Well folks, I'm not one to say "I told you so". I do act like I know what I'm talking about from time to time, and sometimes I get proven right. I'd like to talk about something I was asking for way back on October 1, and that was for the San Francisco Giants to pursue Jordan Zimmermann in free agency. Seriously, I wrote a blog where I said I thought Zimmermann made the most sense. Go check, I'll wait. You back? OK!!!! They opted instead to sign Johnny Cueto. Now first let me say I am not totally opposed to that signing. Cueto was a very solid pitcher for the Cincinnati Reds, finishing 2nd in Cy Young voting as recently as 2014, and finishing 4th in 2012. Zimmermann, on the other hand, finished 5th in 2014 and 7th in 2013. Measurables are fairly similar, both were born in 1986, Cueto in February and Zimmermann in May. Cueto stands 5'11" at 220 pounds while Zimmemann is 6'2" and 200. Cueto has 1 more season of experience amounting to 48 more starts and 328 2/3 more innings pitched. Both were coming off subpar performances in 2015, Cueto finishing 11-13 with a 3.44 ERA and Zimmermann finishing 13-10 with a 3.66 ERA. Cueto also just won a World Series with the Kansas City Royals. But as a Giants fan, the last image I had of Zimmermann was Game 2 of the 2014 NLDS when he pitched 8 2/3 innings of 3-hit, shutout baseball against the eventual World Series champion Giants (he was charged with the game tying run, but truly it was allowed by Drew Storen). His previous start, on the last day of the 2014 regular season? Not bad really, all he did was no-hit the Miami Marlins on 104 pitches, walking 1 and striking out 10. This is not to take anything away from Cueto, whose final game on 2015 was game 2 of the World Series where he pitched a Complete Game against the New York Mets, allowing 2 hits and 1 run (also walked 3 and struck out 4). My personal opinion was that I would have preferred Zimmermann.
Zimmermann ended up signing a 5-year, $110 million contract with the Detroit Tigers, while Cueto would sign for 6 years and $130 million with the Giants. I do not know the specific details of the Zimmermann contract, whether he has an opt out, team options, etc., but the per year values are similar, $22 million per year for Zimmermann and $21.66 million per year for Cueto. Cueto has an opt out following the 2017 season and would receive a $5 million buyout if he exercises that option. The Giants also have a team option 7th year for $22 million or a $5 million buyout in 2022. So we're talking about 2 very similar players with 2 very similar contracts. One I would have preferred and the other the guy that the Giants actually signed.
Right now each starter has 4 starts, so we're about 1/8 of the way through their respective seasons, and while won-lost records are similar (Zimmermann 4-0, Cueto 3-1), I believe Zimmermann has been the better pitcher by a pretty wide margin. Consider that Zimmermann allowed his first run in the 6th inning of his fourth game, while Cueto allowed his first run in the 2nd inning of his first game, and allowed 5 runs in the 1st inning of his second game against the Dodgers. So let's take a look, game by game, how these 2 starters match up.
Zimmermann: Innings Pitched Hits Runs Earned Runs Walks Strike Outs Pitches
4/8 vs. New York Yankees: 7 2 0 0 3 3 100
4/14 vs. Pittsburgh Pirates: 6 6 0 0 2 4 107
4/20 vs. Kansas City Royals: 6.1 7 0 0 1 8 105
4/25 vs. Oakland A's: 6.2 7 3 1 1 1 102
Cueto:
4/5 vs. Milwaukee Brewers: 7 6 1 1 0 4 96
4/10 vs. Los Angeles Dodgers: 7 10 6 6 2 8 104
4/16 vs. Los Angeles Dodgers: 7.1 3 1 1 2 7 109
4/21 vs. Arizona Diamondbacks: 7 8 3 3 0 3 83
So here's my takeaway. First, I find it odd that 1/8 of the way through the season, Zimmermann has only pitched agasint 1 division rival, while Cueto has pitched 3 in-division games already. That's just weird scheduling that the Giants have already played so many in-division games. In fact, in 21 games, the Giants have only played 6 non-division games, 3 vs. Milwaukee and 3 vs. Miami. Cueto has pitched deeper into games thus far. Cueto has allowed 5 more hits in 2.1 more innings, but he has walked 3 fewer so he actually has a better WHIP (Walks + Hits per Inning Pitched), 1.094 vs. 1.115. Both are still excellent as 1.3 is average. Cueto has 6 more strikeouts. The biggest separation here is run prevention. Cueto has a 3.49 ERA while Zimmermann is at 0.35. ERA, kids, is Earned Runs allowed per 9 Innings Pitched. So Cueto is allowing 3 1/2 runs per complete game, while Zimmermann is allowing less than 1. Is that sustainable? Absolutely not. At the end of the year, who will have had the better season? Way too early to tell. Could we see Cueto vs. Zimmermann in an ultimate showdown? Well, the Giants and Tigers don't play each other this season so the only way we'll see it is if the Giants and Tigers square off in the World Series (rematch from 2012), but currently the Tigers are 4th in the AL Central at 9-9 while the Giants are 3rd in the NL West at 10-11 so we've got a ways to go. If Cueto or Zimmermann were traded to a contender in the other league, we could see a regular season matchup, but considering both are in the first years of multi-year deals, it is unlikely either would be traded.
You're probably asking yourself right now, what is the point of all of this? What is he trying to say? Why have I wasted the last 20 minutes reading this nonsense? All valid questions, I assure you. I guess if nothing else, it is just validation for me that my original preference of the Giants pursuing Zimmermann over Cueto was the right call. Now if I can just figure out how to get the Giants to put me on the payroll.....
Thanks for reading.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Proper use of "hardcore"
Alright kids. Allow me the opportunity to jump onto my soapbox for a moment. I was browsing the craigslist ads today for bands looking for a drummer, so looking for a musical love connection. In case you're curious there is nothing good on there. But one ad caught my eye proclaiming a local hardcore band was looking for a drummer. Upon listening to some songs on the bands YouTube channel, my suspicions were verified. I swear to Christ, this irks me every time. Around the Denver area there is a lack of education of what hardcore is and you are using the term to inflate what is a very singular music scene. You are a METAL band, and not even a good metal band. Stop using the term "hardcore" to describe your music because you obviously have no fucking idea what that term even means.
For anyone still with me, probably like 2 of you if I'm lucky, let me first tell you what hardcore is. Hardcore is a sub-genre of PUNK music, that's right....PUNK MUSIC....that originated in the late 70's and early 80's. Hardcore is generally harder, faster, and more abrasive than traditional punk music. On the West Coast, Black Flag were considered the "godfathers" or hardcore. On the East Coast, bands like Minor Threat, Agnostic Front, and the Misfits (though more closely associated with horror punk) were influential to the rise of hardcore.
By the 90's, hardcore punk began to influence several different genres, including melodic hardcore, thrashcore, and screamo among others. New school bands with a sound more reminiscent of metallic hardcore emerged, including Strung Out, Snapcase, and Hatebreed. Old school bands were also developing with a sound more reminiscent of the classic beginnings of hardcore, including Ten Yard Fight and H2O.
In the 2000's, hardcore began to fade as the popularity of punk rock had reached the mainstream. Bands like AFI, who were hardcore on their earlier work, changed their sound considerably to appeal to major labels. Rise Against would gradually diminish their hardcore elements, culimating with 2008's Appeal to Reason which lacked the intensity of their earlier releases.
While hardcore has a few subgenres including post-hardcore and thrashcore, as well as fusion genres such as grindcore and metalcore, hardcore is at it's core (pardon the pun) a punk genre. If you are a metal band, of which there are an abundance in Denver, stop calling yourself hardcore. You are using that word incorrectly, STOP IT!!!!!
Sorry for the history lesson, and sorry if I sound like a geezer. It just irks me when people like this try to lump themselves into a genre of music and don't have a fuck-all idea of what they're talking about. For someone who grew up listening to and being heavily influenced by several of these bands, allow me to speak for all of us in saying we do not want or need you polluting our subculture.
Oh, and here's another fact to add to the lesson. Moshing was developed in the HARDCORE PUNK SCENE. So to all you bros and d-bags moshing to 5 Finger Death Punch (I vomited a little just typing that), guess what? That shit belongs to us, you fucking hypocrites.
For anyone still with me, probably like 2 of you if I'm lucky, let me first tell you what hardcore is. Hardcore is a sub-genre of PUNK music, that's right....PUNK MUSIC....that originated in the late 70's and early 80's. Hardcore is generally harder, faster, and more abrasive than traditional punk music. On the West Coast, Black Flag were considered the "godfathers" or hardcore. On the East Coast, bands like Minor Threat, Agnostic Front, and the Misfits (though more closely associated with horror punk) were influential to the rise of hardcore.
By the 90's, hardcore punk began to influence several different genres, including melodic hardcore, thrashcore, and screamo among others. New school bands with a sound more reminiscent of metallic hardcore emerged, including Strung Out, Snapcase, and Hatebreed. Old school bands were also developing with a sound more reminiscent of the classic beginnings of hardcore, including Ten Yard Fight and H2O.
In the 2000's, hardcore began to fade as the popularity of punk rock had reached the mainstream. Bands like AFI, who were hardcore on their earlier work, changed their sound considerably to appeal to major labels. Rise Against would gradually diminish their hardcore elements, culimating with 2008's Appeal to Reason which lacked the intensity of their earlier releases.
While hardcore has a few subgenres including post-hardcore and thrashcore, as well as fusion genres such as grindcore and metalcore, hardcore is at it's core (pardon the pun) a punk genre. If you are a metal band, of which there are an abundance in Denver, stop calling yourself hardcore. You are using that word incorrectly, STOP IT!!!!!
Sorry for the history lesson, and sorry if I sound like a geezer. It just irks me when people like this try to lump themselves into a genre of music and don't have a fuck-all idea of what they're talking about. For someone who grew up listening to and being heavily influenced by several of these bands, allow me to speak for all of us in saying we do not want or need you polluting our subculture.
Oh, and here's another fact to add to the lesson. Moshing was developed in the HARDCORE PUNK SCENE. So to all you bros and d-bags moshing to 5 Finger Death Punch (I vomited a little just typing that), guess what? That shit belongs to us, you fucking hypocrites.
Friday, February 26, 2016
Would you rather? Giants Infield edition.
Hey everyone. So, I read an article today that asked the question, which is the better Giants infield? The projected infield they will run out on Opening Day 2016, or the last time the Giants had an all-homegrown infield in 1993? The purpose of this is comparing these two all-homegrown infields. One could argue that the 2000 team had a better infield with J.T. Snow, Jeff Kent, Rich Aurilia and Bill Mueller, or the 2002 team, which was the last San Francisco Giants team to play in the World Series until 2010, which had Snow, Kent, Aurilia, and Pedro Feliz, but the key here is HOMEGROWN. In 1993 and in 2016, each projected starter was drafted and developed by the Giants organization. Snow was acquired by the Giants in a trade with the California (now Anaheim) Angels following the 1996 season, Kent was acquired in a trade with the Cleveland Indians also following the 1996 season, and Aurilia was acquired in a trade with the Texas Rangers in 1994. Mueller and Feliz were both homegrown players with Mueller being drafted by the Giants in the 15th round of the 1993 MLB Draft and Feliz being signed as an amateur free agent out of the Dominican Republic by the Giants in 1994. So that disqualifies 2000 and 2002 from the conversation.
Moving on, let's take a look at that 1993 infield along with their 162 game averages:
1B - Will Clark (.303 Batting Average, 178 Hits, 36 Doubles, 4 Triples, 23 Home Runs, 99 RBI, 77 Walks, 98 Strikeouts, .384 On Base Percentage, .497 Slugging Percentage)
2B - Robby Thompson (.257 Batting Average, 147 Hits, 30 Doubles, 5 Triples, 15 Home Runs, 57 RBI, 55 Walks, 123 Strikeouts, .329 On Base Percentage, .403 Slugging Percentage)
SS - Royce Clayton (.258 Batting Average, 146 Hits, 28 Doubles, 4 Triples, 8 Home Runs, 56 RBI, 43 Walks, 109 Strikeouts, .312 On Base Percentage, .367 Slugging Percentage)
3B - Matt Williams (.268 Batting Average, 163 Hits, 29 Doubles, 3 Triples, 33 Home Runs, 106 RBI, 41 Walks, 118 Strikeouts, .317 On Base Percentage, .489 Slugging Percentage)
A few notes of interest, 1993 was Clark's worst statistical season (.283, 14 Home Runs, 73 RBI) and final season with the Giants. It also broke a string of 5 straight All Star selections for Clark (1988-1992). Thompson had his best statistical season in 1993 (.312, 19 Home Runs, 65 RBI) and was an All-Star selection for the 2nd time in his career (1988, 1993). Williams would go on to hit 43 Home Runs in only 112 games during the strike-shortened 1994 season. At the time of the strike, Williams was on pace to hit 61 Home Runs which would have tied the then single-season record set by Roger maris in 1961. Williams would then be part of the trade with Cleveland in 1996 bringing Jeff Kent to San Francisco.
And now let's look at the 2016 infield with their 162 game averages:
1B - Brandon Belt (.271 Batting Average, 143 Hits, 33 Doubles, 5 Triples, 18 Home Runs, 69 RBI, 58 Walks, 145 Strikeouts, .347 On Base Percentage, .456 Slugging Percentage)
2B - Joe Panik (.309 Batting Average, 188 Hits, 35 Doubles, 4 Triples, 8 Home Runs, 52 RBI, 51 Walks, 70 Strikeouts, .364 On Base Percentage, .419 Slugging Percentage)
SS - Brandon Crawford (.246 Batting Average, 130 Hits, 27 Doubles, 5 Triples, 12 Home Runs, 65 RBI, 49 Walks, 116 Strikeouts, .313 On Base Percentage, .383 Slugging Percentage)
3B - Matt Duffy (.292 Batting Average, 164 Hits, 27 Doubles, 5 Triples, 11 Home Runs, 75 RBI, 27 Walks, 97 Strikeouts, .331 On Base Percentage, .415 Slugging Percentage)
So there's the comparison. Now, let me explain why I used the 162 game average. That way we could put together an average season for each player, rather than using a single season performance. For example, as noted above, 1993 represented Will Clark's WORST statistical season, while 1993 represented Robby Thompson's BEST statistical season. Brandon Crawford set a single-season high in 2015 with 21 Home Runs. Both Joe Panik and Matt Duffy have less than 2 full years of Major League experience. So the average seemed like the best and most fair way to put these 2 groups side by side.
Now, the 1993 infield had more power (79 Home Runs vs. 49) mainly due to Clark and Williams. On Base Percentage is largely the same (1.342 vs. 1.355) so that takes into account Hits, Walks, and Batting Average. Strikeout numbers are right about the same (448 vs. 428). Offensive numbers don't really do much to separate either group it would seem.
What about defense? Will Clark won a Gold Glove in 1991, Robby Thompson won 1 in 1993, and Matt Williams Won 3 in 1991, 1993, and 1994 (this is just in the NL. Williams also won an AL Gold Glove with Cleveland in 1997). Of the current group, only Crawford has won a Gold Glove finally receiving the honor in 2015. Belt is largely considered one of the best defensive First Basemen in the game, though in his 5 years of experience, the Gold Glove has been awarded to Joey Votto (2011), Adam LaRoche (2012), Paul Goldschmidt (2013 & 2015), and Adrian Gonzalez (2014). So defensively the edge might go to 1993, but you also have to account for the era and the players playing at that time. For example, would Clayton have won a Gold Glove had he not been playing at the same time as Ozzie Smith and Barry Larkin? Would Clark have won more than one Gold Glove had he not been playing at the same time as Mark Grace? One could argue that Crawford deserved the Gold Glove earlier in his career, but the award went to Andrelton Simmons in 2013 and 2014. Joe Panik could receive Gold Glove consideration. Unfortunately for Matt Duffy, he plays the same position as Nolan Arenado, who is unquestionably the best Third Baseman in the NL, if not all of Major League Baseball.
How about experience? The 1993 team had a little more, with both Clark and Thompson entering their 8th seasons, Clayton entering his 3rd, and Williams entering his 7th. In 2016, Belt and Crawford will each be entering their 6th seasons, while Panik and Duffy will each be entering their 3rd. Not that experience matters that much, but by 1993 we already had a pretty good idea what 3/4 of the Giants infield was bringing to the table, while the 2016 infield is still developing.
I have to admit, I can't pick one. There is a certain nostalgia about the 1993 team for me which was made up of childhood heroes. 1993 was Barry Bonds' first season in San Francisco, the Giants had 2 20-game winners (John Burkett and Bill Swift), and became the only NL team in the divisional play era to win 100 or more games and not make the playoffs in the last great pennant race. 1993 was the year I learned to hate the Atlanta Braves. That same nostalgia could also be applied to the 2016 team as this group has been part of the last 2 Giants' World Series championships in 2012 and 2014.
So there you go folks. If you had to choose between the 1993 Giants infield and the 2016 infield, which would you pick? And why?
Moving on, let's take a look at that 1993 infield along with their 162 game averages:
1B - Will Clark (.303 Batting Average, 178 Hits, 36 Doubles, 4 Triples, 23 Home Runs, 99 RBI, 77 Walks, 98 Strikeouts, .384 On Base Percentage, .497 Slugging Percentage)
2B - Robby Thompson (.257 Batting Average, 147 Hits, 30 Doubles, 5 Triples, 15 Home Runs, 57 RBI, 55 Walks, 123 Strikeouts, .329 On Base Percentage, .403 Slugging Percentage)
SS - Royce Clayton (.258 Batting Average, 146 Hits, 28 Doubles, 4 Triples, 8 Home Runs, 56 RBI, 43 Walks, 109 Strikeouts, .312 On Base Percentage, .367 Slugging Percentage)
3B - Matt Williams (.268 Batting Average, 163 Hits, 29 Doubles, 3 Triples, 33 Home Runs, 106 RBI, 41 Walks, 118 Strikeouts, .317 On Base Percentage, .489 Slugging Percentage)
A few notes of interest, 1993 was Clark's worst statistical season (.283, 14 Home Runs, 73 RBI) and final season with the Giants. It also broke a string of 5 straight All Star selections for Clark (1988-1992). Thompson had his best statistical season in 1993 (.312, 19 Home Runs, 65 RBI) and was an All-Star selection for the 2nd time in his career (1988, 1993). Williams would go on to hit 43 Home Runs in only 112 games during the strike-shortened 1994 season. At the time of the strike, Williams was on pace to hit 61 Home Runs which would have tied the then single-season record set by Roger maris in 1961. Williams would then be part of the trade with Cleveland in 1996 bringing Jeff Kent to San Francisco.
And now let's look at the 2016 infield with their 162 game averages:
1B - Brandon Belt (.271 Batting Average, 143 Hits, 33 Doubles, 5 Triples, 18 Home Runs, 69 RBI, 58 Walks, 145 Strikeouts, .347 On Base Percentage, .456 Slugging Percentage)
2B - Joe Panik (.309 Batting Average, 188 Hits, 35 Doubles, 4 Triples, 8 Home Runs, 52 RBI, 51 Walks, 70 Strikeouts, .364 On Base Percentage, .419 Slugging Percentage)
SS - Brandon Crawford (.246 Batting Average, 130 Hits, 27 Doubles, 5 Triples, 12 Home Runs, 65 RBI, 49 Walks, 116 Strikeouts, .313 On Base Percentage, .383 Slugging Percentage)
3B - Matt Duffy (.292 Batting Average, 164 Hits, 27 Doubles, 5 Triples, 11 Home Runs, 75 RBI, 27 Walks, 97 Strikeouts, .331 On Base Percentage, .415 Slugging Percentage)
So there's the comparison. Now, let me explain why I used the 162 game average. That way we could put together an average season for each player, rather than using a single season performance. For example, as noted above, 1993 represented Will Clark's WORST statistical season, while 1993 represented Robby Thompson's BEST statistical season. Brandon Crawford set a single-season high in 2015 with 21 Home Runs. Both Joe Panik and Matt Duffy have less than 2 full years of Major League experience. So the average seemed like the best and most fair way to put these 2 groups side by side.
Now, the 1993 infield had more power (79 Home Runs vs. 49) mainly due to Clark and Williams. On Base Percentage is largely the same (1.342 vs. 1.355) so that takes into account Hits, Walks, and Batting Average. Strikeout numbers are right about the same (448 vs. 428). Offensive numbers don't really do much to separate either group it would seem.
What about defense? Will Clark won a Gold Glove in 1991, Robby Thompson won 1 in 1993, and Matt Williams Won 3 in 1991, 1993, and 1994 (this is just in the NL. Williams also won an AL Gold Glove with Cleveland in 1997). Of the current group, only Crawford has won a Gold Glove finally receiving the honor in 2015. Belt is largely considered one of the best defensive First Basemen in the game, though in his 5 years of experience, the Gold Glove has been awarded to Joey Votto (2011), Adam LaRoche (2012), Paul Goldschmidt (2013 & 2015), and Adrian Gonzalez (2014). So defensively the edge might go to 1993, but you also have to account for the era and the players playing at that time. For example, would Clayton have won a Gold Glove had he not been playing at the same time as Ozzie Smith and Barry Larkin? Would Clark have won more than one Gold Glove had he not been playing at the same time as Mark Grace? One could argue that Crawford deserved the Gold Glove earlier in his career, but the award went to Andrelton Simmons in 2013 and 2014. Joe Panik could receive Gold Glove consideration. Unfortunately for Matt Duffy, he plays the same position as Nolan Arenado, who is unquestionably the best Third Baseman in the NL, if not all of Major League Baseball.
How about experience? The 1993 team had a little more, with both Clark and Thompson entering their 8th seasons, Clayton entering his 3rd, and Williams entering his 7th. In 2016, Belt and Crawford will each be entering their 6th seasons, while Panik and Duffy will each be entering their 3rd. Not that experience matters that much, but by 1993 we already had a pretty good idea what 3/4 of the Giants infield was bringing to the table, while the 2016 infield is still developing.
I have to admit, I can't pick one. There is a certain nostalgia about the 1993 team for me which was made up of childhood heroes. 1993 was Barry Bonds' first season in San Francisco, the Giants had 2 20-game winners (John Burkett and Bill Swift), and became the only NL team in the divisional play era to win 100 or more games and not make the playoffs in the last great pennant race. 1993 was the year I learned to hate the Atlanta Braves. That same nostalgia could also be applied to the 2016 team as this group has been part of the last 2 Giants' World Series championships in 2012 and 2014.
So there you go folks. If you had to choose between the 1993 Giants infield and the 2016 infield, which would you pick? And why?
Saturday, October 24, 2015
No Bean Chili
Hello everyone. So I decided to make chili last night and as I really like this recipe, I wanted to share it with you. I'm also trying to make a video of the cooking process but it is taking some time to edit it together. Hopefully I can get it done and uploaded to YouTube in the next week or so, but I may need to make a second batch in order to get all the steps.
Anyway, let's start with the ingredients you're going to need:
~ 4 Tri-Tip Roasts trimmed of fat and cut into 1/4" cubes
(Note: Tri-Tip is primarily a West coast cut of meat. If you can't get this at your local grocer, you can also use ground beef, beef chuck, brisket, or short ribs. Your average tri-tip is about 1.5 to 2.5 pounds, so if you use an alternative, make sure you start with about 8 pounds of meat. Tri-Tip should cost you about $6.99 per pound. Just an FYI, King Soopers in Denver has recently started carrying this cut, but are charging $8.99 per pound for it.)
~ 4 16 oz cans beef broth (I used 2 32 oz boxes of Progresso beef broth)
~ 1 16 oz can tomato sauce (I used 2 8 oz cans of Hunt's tomato sauce)
~ 4 Tablespoons cumin
~ 2 Tablespoons chili powder
~ 2 cups chopped onions
~ 8 minced garlic cloves
~ 1 can Ortega green chiles (comes in 4 oz and 7 oz cans. I used the 7 oz can)
~ 4 Jalapeno peppers
~ 3 Tablespoons oregano
~ cayenne pepper
Now I'm going to go through the recipe as it is written, and then add my notes to what I did differently and why.
1. Place meat into clean bowl. Add cumin and chili powder over meat, mix together and let stand for 1 hour.
2. Brown meat in a little oil.
3. Mix in 1 can of broth to loosen drippings.
4. Add tomato sauce and mix well.
5. Add rest of broth, onions, garlic to kettle.
6. Add green chiles.
7. Boil jalapenos for 40 minutes.
8. Puree jalapenos in food processor/blender.
9. Add jalapeno puree to kettle along with oregano.
10. Cayenne pepper to taste.
11. Simmer all day.
So there you have it. All seems fairly simple, right? Let me first tell you that cutting the tri-tip is going to take you some time if you're doing it by yourself. I think I'm a pretty OK chef, and it took me about 2 - 2 1/2 hours to cut 4 tri-tips. Now I went a little against the recipe on this and I'll tell you why.
First, I started boiling the water for the jalapenos. Since this prep step is going to take close to an hour, I'd say go ahead and start this first. That way you can set it and forget it. Once the water is boiling, add your jalapenos and boil for 40 minutes. I reduced the heat to medium-high so as not to boil all the water down.
Now I'm using a slow cooker instead of a stove-top kettle or stock pot, soo I did not season the meat before browning. The reason for this is I drained the meat before putting into the slow cooker and I did not want to lose any of the flavor from the spices in the run off. So I browned the meat unseasoned, drained, and placed into the slow cooker.
Next I sautéed the onions and garlic. You can put these in the kettle raw, but sautéing them coaxes the maximum amount of flavor before adding to your chili. The recipe doesn't specify type of onions but you're going to want to use either yellow or white onions for this chili recipe. I went with white. White onions are sharper than yellow onions, while yellow onions are hardy with a complex and spicy flavor. I sautéed the onions for about 5 minutes, until the onions were soft and slightly translucent. Then I added the garlic and browned the outside, about 1 minute (be careful not to burn). Then I added about half of one of the boxes of beef broth to the onions and garlic to deglaze the pan, and added both cans of tomato sauce. I stirred all of this together in the pan for a short time, then added to the slow cooker over the tri-tip.
At this point I added all of our measured spices to the slow cooker, the cumin, chili powder, and oregano. I also added the can of green chiles and the rest of the already opened box of beef broth and stirred it together. The last time I made this chili it was a bit watery so you may not need to use all 64 oz of broth. I'll go over some other thickening steps later.
At this point the jalapenos were done so I removed them from the water (careful, it's hot). You will want to destem them jalapenos. I cut the tops off, but the stems will easily pull off. Now you have a choice to make. You can puree the jalapenos as is, or you can deseed them if you wish. Leaving the seeds will increase the potency of the jalapeno, while removing the seeds will mellow the heat but still deliver all the flavor. I chose to be a Viking and leave the seeds in. If you want to deseed your jalapenos, cut them in half, then use a spoon to scoop out the core and seeds. You may also want to wear gloves as the oil from the jalapeno will stay on your skin for a while. If you don't wear gloves, be sure not to touch your eyes after handling the jalapenos. Then I tossed the jalapenos into the food processor and pureed. I then added the jalapeno puree to my slow cooker and stirred.
The final step was to add the cayenne pepper. Now this is just used to taste so you can use a little or a lot or none at all. I used a little. You can always add more later, but you can't take spice away once it's added. Finally I added about half of the last box of beef broth and set the slow cooker to low for 8 hours. If the chili starts to cook down too much, you can always add more of the beef broth as needed.
Now, if you want to thicken your chili, there are a few ways you can do this. You can add a slurry using either flour or cornstarch. If using flour, remove 1/4 cup of the liquid from your chili into a separate bowl and add 2 Tablespoons of flour to the liquid. Mix together until the mixture is smooth and without lumps. Add slurry to the chili and stir. The stirring and heat should thicken the chili. If using cornstarch, you want to use 1 Tablespoon of cornstarch to 1 Tablespoon of liquid. If you want to let the chili naturally reduce, cook the chili uncovered for an additional 30 to 60 minutes. I think this might work better if using a stove top kettle. If you don't want to add anything to the chili, you can also thicken upon serving. Just add your choice in your own bowl. You can use oyster crackers or saltines, crushed corn chips, crumbled corn bread, or grated cheese. I'm definitely trying the corn chips and corn bread ideas.
Here's my personal serving suggestion. If you're from Cincinnati you'll know exactly what I'm talking about here. Cincinnati has 2 chains of chili restaurants, Skyline Chili and Gold Star Chili. At either restaurant you can get a coney, that's a hot dog folks. So for a regular coney you have your hot dog, topped with chili and chopped onions (with or without mustard). The cheese coney adds shredded cheddar cheese on top. Or if you don't want a hot dog, you can go with a "Way" instead. Your basic 3-Way is spaghetti topped with chili and cheddar cheese, a 4-Way adds beans or onions, and a 5-Way adds beans AND onions. If you want to add beans, I'd suggest just using canned kidney beans.
That's all folks. Feel free to add or adjust to your leisure and taste. Bon appetite.
Anyway, let's start with the ingredients you're going to need:
~ 4 Tri-Tip Roasts trimmed of fat and cut into 1/4" cubes
(Note: Tri-Tip is primarily a West coast cut of meat. If you can't get this at your local grocer, you can also use ground beef, beef chuck, brisket, or short ribs. Your average tri-tip is about 1.5 to 2.5 pounds, so if you use an alternative, make sure you start with about 8 pounds of meat. Tri-Tip should cost you about $6.99 per pound. Just an FYI, King Soopers in Denver has recently started carrying this cut, but are charging $8.99 per pound for it.)
~ 4 16 oz cans beef broth (I used 2 32 oz boxes of Progresso beef broth)
~ 1 16 oz can tomato sauce (I used 2 8 oz cans of Hunt's tomato sauce)
~ 4 Tablespoons cumin
~ 2 Tablespoons chili powder
~ 2 cups chopped onions
~ 8 minced garlic cloves
~ 1 can Ortega green chiles (comes in 4 oz and 7 oz cans. I used the 7 oz can)
~ 4 Jalapeno peppers
~ 3 Tablespoons oregano
~ cayenne pepper
Now I'm going to go through the recipe as it is written, and then add my notes to what I did differently and why.
1. Place meat into clean bowl. Add cumin and chili powder over meat, mix together and let stand for 1 hour.
2. Brown meat in a little oil.
3. Mix in 1 can of broth to loosen drippings.
4. Add tomato sauce and mix well.
5. Add rest of broth, onions, garlic to kettle.
6. Add green chiles.
7. Boil jalapenos for 40 minutes.
8. Puree jalapenos in food processor/blender.
9. Add jalapeno puree to kettle along with oregano.
10. Cayenne pepper to taste.
11. Simmer all day.
So there you have it. All seems fairly simple, right? Let me first tell you that cutting the tri-tip is going to take you some time if you're doing it by yourself. I think I'm a pretty OK chef, and it took me about 2 - 2 1/2 hours to cut 4 tri-tips. Now I went a little against the recipe on this and I'll tell you why.
First, I started boiling the water for the jalapenos. Since this prep step is going to take close to an hour, I'd say go ahead and start this first. That way you can set it and forget it. Once the water is boiling, add your jalapenos and boil for 40 minutes. I reduced the heat to medium-high so as not to boil all the water down.
Now I'm using a slow cooker instead of a stove-top kettle or stock pot, soo I did not season the meat before browning. The reason for this is I drained the meat before putting into the slow cooker and I did not want to lose any of the flavor from the spices in the run off. So I browned the meat unseasoned, drained, and placed into the slow cooker.
Next I sautéed the onions and garlic. You can put these in the kettle raw, but sautéing them coaxes the maximum amount of flavor before adding to your chili. The recipe doesn't specify type of onions but you're going to want to use either yellow or white onions for this chili recipe. I went with white. White onions are sharper than yellow onions, while yellow onions are hardy with a complex and spicy flavor. I sautéed the onions for about 5 minutes, until the onions were soft and slightly translucent. Then I added the garlic and browned the outside, about 1 minute (be careful not to burn). Then I added about half of one of the boxes of beef broth to the onions and garlic to deglaze the pan, and added both cans of tomato sauce. I stirred all of this together in the pan for a short time, then added to the slow cooker over the tri-tip.
At this point I added all of our measured spices to the slow cooker, the cumin, chili powder, and oregano. I also added the can of green chiles and the rest of the already opened box of beef broth and stirred it together. The last time I made this chili it was a bit watery so you may not need to use all 64 oz of broth. I'll go over some other thickening steps later.
At this point the jalapenos were done so I removed them from the water (careful, it's hot). You will want to destem them jalapenos. I cut the tops off, but the stems will easily pull off. Now you have a choice to make. You can puree the jalapenos as is, or you can deseed them if you wish. Leaving the seeds will increase the potency of the jalapeno, while removing the seeds will mellow the heat but still deliver all the flavor. I chose to be a Viking and leave the seeds in. If you want to deseed your jalapenos, cut them in half, then use a spoon to scoop out the core and seeds. You may also want to wear gloves as the oil from the jalapeno will stay on your skin for a while. If you don't wear gloves, be sure not to touch your eyes after handling the jalapenos. Then I tossed the jalapenos into the food processor and pureed. I then added the jalapeno puree to my slow cooker and stirred.
The final step was to add the cayenne pepper. Now this is just used to taste so you can use a little or a lot or none at all. I used a little. You can always add more later, but you can't take spice away once it's added. Finally I added about half of the last box of beef broth and set the slow cooker to low for 8 hours. If the chili starts to cook down too much, you can always add more of the beef broth as needed.
Now, if you want to thicken your chili, there are a few ways you can do this. You can add a slurry using either flour or cornstarch. If using flour, remove 1/4 cup of the liquid from your chili into a separate bowl and add 2 Tablespoons of flour to the liquid. Mix together until the mixture is smooth and without lumps. Add slurry to the chili and stir. The stirring and heat should thicken the chili. If using cornstarch, you want to use 1 Tablespoon of cornstarch to 1 Tablespoon of liquid. If you want to let the chili naturally reduce, cook the chili uncovered for an additional 30 to 60 minutes. I think this might work better if using a stove top kettle. If you don't want to add anything to the chili, you can also thicken upon serving. Just add your choice in your own bowl. You can use oyster crackers or saltines, crushed corn chips, crumbled corn bread, or grated cheese. I'm definitely trying the corn chips and corn bread ideas.
Here's my personal serving suggestion. If you're from Cincinnati you'll know exactly what I'm talking about here. Cincinnati has 2 chains of chili restaurants, Skyline Chili and Gold Star Chili. At either restaurant you can get a coney, that's a hot dog folks. So for a regular coney you have your hot dog, topped with chili and chopped onions (with or without mustard). The cheese coney adds shredded cheddar cheese on top. Or if you don't want a hot dog, you can go with a "Way" instead. Your basic 3-Way is spaghetti topped with chili and cheddar cheese, a 4-Way adds beans or onions, and a 5-Way adds beans AND onions. If you want to add beans, I'd suggest just using canned kidney beans.
That's all folks. Feel free to add or adjust to your leisure and taste. Bon appetite.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
My future as a drummer
Yesterday I bought an electronic drum kit (Alesis DM7X in case you're interested). I've never owned an electronic kit before, but it has been something I've been considering for a few years now. I've lived in apartments since moving to Denver 12 years ago and I thought it would be nice to have a way to practice at home. Obviously I can't set up my acoustic kit in an apartment. Those of you who have seen me play or have played with me know I play LOUD. I suppose I could set everything up and jam if I didn't care about my neighbors. But as of this writing, that is not something I'm considering.
Before I begin, I want to say that writing this is a little hard for me. It is intended as a commentary and not as a criticism against those people I was in bands with, other bands I have shared stages with, the promoters I've worked with over the years. However several of those experiences have left a distinct bitter taste that I don't care to hide. It is also an acknowledgement of perceived personal failures. Not the failure of not becoming a rock star, but rather the failure of putting my faith in so many of the wrong people. At the end of the day, it is extraordinarily difficult for me to look back at the last 12 years as anything other than a waste of time. I do try to be entertaining in these blogs for the most part, and whether I succeed or not is truly a subjective matter, but this post will be personal and honest. And no matter who you are, baring a piece of your soul for the world to see is a daunting thought. Please read this knowing that this comes from a damaged place and it is not intended to be a personal attack at any one person, group, or other.
Anyway, I felt like writing some of my thoughts regarding being a musician and my "career" up to this point. Also I wanted to touch a little bit on the future and the state of the music scene I happen to be living in and how it pertains to me.
So to start with, I moved to Denver in 2003. I've basically been playing drums in bands since age 12 or 13, 7th grade. Those were mostly garage band types. We played basement parties and those types of things, but nothing professional. 2004 began the idea that would eventually form the band that I would spend the next 10 years with. At first it was just myself and a singer, but in early 2005 I answered an ad from 2 guitar players who seemed to have common interests. We jammed together and things seemed to click. Eventually we brought in the singer and added a bass player and we were set. We only had 2 lineup changes, bass player and one of our guitar players, and from 2005 - 2009 we played most of the mid-level venues in and around the Denver area. I think we carved out a good reputation with most of the promoters and venues we were able to work with. We quickly established ourselves as professional (which was pretty funny if you know the story) and as solid workers on stage. We weren't the most popular band in Denver but we always brought a solid crowd with us. At that point I don't think the goal was to be the most popular, in fact I don't think any of us cared about that at all. The goal was just to write music and perform. And we did just that.
The band took a hiatus in 2009. I was quite lost during that time. I tried to keep playing, but there was a familiarity and a camaraderie I shared with that band that I wasn't able to capture. These people I had shared so many experiences over the previous 4 years were not replaceable. They were my friends, they were my brothers, they were my family.
In 2011 the band decided to give things another run. We had largely the same lineup, we had a new guitar player and our original bass player from 2005 came back to the fold, but the 3 of us who had been there from the beginning were still there. Unfortunately I think so many things had changed that we were destined to fail. It no longer seemed that writing and performing were what was driving everyone. There was this underlying motivation of "making it" and writing a radio hit song. I operated as the de facto manager for the band so I understand there is a business aspect to it. But as a musician and as a performer I still believe the music and performing should be what pushes you, not the money, perceived fame, etc.
In 2013 I was ultimately replaced as the manager by an outside party and in December of that year I decided to leave the band. January, 2014 was my final performance. I will not tackle the details of my replacement or my departure at this time. That is another story that I am still not ready to write. I will say this regarding the situation. If you are a local band, you do not need a manager. I came from a DIY background and allowing an unaffiliated 3rd party handle your business is not at all something I am comfortable with. I had developed a good working rapport with a number of these bookers and I felt like an asshole telling them they now had to deal with someone else. Also, if you are a local band who has to tell people, "you can't talk to us about booking us, you have to talk to our manager", you are a douchebag.
As far as the musical climate, when I started playing in bands I started with jazz. My first 2 "real" bands in high school were grunge. I also played punk, nu metal, and a number of other styles. I learned and pushed myself by playing along with bands like Deftones, Rage Against the Machine, Korn, Soundgarden, to name a few. After I moved to Denver and we started this band, I would classify ourselves as alt-metal. Bands like Breaking Benjamin, Three Days Grace, and Chevelle were very much in fashion and I think the Denver music scene followed suit. We always had plenty of good bands to book with and our sounds all seemed to compliment each other. Since then it seems the musical climate has shifted. Now Denver is flooded with "bro metal" and borderline death metal bands. This is not at all my scene, nor is it anything I am interested in playing. If anything I was trying to push our sound in more of a post-hardcore direction. Think Story of the Year or A Day to Remember. Another classification could be easycore (a fusion of metalcore and pop punk). But my vision was not shared by the rest of the band. I also bridge a generation gap between pre and post social media. When I was coming up, the only way to let people know you had a show was to tell them. That meant going to parties and talking to people, making flyers and handing them out, relying on your friends to tell people. Then social media came along and offered a new tool to advertise to and communicate with your fans. Ideally both should be utilized, but I think the younger generation relies on social media as their primary means of promotion and that does not work. At the same time, the older generation hardly uses social media at all and that doesn't work either. I'm in between those 2 extremes and I think that's the perfect place to be, utilizing both the old and the new school. Social media is just a different avenue to achieve the same result. Handing out flyers is equivalent to creating an event and sending out invites on Facebook. The part that fails miserably in this case is the word of mouth. If you accept an invite, you can then forward the invite to any of your friends. Most people don't do this. Understand as fans you are as responsible for a bands success or failure as the band. We are all in this together and we all have a part to play. But it falls apart if not everybody is willing to play their part.
In the 2 years that have followed since I left the band, I have been searching for another opportunity. It's not like I've put everything away. Far from it. I realize I am not 20, but as far as energy goes I do not feel like I have slowed down at all. I bring over 20 years of playing experience and almost 10 years of management experience. And yet the sticking point is the style of music I want to play. I have posted several ads on craigslist advertising myself. I specifically am looking for a post-hardcore or easycore style of band. I am not interested in playing metal and I have specifically worded this in every ad I have posted. And yet, the only people I have been contacted by are people wanting to play metal. I'm not sure if they just see "drummer" in the title and don't bother to read the rest of the ad, or if they feel like maybe they can convince me to play a different style than I'd like. I do not want to play simply for the sake of playing. I want to do something I am going to enjoy. After all, at the end of the day being in a band is supposed to be fun.
So this brings me to the future part of this blog. I don't know what the future holds for me. I don't know if I will ever be on stage again looking out over a crowd from behind my drums. I do know that I have not wanted to play more in the past 2 years than I do right now. I believe that is due to the new record releases by Strung Out, Breaking Benjamin, Bullet For My Valentine, and Atreyu this year. My hope is deflated, however, by the thought that the musical climate I find myself surrounded by will not afford me the opportunity to play the type of music I want to hear. I'm sure at this point there are several people asking, "well why don't you move to a different city?" That thought has been prevalent in my mind for quite some time. It is a scary proposition however to move to a new city by myself and start over. I'd basically be hitting the reset button on my life and I don't care who you are or where you are in life, that is a scary thought. Also, I find it interesting that the people who have no reason to change, whether they're happily married, or have kids, or have a home, or who have lived in one place their entire lives and never been anywhere else, are the first ones to stand up and tell you that you need to change. Please walk in the other persons shoes and try to understand what they are going through and why they might feel a certain way before you start handing out "advice".
Perhaps there is more to this story that is yet to be written. Perhaps there is a happy ending somewhere in the dark. The hopeful optimist in me says there is because I feel like I have so much to offer, I only need the chance. The realist (or pessimist, depending on your opinion) says this is the way things are and you'd better hurry up and accept it because there sure as Hell is nothing you can do to change it. And then there's me, caught in the middle. But I'm not a psychologist so what do I know. Thank you for reading.
Before I begin, I want to say that writing this is a little hard for me. It is intended as a commentary and not as a criticism against those people I was in bands with, other bands I have shared stages with, the promoters I've worked with over the years. However several of those experiences have left a distinct bitter taste that I don't care to hide. It is also an acknowledgement of perceived personal failures. Not the failure of not becoming a rock star, but rather the failure of putting my faith in so many of the wrong people. At the end of the day, it is extraordinarily difficult for me to look back at the last 12 years as anything other than a waste of time. I do try to be entertaining in these blogs for the most part, and whether I succeed or not is truly a subjective matter, but this post will be personal and honest. And no matter who you are, baring a piece of your soul for the world to see is a daunting thought. Please read this knowing that this comes from a damaged place and it is not intended to be a personal attack at any one person, group, or other.
Anyway, I felt like writing some of my thoughts regarding being a musician and my "career" up to this point. Also I wanted to touch a little bit on the future and the state of the music scene I happen to be living in and how it pertains to me.
So to start with, I moved to Denver in 2003. I've basically been playing drums in bands since age 12 or 13, 7th grade. Those were mostly garage band types. We played basement parties and those types of things, but nothing professional. 2004 began the idea that would eventually form the band that I would spend the next 10 years with. At first it was just myself and a singer, but in early 2005 I answered an ad from 2 guitar players who seemed to have common interests. We jammed together and things seemed to click. Eventually we brought in the singer and added a bass player and we were set. We only had 2 lineup changes, bass player and one of our guitar players, and from 2005 - 2009 we played most of the mid-level venues in and around the Denver area. I think we carved out a good reputation with most of the promoters and venues we were able to work with. We quickly established ourselves as professional (which was pretty funny if you know the story) and as solid workers on stage. We weren't the most popular band in Denver but we always brought a solid crowd with us. At that point I don't think the goal was to be the most popular, in fact I don't think any of us cared about that at all. The goal was just to write music and perform. And we did just that.
The band took a hiatus in 2009. I was quite lost during that time. I tried to keep playing, but there was a familiarity and a camaraderie I shared with that band that I wasn't able to capture. These people I had shared so many experiences over the previous 4 years were not replaceable. They were my friends, they were my brothers, they were my family.
In 2011 the band decided to give things another run. We had largely the same lineup, we had a new guitar player and our original bass player from 2005 came back to the fold, but the 3 of us who had been there from the beginning were still there. Unfortunately I think so many things had changed that we were destined to fail. It no longer seemed that writing and performing were what was driving everyone. There was this underlying motivation of "making it" and writing a radio hit song. I operated as the de facto manager for the band so I understand there is a business aspect to it. But as a musician and as a performer I still believe the music and performing should be what pushes you, not the money, perceived fame, etc.
In 2013 I was ultimately replaced as the manager by an outside party and in December of that year I decided to leave the band. January, 2014 was my final performance. I will not tackle the details of my replacement or my departure at this time. That is another story that I am still not ready to write. I will say this regarding the situation. If you are a local band, you do not need a manager. I came from a DIY background and allowing an unaffiliated 3rd party handle your business is not at all something I am comfortable with. I had developed a good working rapport with a number of these bookers and I felt like an asshole telling them they now had to deal with someone else. Also, if you are a local band who has to tell people, "you can't talk to us about booking us, you have to talk to our manager", you are a douchebag.
As far as the musical climate, when I started playing in bands I started with jazz. My first 2 "real" bands in high school were grunge. I also played punk, nu metal, and a number of other styles. I learned and pushed myself by playing along with bands like Deftones, Rage Against the Machine, Korn, Soundgarden, to name a few. After I moved to Denver and we started this band, I would classify ourselves as alt-metal. Bands like Breaking Benjamin, Three Days Grace, and Chevelle were very much in fashion and I think the Denver music scene followed suit. We always had plenty of good bands to book with and our sounds all seemed to compliment each other. Since then it seems the musical climate has shifted. Now Denver is flooded with "bro metal" and borderline death metal bands. This is not at all my scene, nor is it anything I am interested in playing. If anything I was trying to push our sound in more of a post-hardcore direction. Think Story of the Year or A Day to Remember. Another classification could be easycore (a fusion of metalcore and pop punk). But my vision was not shared by the rest of the band. I also bridge a generation gap between pre and post social media. When I was coming up, the only way to let people know you had a show was to tell them. That meant going to parties and talking to people, making flyers and handing them out, relying on your friends to tell people. Then social media came along and offered a new tool to advertise to and communicate with your fans. Ideally both should be utilized, but I think the younger generation relies on social media as their primary means of promotion and that does not work. At the same time, the older generation hardly uses social media at all and that doesn't work either. I'm in between those 2 extremes and I think that's the perfect place to be, utilizing both the old and the new school. Social media is just a different avenue to achieve the same result. Handing out flyers is equivalent to creating an event and sending out invites on Facebook. The part that fails miserably in this case is the word of mouth. If you accept an invite, you can then forward the invite to any of your friends. Most people don't do this. Understand as fans you are as responsible for a bands success or failure as the band. We are all in this together and we all have a part to play. But it falls apart if not everybody is willing to play their part.
In the 2 years that have followed since I left the band, I have been searching for another opportunity. It's not like I've put everything away. Far from it. I realize I am not 20, but as far as energy goes I do not feel like I have slowed down at all. I bring over 20 years of playing experience and almost 10 years of management experience. And yet the sticking point is the style of music I want to play. I have posted several ads on craigslist advertising myself. I specifically am looking for a post-hardcore or easycore style of band. I am not interested in playing metal and I have specifically worded this in every ad I have posted. And yet, the only people I have been contacted by are people wanting to play metal. I'm not sure if they just see "drummer" in the title and don't bother to read the rest of the ad, or if they feel like maybe they can convince me to play a different style than I'd like. I do not want to play simply for the sake of playing. I want to do something I am going to enjoy. After all, at the end of the day being in a band is supposed to be fun.
So this brings me to the future part of this blog. I don't know what the future holds for me. I don't know if I will ever be on stage again looking out over a crowd from behind my drums. I do know that I have not wanted to play more in the past 2 years than I do right now. I believe that is due to the new record releases by Strung Out, Breaking Benjamin, Bullet For My Valentine, and Atreyu this year. My hope is deflated, however, by the thought that the musical climate I find myself surrounded by will not afford me the opportunity to play the type of music I want to hear. I'm sure at this point there are several people asking, "well why don't you move to a different city?" That thought has been prevalent in my mind for quite some time. It is a scary proposition however to move to a new city by myself and start over. I'd basically be hitting the reset button on my life and I don't care who you are or where you are in life, that is a scary thought. Also, I find it interesting that the people who have no reason to change, whether they're happily married, or have kids, or have a home, or who have lived in one place their entire lives and never been anywhere else, are the first ones to stand up and tell you that you need to change. Please walk in the other persons shoes and try to understand what they are going through and why they might feel a certain way before you start handing out "advice".
Perhaps there is more to this story that is yet to be written. Perhaps there is a happy ending somewhere in the dark. The hopeful optimist in me says there is because I feel like I have so much to offer, I only need the chance. The realist (or pessimist, depending on your opinion) says this is the way things are and you'd better hurry up and accept it because there sure as Hell is nothing you can do to change it. And then there's me, caught in the middle. But I'm not a psychologist so what do I know. Thank you for reading.
Would the Giants look for a Center Fielder?
So I was reading an article today which asked the question, "What should the San Francisco Giants do with Left Field?". Here's the link to the article: http://goldengatesports.com/2015/10/19/what-should-the-san-francisco-giants-do-in-left-field/. But it got me to thinking, up to this point I have been considering the Giants looking for a Left Fielder, from resigning Nori Aoki, to bringing in Alex Gordon. But what if the Giants moved Angel Pagan to Left Field and instead targeted a Center Fielder in free agency?
Here's a list of the available Center Field Free Agents:
Rajai Davis
Dexter Fowler
Austin Jackson
Justin Maxwell
Colby Rasmus
Denard Span
Drew Stubbs
Rajai Davis is the oldest at 35, and actually played for the Giants in 2007 and 2008. Justin Maxwell played for the Giants last season and for a player who will be 32 at the beginning of the 2016 season and has 7 seasons of Major League experience, I think it's safe to say you know what you're going to get with him. Not a starter. So let's look at the other 5 guys, all of which will be between 29 and 32 in 2016.
Dexter Fowler (30): Fowler does not hit for a high average (.250 in 2015, has only hit .300 once in 2012) and strikes out quite a bit (career high 154 in 2015) for a guy who should be your leadoff hitter, but his speed and defense make him worth a look. Fowler stole 20 bases in 2015. To compare, Nori Aoki led the Giants in 2015 with 14 Stolen Bases (in 93 games played). Fowler committed only 4 errors in Center Field last year. Angel Pagan committed 4 errors in Center Field for the Giants last year (in 125 games). Fowler made $9.5 million in 2015, which was less than the Giants paid Aoki. So Fowler's price here might be a tad higher, but statistically he doesn't really seem much of an improvement over Pagan and Aoki.
Austin Jackson (29): I liked Jackson when he played for Detroit. 2012 was statiscally his best season hitting .300 with 16 Home Runs and 66 RBI and the Tigers made it to the World Series. He's been pretty steady throughout his career, but did not play particularly well after he was traded to Seattle in 2014. He was having a decent season for the Mariners in 2015 but was traded to the Cubs where his stats have been down. He is another high strikeout player in the leadoff position (lowest season total is 126) with 20+ stolen base speed. Jackson made $7.7 million in 2015 and is coming off 2 sub-par seasons so he could be had for a bargain.
Colby Rasmus (29): Similar story to Fowler and Jackson, only substitue 20+ Home Run power for 20+ Stolen Base speed. Another high strikeout player who hits for a low average (.238 with 154 strikeouts in 2015) but he hit 25 Home Runs this season for the Astros. Rasmus made $8 million in 2015 and based on his power potential I would expect that number to increase at least slightly.
Denard Span (32): Span is coming off an injury plagued 2015, but was a solid player for the Nationals in the 2 previous seasons for Washington. Span is a career .287 hitter and a good base stealer. He has a career success rate of 79% and a season high of 31. Span is also a solid defender. He had 0 errors in 2013 in 384 total chances. Span made $9 million in 2015, but is coming off a down year so there is the possibility of the Giants signing him to a 1-year "prove it" deal.
Drew Stubbs (31): There was a time when Stubbs was an intruguing speed and power prospect. Arguably his best statistical season was 2010 with the Reds where he hit 22 Home Runs and stole 30 bases. His season high for Stolen Bases is 40 in 2011. However Stubbs has never hit for a high average (career .244) and hit a career low .195 in 2015 between Colorado and Texas. Stubbs made just south of $6 million in 2015, but I would only consider signing him to a Minor League deal or as a Spring Training invitee.
So there you go. Honestly I don't think any of these players represent much of a statistical improvement over Pagan and Aoki, but if the price is right, I would be OK seeing either Austin Jackson or Denard Span in a Giants uniform next year. I still like the prospect of keeping Pagan in Center Field and possibly signing Alex Gordon, but considering Gordon made $12.5 million in 2015, that could be the more expensive option. What do you think? Who do you think the Giants should target?
Here's a list of the available Center Field Free Agents:
Rajai Davis
Dexter Fowler
Austin Jackson
Justin Maxwell
Colby Rasmus
Denard Span
Drew Stubbs
Rajai Davis is the oldest at 35, and actually played for the Giants in 2007 and 2008. Justin Maxwell played for the Giants last season and for a player who will be 32 at the beginning of the 2016 season and has 7 seasons of Major League experience, I think it's safe to say you know what you're going to get with him. Not a starter. So let's look at the other 5 guys, all of which will be between 29 and 32 in 2016.
Dexter Fowler (30): Fowler does not hit for a high average (.250 in 2015, has only hit .300 once in 2012) and strikes out quite a bit (career high 154 in 2015) for a guy who should be your leadoff hitter, but his speed and defense make him worth a look. Fowler stole 20 bases in 2015. To compare, Nori Aoki led the Giants in 2015 with 14 Stolen Bases (in 93 games played). Fowler committed only 4 errors in Center Field last year. Angel Pagan committed 4 errors in Center Field for the Giants last year (in 125 games). Fowler made $9.5 million in 2015, which was less than the Giants paid Aoki. So Fowler's price here might be a tad higher, but statistically he doesn't really seem much of an improvement over Pagan and Aoki.
Austin Jackson (29): I liked Jackson when he played for Detroit. 2012 was statiscally his best season hitting .300 with 16 Home Runs and 66 RBI and the Tigers made it to the World Series. He's been pretty steady throughout his career, but did not play particularly well after he was traded to Seattle in 2014. He was having a decent season for the Mariners in 2015 but was traded to the Cubs where his stats have been down. He is another high strikeout player in the leadoff position (lowest season total is 126) with 20+ stolen base speed. Jackson made $7.7 million in 2015 and is coming off 2 sub-par seasons so he could be had for a bargain.
Colby Rasmus (29): Similar story to Fowler and Jackson, only substitue 20+ Home Run power for 20+ Stolen Base speed. Another high strikeout player who hits for a low average (.238 with 154 strikeouts in 2015) but he hit 25 Home Runs this season for the Astros. Rasmus made $8 million in 2015 and based on his power potential I would expect that number to increase at least slightly.
Denard Span (32): Span is coming off an injury plagued 2015, but was a solid player for the Nationals in the 2 previous seasons for Washington. Span is a career .287 hitter and a good base stealer. He has a career success rate of 79% and a season high of 31. Span is also a solid defender. He had 0 errors in 2013 in 384 total chances. Span made $9 million in 2015, but is coming off a down year so there is the possibility of the Giants signing him to a 1-year "prove it" deal.
Drew Stubbs (31): There was a time when Stubbs was an intruguing speed and power prospect. Arguably his best statistical season was 2010 with the Reds where he hit 22 Home Runs and stole 30 bases. His season high for Stolen Bases is 40 in 2011. However Stubbs has never hit for a high average (career .244) and hit a career low .195 in 2015 between Colorado and Texas. Stubbs made just south of $6 million in 2015, but I would only consider signing him to a Minor League deal or as a Spring Training invitee.
So there you go. Honestly I don't think any of these players represent much of a statistical improvement over Pagan and Aoki, but if the price is right, I would be OK seeing either Austin Jackson or Denard Span in a Giants uniform next year. I still like the prospect of keeping Pagan in Center Field and possibly signing Alex Gordon, but considering Gordon made $12.5 million in 2015, that could be the more expensive option. What do you think? Who do you think the Giants should target?
Tuesday, October 13, 2015
Protected Draft Picks
Well folks, time again for another Giants baseball blog. This one comes with a little frustration from me. Let me explain why. Based on their record, the Giants will pick 19th in the Major League Baseball Draft for 2016. Obviously the MLB Draft is nowhere near as popular as the NFL or NBA Draft, plus is insanely longer than either of those 2 with up to 40 rounds. That's actually even shorter than it used to be. Remember Mike Piazza? He was drafted in the 62nd round by the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1988. That turned out to be a pretty good pick, considering it was only done as a favor by Tommy Lasorda who was a childhood friend of Piazza's father....unless you're a Giants fan, then F*@! Mike Piazza!!!! 1993, soon to be named Rookie of the Year Piazza hits 2 Home Runs on the final day of the season and the Dodgers beat the Giants 12-1 to eliminate them from the playoffs despite the Giants winning 103 games in the last great pennant race. 103 wins is the most wins by a team to not make the playoffs, but I digress. That is an argument for another time. Back to the point.
Where was I? Oh yes, the MLB Draft. So the Giants select 19th which is fine I suppose. But I just read today that this is not a protected draft pick. The Giants would have needed to lose 9 more games for the draft pick to be protected as only picks 1-11 are protected. Believe me, I am not wishing that the Giants had lost 9 more games this season. But it certainly does throw a bit of a wrench into what I had previously written I would like to see the Giants do.
For those of you who do not know how the protected vs. non-protected draft pick effects free agency (and until maybe 5 minutes ago I was among you), here's the basics. For a free agent, their current team has first shot at re-signing them (or Exclusive Negotiating Rights). The team must decide whether to submit a qualifying offer to the player. If the free agent declines the qualifying offer and opts for free agency, the team that signs them will lose their first round pick, unless the team has one of the 10 worst records from the previous season, in which case the team loses a 2nd round pick. So what does this mean to the Giants who will inevitably be looking for pitching? If they sign Jordan Zimmermann (my preference) or Zack Greinke (if he voids the remainder of his current contract with the Dodgers), they lose the 19th pick in the 2016 MLB Draft. If they sign a player who was traded at the 2015 trade deadline, David Price, Johnny Cueto, Scott Kazmir, etc. they keep the pick.
I wrote previously that I think Kazmir would be a good fit as the #3 starter if the Giants decide not to pursue re-signing Mike Leake. But I thought Zimmermann would be the crown jewel if they could sign him. Now that they risk losing a 1st round draft pick, I think they might want to look elsewhere. I also wrote that I think David Price will (no pun intended here) price himself out of the Giants plans. So that brings my focus to Johnny Cueto.
So what would the Giants get with Cueto? Well, they would get a player who has shown brilliance in his career, and a player who will be 30 when the 2016 season begins. His 2 best seasons were 2012 when he went 19-9 with a 2.78 ERA, and 2014 when he went 20-9 with a 2.25 ERA and 242 Strikeouts in 243 2/3 Innings Pitched. In 2014 Cueto was an All-Star and finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting. Cueto made $10 million in both 2014 and 2015, but is coming off a bit of a down year (11-13, 3.44 ERA) so Cueto may not warrant much of a salary increase, if at all. He has also not performed well in the Postseason going 0-2 with a 5.52 ERA in 4 Postseason starts with Cincinnati and Kansas City. The Giants do seem to have a habit with picking up players coming off down performance years, though they are not always success stories (Aubrey Huff - 2010 vs. McGehee - 2015). So maybe this move makes sense. Let's revisit how this could potentially set up the Giants rotation for 2016:
1. Madison Bumgarner
2. Johnny Cueto
3. Mike Leake/Scott Kazmir
4. Jake Peavy
5. Matt Cain/Chris Heston
That would be a pretty solid rotation, right? But for historical reasons, let's look at the Giants history of picking 19th. They have done it 4 times with those selections being:
Rob Dressler - 1972
Terry Lee - 1974
Eric Christopherson - 1990
Tony Torcato - 1998
Of those 4, only Dressler (82 games) and Torcato (43 games) made it to the Majors. So maybe it wouldn't be so bad to give up the 19th pick. On the other hand, let's look at some other 19th overall picks from years past:
Roger Clemens - 1983
Bobby Grich - 1967
Alex Rios - 1999
Mike Scioscia - 1976
Shannon Stewart - 1992
James Loney - 2002
Shelby Miller - 2009
Brian Bohanon - 1987
Ron Robinson - 1980 (on a personal note, I met Ron Robinson while I was working at Silverthorn Resort in 1998)
Sean Burnett - 2000
So maybe there would be a possibility that the Giants could get a good player at 19 (or a guy who should be in the Hall of Fame, again, argument for another time). The thing you have to weigh is whether you take a chance on an amateur player that he will contribute to your team success down the road, or a known commodity who could contribute to your team success right now. Wow, that is a tough one. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision. So, go Giants in 2016 and thanks for reading.
Where was I? Oh yes, the MLB Draft. So the Giants select 19th which is fine I suppose. But I just read today that this is not a protected draft pick. The Giants would have needed to lose 9 more games for the draft pick to be protected as only picks 1-11 are protected. Believe me, I am not wishing that the Giants had lost 9 more games this season. But it certainly does throw a bit of a wrench into what I had previously written I would like to see the Giants do.
For those of you who do not know how the protected vs. non-protected draft pick effects free agency (and until maybe 5 minutes ago I was among you), here's the basics. For a free agent, their current team has first shot at re-signing them (or Exclusive Negotiating Rights). The team must decide whether to submit a qualifying offer to the player. If the free agent declines the qualifying offer and opts for free agency, the team that signs them will lose their first round pick, unless the team has one of the 10 worst records from the previous season, in which case the team loses a 2nd round pick. So what does this mean to the Giants who will inevitably be looking for pitching? If they sign Jordan Zimmermann (my preference) or Zack Greinke (if he voids the remainder of his current contract with the Dodgers), they lose the 19th pick in the 2016 MLB Draft. If they sign a player who was traded at the 2015 trade deadline, David Price, Johnny Cueto, Scott Kazmir, etc. they keep the pick.
I wrote previously that I think Kazmir would be a good fit as the #3 starter if the Giants decide not to pursue re-signing Mike Leake. But I thought Zimmermann would be the crown jewel if they could sign him. Now that they risk losing a 1st round draft pick, I think they might want to look elsewhere. I also wrote that I think David Price will (no pun intended here) price himself out of the Giants plans. So that brings my focus to Johnny Cueto.
So what would the Giants get with Cueto? Well, they would get a player who has shown brilliance in his career, and a player who will be 30 when the 2016 season begins. His 2 best seasons were 2012 when he went 19-9 with a 2.78 ERA, and 2014 when he went 20-9 with a 2.25 ERA and 242 Strikeouts in 243 2/3 Innings Pitched. In 2014 Cueto was an All-Star and finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting. Cueto made $10 million in both 2014 and 2015, but is coming off a bit of a down year (11-13, 3.44 ERA) so Cueto may not warrant much of a salary increase, if at all. He has also not performed well in the Postseason going 0-2 with a 5.52 ERA in 4 Postseason starts with Cincinnati and Kansas City. The Giants do seem to have a habit with picking up players coming off down performance years, though they are not always success stories (Aubrey Huff - 2010 vs. McGehee - 2015). So maybe this move makes sense. Let's revisit how this could potentially set up the Giants rotation for 2016:
1. Madison Bumgarner
2. Johnny Cueto
3. Mike Leake/Scott Kazmir
4. Jake Peavy
5. Matt Cain/Chris Heston
That would be a pretty solid rotation, right? But for historical reasons, let's look at the Giants history of picking 19th. They have done it 4 times with those selections being:
Rob Dressler - 1972
Terry Lee - 1974
Eric Christopherson - 1990
Tony Torcato - 1998
Of those 4, only Dressler (82 games) and Torcato (43 games) made it to the Majors. So maybe it wouldn't be so bad to give up the 19th pick. On the other hand, let's look at some other 19th overall picks from years past:
Roger Clemens - 1983
Bobby Grich - 1967
Alex Rios - 1999
Mike Scioscia - 1976
Shannon Stewart - 1992
James Loney - 2002
Shelby Miller - 2009
Brian Bohanon - 1987
Ron Robinson - 1980 (on a personal note, I met Ron Robinson while I was working at Silverthorn Resort in 1998)
Sean Burnett - 2000
So maybe there would be a possibility that the Giants could get a good player at 19 (or a guy who should be in the Hall of Fame, again, argument for another time). The thing you have to weigh is whether you take a chance on an amateur player that he will contribute to your team success down the road, or a known commodity who could contribute to your team success right now. Wow, that is a tough one. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision. So, go Giants in 2016 and thanks for reading.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)