Thursday, April 27, 2006
The Star Tribune has an article and 2 sidebars about Mitch Hedberg today. The article is about a tribute for him this weekend at the Orpheum. One sidebar lists what other performers said about him. The last sidebar gives his best bits. My favorite bit is "I bought myself a parrot, and it could talk. But it did not say it was hungry, so it died."
Monday, April 24, 2006
Adam, where is this video from? Who are the drivers? It's amazing.
Wednesday, April 19, 2006
My new favorite website.
Wednesday, April 05, 2006
TOP 10 2005
1. CHANNELS Who else? J. Robbins. It's really good alright? They'll probably be on next year's list, too. Their debut album will be released on Dischord this Spring.
2. SPOON I think Adam said it well, they're about as solid as an indie act gets these days. I Summon You is a fabulous song. I will say, however, that I like the first three Spoon albums all more than the last three.
3. TRAIL OF DEAD Excellent. For some reason I discovered these guys in 2005. So I had to go back and by source tags & codes (again, I gave away my first copy because I thought it sucked). Anyhowe, I've listened to "The Rest Will Follow" a gajillion times over the past year.
4. MINUS THE BEAR Thanks for the tip, Adam. The first six songs are awesome. A really excellent album. You could make an argument that this should be #2 on my list. It probably should be.
5. THE LIFE AND TIMES Allen Epley's new band -- not too heavy, really interesting, melodic minor-key guitar rock. Really, really cool, in fact.
6. BLOC PARTY The first four songs are good, although I will admit that I did not spent much time with the album after the first week.
7. WOLF PARADE Very nice album. Surprisingly, it doesn't remind me of Modest Mouse. I don't know why. Frankly, I think there's really only three or four songs that are any good, but that's usually enough for me.
8. BECK Four excellent songs. #12 (Rental Car) is awesome, #3 Girl is great, #1 E-Pro is good, and #6 (?) Hell-Yes is hilarious.
9. WALKING CONCERTGood punk post-rock songs. Try and listen to "What's Your New Thing?" sometime.
10. LOW There are really only two songs that I like: California and Monkey (the songs everyone likes), but those two songs are INCREDIBLE. California, especially. Relatedly, I never ONCE saw Low in Minnesota. How weird is that?
1. CHANNELS Who else? J. Robbins. It's really good alright? They'll probably be on next year's list, too. Their debut album will be released on Dischord this Spring.
2. SPOON I think Adam said it well, they're about as solid as an indie act gets these days. I Summon You is a fabulous song. I will say, however, that I like the first three Spoon albums all more than the last three.
3. TRAIL OF DEAD Excellent. For some reason I discovered these guys in 2005. So I had to go back and by source tags & codes (again, I gave away my first copy because I thought it sucked). Anyhowe, I've listened to "The Rest Will Follow" a gajillion times over the past year.
4. MINUS THE BEAR Thanks for the tip, Adam. The first six songs are awesome. A really excellent album. You could make an argument that this should be #2 on my list. It probably should be.
5. THE LIFE AND TIMES Allen Epley's new band -- not too heavy, really interesting, melodic minor-key guitar rock. Really, really cool, in fact.
6. BLOC PARTY The first four songs are good, although I will admit that I did not spent much time with the album after the first week.
7. WOLF PARADE Very nice album. Surprisingly, it doesn't remind me of Modest Mouse. I don't know why. Frankly, I think there's really only three or four songs that are any good, but that's usually enough for me.
8. BECK Four excellent songs. #12 (Rental Car) is awesome, #3 Girl is great, #1 E-Pro is good, and #6 (?) Hell-Yes is hilarious.
9. WALKING CONCERTGood punk post-rock songs. Try and listen to "What's Your New Thing?" sometime.
10. LOW There are really only two songs that I like: California and Monkey (the songs everyone likes), but those two songs are INCREDIBLE. California, especially. Relatedly, I never ONCE saw Low in Minnesota. How weird is that?
BASKETBALL
Is it too early to Humphries a bust? If not, the Minnesota three (Pryzbilla, Rickert, Humphries -- no idea how to spell any of those names) sure have been busts at the pro level. How weird is that -- three stud white guys from Minnesota -- three total high school phenoms -- all three go to MN for one or two years, all three leave very early, and all three proceed to suck. ALL THREE!!!
Anyhow, I don't watch the NBA at all (except for King LeBron, who ROCKS!), and I don't watch much college basketball anymore, either (regular season is meaningless for everyone but the crappy small conference teams, and the tournament is single elimination, so it's next to meaningless). With respect to the college b-ball that I have seen, however, I can't say that the level of play is any less intriguing. It would make sense (I suppose) that if the top-of-the-top-notch players are in the NBA, that the top-notch programs are just that much more like the middle-of-the-road programs.
RACE
I was thinking about that GA senator -- the woman who (allegedly) hit the Congressional cop -- race is pretty much the most polarizing issue in America, huh? I saw her attorney on Hannity and Colmes, and he was repeatedly calling Tom Delaya "rich white boy" (I think Delay had called the Senator a "long-time racist," or something). As you might imagine, Hannity had a field day with that -- i.e., "if Tom Delay had called you a "black boy," you would have been all over him calling him a racist, wouldn't you?"
Here's the thing, I see where the atty is coming from, but that smack-talk just gives white idiots like Hannity more ammunition and one more reason to dismiss legitimate concerns of racism. It's a real dillema, because I think there is something to the argument that it's okay (or at least not as bad) for minorities to say things like that (because of the power difference and all that), but it gives joe-blow-racists a lot to hang their hats on.
Sorry ... just ranting.
Is it too early to Humphries a bust? If not, the Minnesota three (Pryzbilla, Rickert, Humphries -- no idea how to spell any of those names) sure have been busts at the pro level. How weird is that -- three stud white guys from Minnesota -- three total high school phenoms -- all three go to MN for one or two years, all three leave very early, and all three proceed to suck. ALL THREE!!!
Anyhow, I don't watch the NBA at all (except for King LeBron, who ROCKS!), and I don't watch much college basketball anymore, either (regular season is meaningless for everyone but the crappy small conference teams, and the tournament is single elimination, so it's next to meaningless). With respect to the college b-ball that I have seen, however, I can't say that the level of play is any less intriguing. It would make sense (I suppose) that if the top-of-the-top-notch players are in the NBA, that the top-notch programs are just that much more like the middle-of-the-road programs.
RACE
I was thinking about that GA senator -- the woman who (allegedly) hit the Congressional cop -- race is pretty much the most polarizing issue in America, huh? I saw her attorney on Hannity and Colmes, and he was repeatedly calling Tom Delaya "rich white boy" (I think Delay had called the Senator a "long-time racist," or something). As you might imagine, Hannity had a field day with that -- i.e., "if Tom Delay had called you a "black boy," you would have been all over him calling him a racist, wouldn't you?"
Here's the thing, I see where the atty is coming from, but that smack-talk just gives white idiots like Hannity more ammunition and one more reason to dismiss legitimate concerns of racism. It's a real dillema, because I think there is something to the argument that it's okay (or at least not as bad) for minorities to say things like that (because of the power difference and all that), but it gives joe-blow-racists a lot to hang their hats on.
Sorry ... just ranting.
There is a pretty good website out there that lists the underclassmen and high school players who declared for the NBA draft. The 2005 list is here. 2004 is here. And 2003 is here. Look at the bottom of the 2003 page, and you can see the numbers of players who left early all the way back to 1997. This article has a sidebar listing the 36 American high school players who entered the NBA draft since 1995 (the year K.G. broke the mold). And here is the Wikipedia entry on high school players going straight to the NBA.
Personally, I think that the current rule (the player must be 19 and at least one year removed from high school) is stupid. However, I don't think there is any doubt that underclassmen leaving early and high school players skipping college has lowered the quality of play in college. Just look at all of the players on those lists. Imagine what teams would look like if players were forced to play 4 full years (or even just 2 or 3). Think of all of the Gophers who have left early in the past few years. Joel Przybilla as a sophomore in 2000. Rick Rickert as a sophomore in 2003. Kris Humpries as a freshman in 2004. But, like I said, I'm not in favor of banning players from entering early. If I was in their position, you can sure as hell bet that I would be taking the millions.
I also think parity has increased because early entry of players has hurt the bigger schools more. Big-time programs are struggling to keep their talent for more than a year or two, and mid-level and smaller schools are more likely to keep their good players there for all 4 years. I don't think there are as many totally dominant teams (or conferences) as in the past, and the success of mid-major teams in the tournament this year only further proves this. The best example of this was North Carolina vs. George Mason in the 2nd round. George Mason put out a team full of mediocre talent, but they were a veteran team. North Carolina, on the other hand, was full of young talent, but they had lost their 4 best players from their 2005 championship team (all drafted in the first round).
Personally, I think that the current rule (the player must be 19 and at least one year removed from high school) is stupid. However, I don't think there is any doubt that underclassmen leaving early and high school players skipping college has lowered the quality of play in college. Just look at all of the players on those lists. Imagine what teams would look like if players were forced to play 4 full years (or even just 2 or 3). Think of all of the Gophers who have left early in the past few years. Joel Przybilla as a sophomore in 2000. Rick Rickert as a sophomore in 2003. Kris Humpries as a freshman in 2004. But, like I said, I'm not in favor of banning players from entering early. If I was in their position, you can sure as hell bet that I would be taking the millions.
I also think parity has increased because early entry of players has hurt the bigger schools more. Big-time programs are struggling to keep their talent for more than a year or two, and mid-level and smaller schools are more likely to keep their good players there for all 4 years. I don't think there are as many totally dominant teams (or conferences) as in the past, and the success of mid-major teams in the tournament this year only further proves this. The best example of this was North Carolina vs. George Mason in the 2nd round. George Mason put out a team full of mediocre talent, but they were a veteran team. North Carolina, on the other hand, was full of young talent, but they had lost their 4 best players from their 2005 championship team (all drafted in the first round).
