It didn't get any better in the following years, and yet he still played full time until 1992. Was it his back? Eyesight? Too much clean living. It's one of the great mysteries of our time.

No need to "pull a Hoffman" here and compare profiles. I've been here for about 4 years. I know what sort of beers couw prefers, I know something about the music he likes, and I know the guy has a great sense of humor. Like Free For All stated, I've seen a picture posted too. To act like this is some stranger is out of line. Having also hung around I happen to know to Christiern = Chris Albertson. But for someone else that takes an extra click. No need to get in a huff about the tired old debate of handles vs. full name, some of us have damn good reasons not to use our names. Just go ahead ditch the nickname and use your full name as a handle if you're going to pull that jazz. I like both of you a lot. I tend to favor humor. I tend to favor free expression. But in case you haven't noticed, European posters are dropping like flies, if that saying translates across the Atlantic. Maybe couw has a point. I like piss & vinegar as much as anybody, but in the context of this thread, a technical help thread at that, maybe this story was better saved for your memoirs, or hell, start a new thread. I know this will sound touchy too, but that's where we're at now. And couw deserves way more respect.

When the American comedy show Saturday Night Live began in 1975, a running joke during their fake newscast had Chevy Chase saying "And this just in, Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead." This was howlingly funny at the time, like Steve Martin's "wild and crazy guy." (Oops, didn't mean to call you "wild & crazy." ) One of those pop culture things that is still remembered 32 years later. I can understand the need to step back some & do other things, and thanks for all the contributions to the board.

Usually one of the College Fantasys, but not too long ago I found a very cheap copy of Dave Does Disney. You know how it can be, the newest heard can be the favorite.

He'll look great in that uniform. Not sure his numbers will, but he will. Nah, actually as much as Jones can be frustrating, I'd think he'd rebound some. Last year may have just been one of those years where little goes right. The price of gas is making everything go up. Btw, good dog Dan.

Yup, I'm ignoring Jim and mailing it anyway. I figure the payment applies to past years too. Use it how you see fit, though paying off the past albums so y'all can make another would be a good thing!

One more issue that maybe needs to be addressed. Sometimes the board acts up due to technology, either the server or software. I recall at least once it happened while Jim was at a gig, he comes home at 1 or 2 AM and sees he has a database/server mess to deal with. Not fun to sleep knowing you have to wake up to that. And that's the type of b.s. that can make a Dad (or anybody) cranky. Just reading Jim's last post I do read a need for a paternity leave for him, and preferably before the baby is born. This is all up to Jim of course, but is it possible that someone else could take control of the responsibility of when technical support is needed? Not sure how this works, how much technical knowledge is required, what permissions are or might be needed. It probably is much more than making a call to technical support. But I just a thought I'm putting out there to better increase the quality family time. Gonna go "old school" for the holidays and mail a check this time.

Mention the LORD (8.0) and you might find yourself with hellfire & damnation.

Shucks, he may have been on pace to have the most HR hit as a pitcher. He's never had a year without hitting at least 1. Glad to see one of the "other" old franchises steal some headlines from the big 2.

Regarding the Marlin/Tiger trade, WOW! Baseball Prospectus last year compared Maybin to Eric Davis, a 30/30 CF with all the tools. Miller has been compared to a lefty Carlos Zambrano. Have to see who the others are, but wow, what a remarkable trade! May take a few years to see how it works out for Florida. I noticed that the Rays (no more Devil in them) sent Elijah Dukes to the Nats for a LHP pitcher yesterday. As this follows the trade of Delmon Young it looks like character matters to the organization.

And those posts that abuse ellipses can be........hard.........to............take......... Apologies if I posted this before, but it's an oldie (ASCII art!) & a goody. rec.music.gdead Music Appreciation Flow Chart. Living in Eugene, an old Dead stopover with plenty of "family" still living here, I'm all too familiar the mindset of the chart.

How about a board where the Grateful Dead aren't the primary focus, but it's okay to talk about them, at least in one little corner? Prefer jazz background in posters, baseball knowledge welcome but not required.

I'm usually the last person to use the line "think of the children," but not having this board gives Jim more minutes with his family without the worry of wondering if the dbase, server, or members' manners are functioning right. Maybe in 13 years if his kids are too cool to be seen with Dad he can start up another discussion board. By then of course it'll all be holographic, with a sense of smell! Without this board I don't know when or if I would have discovered the Jazz In Paris series, Von Freeman, Carter/Bradford's "Seeking" (or hatOLOGY period), Chu Berry, Teagarden the vocalist, or a bunch of OJCs that don't make "100 Best" lists. And so much more. And now mostly because of this board a whole new exciting world of classical has opened up. Luckily I have parts of some recommendation threads copied as text files, but I'll be hitting the search function hard in the next couple of weeks. The tricky part is figuring what I might be interested in 3 years from now that I don't know now to look for. A transfer of the database would be a beautiful thing if possible. And maybe keeping the band's affiliation "unofficial" would be better professionally. But whatever happens, thank you Jim, the band and the board for the good times & great advice.