Dan Gould

You truly have no fucking clue. The jump from 1985 to 86 was only a hundred. There was a jump of 100 from 82 to 83 - WERE THE BALLS JUICED THEN? Followed by a drop of 100 - NO JUICED BALLS NOW! And then another jump of a little over 100 - JUICED!. Do you have any fucking idea what standard deviations are? These "increases" are within a standard deviation. They have no significance.

Your breathtaking stupidity continues unabated. You claimed that the "juiced ball" started in the mid-80s. I have proven that it did not. You asked about hits, you asked about home runs, and I have demonstrated that aside from an isolated spike in 1987, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of a juiced ball in the mid-80s or at any other time before 1993, when the more intelligent explanation for the increase was MLB expansion. I think I am going to appeal to Quincy here:

It was without question an isolated spike in the data. Here are the NL home run totals for 1988 to 1992: 1279 1365 1521 1430 1262 AVG: 1371 Here are the NL home run totals for 1986 to 1982: 1523 1424 1278 1398 1299 AVG: 1384 See Goodie? In between that isolated spike to 1824 home runs in 1987, there were MORE home runs hit in the prior five years than there were in the following five years. And remember that the data shows that in 1993, with two new teams in the league, hits and home runs jumped. My stats prove nothing of the kind. There is no statistical evidence of a juiced ball outside of the isolated case of 1987. Had the ball been juiced and stayed juiced, then the five years after 1987 would not have seen FEWER home runs hit than in the five years prior to 1987. http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/AL.shtml Same spike in home runs in 1987 but of a distinctly lesser magnitude. No spike in hits in 1987, no spike in the mid 80s at all (there goes your other claim). But here is the astounding data: AVG home runs in the AL, 1988 to 1992: 1829 AVG home runs in the AL, 1982 to 1986: 2086 In short, no evidence whatsoever for a "juiced" ball in the "mid-80s".

Chris A. was facing in the wrong direction. I still can't believe its taken a day for someone to start a thread about this mind-boggling incident.

Well then let's take a look, shall we? For simplicity sake, let's just consider the NL, whose stats are found on this page: http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL.shtml Hits: From 1969 to 1992, the total number of hits in the NL varies consistently between 16000 and 17275 at the very highest. There is no discernable pattern, and absolutely no uptick in the "mid-80s". In 1993, total number of hits first exceeded 20,000, and that became the new "floor" for every non-strike season except 1995, when the hits reached 18184, well in excess of the totals of the prior period. Home Runs: Almost every season in the 70s and 80s saw home runs total between the 1200 and 1500 range, with a single spike over 1800 in 1987. Once again, it was 1993 that saw a jump up above 1900 home runs hit, and afterwards, only the non-strike year of 1995 sees a similar number, and from 1996 on, well over 2000 homers were hit every season. There is absolutely no statistical support for your claim of a mid-80s "juiced" ball. Yet 1969 and 1993 seems to be turning points, and there are clear reasons why they would be: 1969 saw the lowering of the mound 1993 saw Colorado and Florida come into the league, and I think we all know that Colorado was an insane hitter's park and furthermore, the addition of two new teams diluted the pitching skills of the league as a whole. Q.E.D., which in this case is Latin for Goodie, get a clue.

If the ball was juiced by the mid-80s, why was it that the first and only time that MLB studied the question of a "juiced" ball was in 2000, when it commissioned a study of 1999 vs 2000 balls? http://webusers.npl.uiuc.edu/~a-nathan/pob/UML2000.pdf If the ball was juiced by the mid-80s, why do the league HR leaders look like this (NL listed first) 85: 37/40 86: 37/40 87: 49/49 (this would be Dawson in Wrigley, and McGuire's rookie season) 88: 39/42 89: 47/36 90: 40/51 91: 38/44 92: 35/43 93: 46/46 It is from 1993 until 2007 that the leader in both leagues hit a minimum of 40 home runs, which is a stretch never before seen in baseball history (its kind of interesting to see that the closest was a nine year stretch from '56 to '64 in which there were mashers in both leagues exceeding 39 homers every year). Wish I had the league home run totals handy but there is no question in my mind that the idea of a "juiced" ball (or more likely, increasingly juiced bodies) was even suggested before the early to mid 90s.

Just curious - what does that mean? He pitched during a lot of the years that Nolan Ryan pitched, so you can't be referring to the era he pitched in. At the end of his career, yes. But I seriously do not believe there can be any side-by-side comparison to Ryan. BTW, Jenkins pitched 1965-1983; Ryan pitched 1966-1993. The ball was juiced by the mid-80s. I suspect Jenkins saw very little of that. For Dan's sake, The Dead ball Era occured during the same time Jenkins was pitching. His greatest successes coming in the 1970s. Does anyone else want to correct Timmy about what the term "Dead Ball era" is understood to mean? Meantime, we can still wait on his "old school" definition. I'm sure it will be a hoot. In the meantime, let's remember some recent comments directed at Timmy: I was just going to say the same thing. True, SF was hit harder by the quake, but man, Tim... BOTH the Giants and the A's were touched by the quake, so it was an issue for both teams. It's not like the A's weren't affected at all. And this: This is just not a reflection of reality in any way. Like I said before... not a chance in hell. Timmy may be the least-informed hard-core baseball fan in the world.

But Chuck couldn't (or wouldn't) tell us about release schedules and the likelihood of release dates being accurate, right?

Actually Chuck probably wouldn't - when we were trying to get info on the Dupree Bolton release, Chuck mentioned that he's no longer working with Uptown.

Matthew, you've fallen behind, my friend. First, Timmy said he was "Dead Ball Era". Now Timmy says he was "Old School". God only knows what this maroon is truly saying.

Really Timmy? Wow. Just ... Wow. The earthquake effected the entire area. No one disputes this. But apparently it only effected the fans and players of one team, not the other. And I'm still waiting to hear about your claim that Ferguson Jenkins pitched in the Deadball Era.

Excellent!

Looks like the Sox are close to locking up Youk for four years/40 million plus an option year. Gotta like that. He's 30 now, so keeping him under club control through age 35 is great. Or at least its much better than letting him go to arbitration, then have another monster year. If he has another great year and is a free agent after that, he'd be one of the best hitters on the market and only 31. Ten million a year to lock him up is pretty good, imo. Maybe he's declining when he's 35, maybe not - but he'll be a Red Sox for the best years of his career.

The title track from Johnny Adams, One Foot In The Blues. One of the smartest things I've done in the past 12 months was taking a chance on Room With a View of the Blues. What an amazing set of pipes.

Now that the Bolton is finally seeing release, is there hope that the next one won't be delayed again and again and again?

Sorry, I missed that part. Nevertheless I'd think you understand that there is a lot of overlap between the audience for sporting events and the audience for horror films (and relatively few 4 year olds who tune in for sports).

The problem is that now you get into the "artist's legacy" issue of whether this serves his memory or not (we know where Chuck stands on this). Not to mention the question of exactly how much demand there would be to justify that cost. Which isn't to say that I wouldn't welcome a digital release of the Grant Green with Gene Harris on organ session.

Thanks - the last update I saw at Amazon had it as a January 20 release, guess its finally come out! I probably said this above but the music on the Frankly Jazz show is very nice, like a long lost, shorter than average Curtis Amy Pacific Jazz session, and I'm really looking forward to hearing it from a source better than the multi-generation VHS tape I have.

As for price, it looks like some Ace reissues have a good price, some not so much. Amazon Marketplace has some lower prices, including the dreaded Caiman.

Anyone who has bought Ace reissues knows that minimal additional info is rarely an accurate description. From their product page: http://www.acerecords.co.uk/content.php?pa...mp;release=7867

What, they think they're too good for online porn ads, like their competitors?

Jim, they're obviously advertising to teenagers. If you're seeing these spots while you watch your "stories" maybe its time to kick the soap habit and let the kids watch age-appropriate stuff where I'm sure Bloody Valentine's Day in 3-D won't make an unwelcome appearance. Just a thought.

Tim, you need to stop, man. Ferguson Jenkins was a "dead ball era" pitcher? And where did you say that the rest of the area wasn't effected by the Quake? How about here: Obviously the A's were "willing to play baseball in the midst of unbearable tragedy in your fan's hometown". And your assertion that the Giants would have inevitably won - what a crock of shit. They were down 2-0. Right there the history of the World Series favors the team with the lead. And because the Dodgers came through in '88, that means the Giants would win in '89??? God your astoundingly dense.

Same as the hospital meaning - Intensive Care Unit.