Dan Gould

What an F-ING infuriating loss tonite. And all the while the Yanks uber-prospect is throwing a no-hitter through 6 1/3.

OK, first of all - nobody commented about that ridiculous grave-robbing "duet" by Elvis and Celine Dion? On a scale of Nat & Natalie Cole (pretty bad) to Pops & Kenny G (horrifying) I thought it ranked pretty damn close to the latter side of the scale. I will say though that the technical achievement was impressive - how the hell did they create the shot over Elvis' shoulder with Elvis out of focus and Celine in focus? And now - this week is The "Music" of Jon Bon Jovi???? First of all - didn't he just write one song and they just change the lyrics??

I'm too young to remember his earliest appearances but I always enjoyed him on the Newhart show and Mork & Mindy. Had a real gift for those roles. RIP.

I'd prefer June 1st, after Clemens signs with Boston.

Can you believe this idiot, Aggie? Apparently 40,000 individuals who boo their lungs out when Bonds comes to their home stadium is "hearsay" too. Seriously, you need to drop this with this IQ challenged individual. Just wait until the Feds finally make their move, and then remind him how stupid he is. And pray that he doesn't get picked for Bonds' jury.

I was in Boston's Logan airport a number of years ago and saw a guy who looked just like Ray Charles. He was sitting by himself, so I figured it couldn't be him. Then he pulls out this phone-book size braille magazine and starts reading it with his fingers. Then his entourage came over to join him and I realized it was Ray. The magazine he was reading? Playboy. He really did buy it for the articles.

Having good vision certainly contributes to being able to effectively hit a ball, whether it's a home run or a line drive or a bunt. Having good eye-hand coordination helps too. Bonds certainly has good vision and coordination. Those things aren't in question, and I don't understand why you keep harping on his vision. Its an utterly false and deceptive argument from a fool who will say anything to defend the indefensible. The simple fact is that ballplayers who make the majors already have superior vision and hand-eye coordination. From the article I quoted from (and this destroys the fool's argument): As to his asinine claim about steroid use "from the 60s on" - there is simply no evidence of it. When steroids became available in the "60s", ballplayers: A) typically had off-season jobs because salaries for most players were so low. Training in the offseason was minimal, and before the free agent era, players were more likely to work in the offseason than work out. B) (and more importantly) strength training was to be avoided at all costs. Players and coaches were fearful of "lost flexibility" and becoming "muscle bound" and therefore losing their baseball skills. C) unfortunately, by the late 80s, strength training did become popular. And has been the case since Ah-nold's day or before, access to steroids and using them is endemic to the gym culture. Once ballplayers started doing strength training, it was inevitable that steroid use would follow. There is no evidence whatsoever that steroid use existed to any significant extent before this happened.

I doubt Leonard took any of it where he went.

Huh? I'm saying steroids don't increase vision. Or talent, or skill. They increase muscle mass. Period. Steroids do not make you see the ball better. Sorry dude, you are DEFINITELY on the losing side in this argument. Bonds's performance has almost surely improved due to steroid use. Guy I see. So the only plausible explaination is Bonds is successful because he's on the juice. Nice. Has it never occurred to you that he is just plain that good...or isn't that a possibility anymore in sports? NO. Because never in the history of the game has anyone IMPROVED from the age of 34 on. EVERY great ballplayer's skills DECLINED. Barry Bonds hooked up with BALCO and Gregg Anderson at the age of 34, and you expect people to believe that its a coincidence? How stupid do you think the population of non-Giants fans are?

I'll go you one better: YOU WILL NEVER WIN WITH BARRY BONDS. Write it down. Remember it.

And players hitting their mid-30s always increase their slugging percentage/home run rates. Oh wait - that isn't true either. EVERY great player has seen his performance decline, or at the very best, stay constant, from age 35 on, EXCEPT one Barry Bonds, who is the victim of a racist media, lying ex-girlfriends, "hearsay", and is demonstrably the only client of BALCO who did not pay for, receive and use steroids.

No question, ever since the championship years ended, Torre has taken the early season to figure out which relievers he "trusts" to get to Mo, and then inevitably overuses them, to bad results from August to October. Gordon, Tanyon Sturtze, Proctor and Villone last year. The problem now is that he hasn't found anyone to "trust" yet - not even Mo (even if Torre won't admit that) and with the starting pitching as it is, he can't get away from abusing most of the pen. We had so many starts by bad pitchers last year, and then Wakefield went down, putting more pressure on the pen, and it all fell apart in August/September. The way its going for the Yanks, it could fall apart in May/June if they don't start to get some decent performances by the starters so that the pen can get some time to right itself. But there are big problems there, because Farnsworth can't pitch on back to back days and hasn't looked very good all year; Vizcaino looks less and less like someone who can handle the eighth inning in the AL; Proctor continues to show the ill effects of his abuse by Torre last year. Bruney might be the best choice as the main option to get to Mo, but who knows? So long as the starters can't pitch deep into games, they aren't going to get things straightened out. What I have to hope for is that Wang continues to pitch like this, which I think is possible due to the way he outperformed his peripherals last year, and that Mussina doesn't do much to help when he returns. The fact that he pitched horribly in the spring and seems to have lost 5 mph off his fastball gives me hope that Mussina will regress significantly this year. Most people seem to agree that a Mussina who can't throw 90 on the heat can't set up the other pitches. I'm certain they'd really prefer to give him a rehab start, which would really give some assurance on his leg, but the rain and the state of the rotation is forcing their hands. Hopefully the Ranger bats come to life against him.

What a terrible story about that pitcher. ************************** And the game continues to shock and amaze. First Igawa tames the Red Sox bats, and the next day, Tavarez outpitches Wang for his first win of the season. I never thought it could happen, but I'm glad it did. If its any consolation for Yankee fans, the schedule-makers may have done them a favor. Their next four series are home and home against Texas and Seattle. You may wonder if they can beat anyone right now, but that has to look better than the remainder of May, when they get, in order, the White Sox, Mets, Red Sox, Angels and Toronto. I wonder if Steinbrenner gives Torre an ultimatum: Get above .500 by the time they play the White Sox, or else "thanks for the memories".

that really is cool, I don't think Michael ever mentioned that test pressings were made or existed. Before it got released, it was only known as something that had been sequenced and catalogued and that pictures of the cover appeared on inner sleeves of other releases, yet never actually released. So its really cool to see that something really was produced.

Given that when he made his opening day start, it was on 643 days rest, this shouldn't be that surprising.

Hot Horn on Everest? Is that a Freddie Hubbard or Junior Cook record? Never heard of it. thanks, Michael - that thread inspired me to go looking for the two LPs that capture the Hubbard-Cook group. One was available via Buy-it-now, the other one I just snagged. Total of about $20 including shipping.

I don't think one win is a season changer the yankees have DEEP problems with pitching and one game doesn't change that .....i guess Torre doesn't like Igawa but he really doesn't have any choice . What ever happened to Pavano ? "tightness" in his elbow. He's still just playing catch, no timetable to throw a bullpen session. One of the NY papers reported that Guidry was seen talking to him "sternly" about the "difference between pain and injury". Can anyone explain to me how Igawa was allowed to take as many warmups as he wanted? Karstens got hit, Karstens threw a few warmups and said he could continue. At the moment that Torre relieved him, he was relieving a bad pitcher, not an injured one. Doesn't the removal have to come immediately following the injury in order for the new pitcher to get as much time as he needs to warm up? If you can change your mind and remove him and still give the reliever extra time, is there a limit as to when you can make the change? After the next batter only? It seemed like total BS to me.

Exactly. I have quite a few recordings of LD shows and rare is the one that he doesn't include that line in the introduction to a bebop tune.

Huh? I'm saying steroids don't increase vision. Or talent, or skill. They increase muscle mass. Period. Steroids do not make you see the ball better. Sorry dude, you are DEFINITELY on the losing side in this argument. Bonds's performance has almost surely improved due to steroid use. Guy Hm. Then would we say a ballplayer's performance is enhanced by cortizone treatments/shots? How about pain medications? Asprin? Allergy pills? Performance is not at all linked to steroids. They only make you bigger. Any real evidence to the contrary will be greatly appreciated. YOU ARE AN ABSOLUTE FOOL. HERE IS ONE MAN'S TAKE. YOU TRY AND DISPUTE HIS CONCLUSIONS. HERE IS SOME MORE EVIDENCE: EVERY PROFESSIONAL ATHLETE IN BASEBALL HISTORY SHOWS A DECLINE IN THOSE YEARS. BONDS STARTS "TRAINING" WITH GREGG ANDERSON AND DOES WHAT NO ONE ELSE HAS EVER ACCOMPLISHED. OH, BUT THAT'S JUST "HEARSAY" RIGHT, NITWIT?

Huh? I'm saying steroids don't increase vision. Or talent, or skill. They increase muscle mass. Period. Steroids do not make you see the ball better. Sorry dude, you are DEFINITELY on the losing side in this argument. Bonds's performance has almost surely improved due to steroid use. Guy He's on the losing side of every argument here. That he didn't use steroids. That they don't effect his ability to hit home runs. That its all "racism". He's an f-ing fool. A joke. Just like his idol.

OK. And how often does this happen? Once, twice maybe three times in a player's life? You're pleading the case of the defense here, Matthew: Steriods do not increase the likelihood of a player hitting a HR. Vision and timing do. Period. there can be no question on this one. So I fail to see the issue here. Bonds using steriods now becomes a White man's justification that Ruth was second only to a "lucky" Black man in Hank Aaron. can't you see why the media is so concerned about this? Even George "failed Iraq policy" Bush is on this one with getting the Feds involved. This is not at all about steriods [for the which they have no proof] it is all about another Black man beating Babe Ruth's record and, most importantly, the media jackals of the sporting press' effort to discredit Bonds in a shameless get-back for telling them to take a flying leap. It is total bullshit. You are beyond help. You need, desperately need professional help.

That's a joke, right? Doping schedules with the initials of all of his other clients, PLUS "BB" is "hearsay"? GRAND JURY TESTIMONY is "hearsay"? And how dare you use the so-called "illegally obtained" Grand Jury testimony. IT IS LEGITIMATE GRAND JURY TESTIMONY. How it was obtained has nothing to do with its accuracy. HELL, the chief co-conspirator is the one who gave it to them! but the simple fact is that the book isn't close to "slipshod reporting" - it is recognized by everyone else as so solidly sourced as to utterly destroy the credibility of Bonds and his rapidly decreasing corp of defenders. The fact that you remain one is staggering. Really? Seriously? Then how come overwhelming evidence that has led dozens of national sportswriters and millions of baseball fans to conclude that he used steroids, and you aren't admitting it? How come? Its painfully obvious you choose not to see that which you do not wish to. I'd tell you I admire you for standing by your man but since it defies all standards of intelligence ... Doping schedules....as witnessed by whom, Dan? His ex-girlfriend? Somebody who talked to a guy who was told somebody saw these schedules? Where are these so-called doping schedules now, Dan? IN THE HANDS OF THE PROSECUTORS. THEY WERE CREATED BY HIS "TRAINER" AND SEIZED IN THE RAIDS. THEY DETAILED THE VERIFIED DRUG USE OF OTHER CLIENTS. THEY DETAIL THE DRUG USE OF BARRY BONDS AS WELL AS HIS ARTIFICIALLY ELEVATED TESTOSTERONE AND OTHER INDICATORS OF STEROID USE. THIS IS NOT HEARSAY. JUST AS IT IS NOT HEARSAY WHEN BARRY BONDS SAYS HE RECEIVED AND USED A CLEAR SUBSTANCE AND A CREAM SUBSTANCE. HE IS STATING THAT HE USED STEROIDS. HE SAID IT HIMSELF. HIS DEFENSE IS THAT HE DIDN'T "KNOW". NO ONE WITH A BRAIN BELIEVES HIM AND IN ANY EVENT, IT DOES NOT MATTER. IT VIOLATED THE LAW. IT VIOLATED THE RULES OF THE GAME. HOW PATHETIC THAT YOU WANT TO BESMIRCH THEIR RESEARCH, THEIR SOURCES, THEIR PROOF BECAUSE THE COMPANY THEY WRITE FOR DOESN'T MEET YOUR STANDARDS. THAT IS BEYOND PATHETIC. WHICH AGAIN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FACTS THEY REPORTED. THE FACTS ARE IRREFUTABLE. THE EVIDENCE IS IRREFUTABLE. THE FACTS ARE NOT EFFECTED IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM BY HOW THEY WERE OBTAINED. YOUR CALLING IT "PSEUDO EVIDENCE" AND "PURE SPECULATION AND CONJECTURE" TELLS EVERYTHING WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR ABILITY TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE AT HAND.

I'll take your word for it, but the way you described the event, it sounded like the only thing missing was Sinatra snapping his fingers before the $20 was proffered.

Is this some sort of weird, little known Italian tradition? Slip a kid $20 at a funeral? And if you're Frank, you can have a lackey do it ...