New look for 2018 Giants

Wow, I haven't even had time to write about the Andrew McCutchen trade and now comes the news that the San Francisco Giants have signed center fielder Austin Jackson to a 2-year, $6 million deal (could be worth up to $8.5 million with incentives).  So we're going to take a look at both of these moves and try to figure out what the lineup could look like.  One thing is for sure.  The Giants just added a huge amount of length to their lineup by adding three players.  Here we go.

So on Monday, January 15, the Giants acquired Andrew McCutchen from the Pittsburgh Pirates for right-handed pitcher Kyle Crick and outfield prospect Bryan Reynolds.  McCutchen won the 2013 MVP while with Pittsburgh and finished 3rd for the award in 2012 and 2014, as well as finishing 5th in 2015.  McCutchen has a 7-year streak of 20+ home runs including 28 last year.  While he doesn't run as much as he used to, he has shown 20+ stolen base speed including a career high of 33 in 2010.  Yes, McCutchen will be 31 in 2018, but he will definitely improve the production and defense of the Giants' outfield which ranked at or near the bottom of the league in 2017.  Of note here is that McCutchen has one more year in his contract at $14.5 million, but the Pirates are paying $2.5 million of that so the Giants are only on the hook for $12 million.  Not bad for a former MVP.  What did they give up for him?  Well Kyle Crick was a former 1st-round draft pick for the Giants in 2011 and at one point was looked at as comparable to Matt Cain.  But Crick struggled with his command in the minors and was eventually moved from a starting role to the bullpen.  He made his Major League debut with the Giants last year appearing in 30 games and finishing with a 3.06 ERA.  He's a fastball/slider guy mixing in an occasional change-up.  Crick could have been in the competition for a bullpen role with the Giants, but at best he was probably going to be a hard-throwing, right-handed 8th-inning guy.  Bryan Reynolds was a 2nd-round pick by the Giants in 2016.  He played 2017 at single-A San Jose where he hit .312 with 10 home runs and 63 RBI.  A switch-hitter, Reynolds can play all three outfield positions, but the Giants viewed him as a Center Fielder.  As they see Steven Duggar as their Center Fielder of the future, it's possible that Reynolds didn't fit into the long-term plans for the Major League club.

On to today where the Giants signed Austin Jackson.  Now Giants fans don't need to think too far back to remember Jackson.  All you need to do is remember the 2012 World Series.  Jackson was the starting Center Fielder and leadoff hitter for the Detroit Tigers who faced the Giants.  Jackson had possibly his best season that year hitting .300 with 16 home runs and 66 RBI.  Jackson struggled from 2014-2016, but had a resurgence with the Cleveland Indians in 2017 hitting .318 with 7 home runs and 35 RBI in 85 games playing mostly against left-handers.  I'm guessing he plays mostly full-time to start the season, but could shift into a platoon role if Steven Duggar plays well enough to earn a call-up.  While Jackson has played most of his career in Center Field, he also has played games in Left and Right and while his defense at this stage of his career probably grades out as average it's still far better than what the Giants showed in 2017 and not too long ago Austin Jackson was considered one of the best defensive Center Fielders in all of baseball.

So what does this mean the lineup will look like?  Because that's really what we're interested in seeing.  Well I'm going to assume that Austin Jackson is going to be the leadoff hitter.  The Giants have already stated that McCutchen will be playing Right Field and Hunter Pence will shift to Left.  Also, it's pretty much assumed that Evan Longoria will hit 3rd in the lineup ahead of Buster Posey.  So I'm thinking we look something like this:

1. CF - Austin Jackson (.318, 7, 35)
2. 2B - Joe Panik (.288, 10, 53)
3. 3B - Evan Longoria (.261, 20, 86)
4. C - Buster Posey (.320, 12, 67)
5. RF - Andrew McCutchen (.279, 28, 88)
6. 1B - Brandon Belt (.241, 18, 51)
7. LF - Hunter Pence (.260, 13, 67)
8. SS - Brandon Crawford (.253, 14, 77)

Crawford batting 8th?  Well originally I had thought Pence would hit 8th, but I have concerns about putting 2 lefties in a row in Belt and Crawford.  Belt has more power potential but Crawford has been a better run-producer in their careers.  So maybe Crawford moves up and Belt moves down?  I don't know, this is just a prediction.  I'm also not sure I like McCutchen at #5, but where else do you hit him?  Leadoff and move Jackson to #8?  #2 moving Panik to #8 and everyone from Belt to Crawford moving up one?  The lineup above seems to make the most sense to me, but I've seen some projections like this:

1. CF - Austin Jackson
2. 1B - Brandon Belt
3. RF - Andrew McCutchen
4. C - Buster Posey
5. 3B - Evan Longoria
6. SS - Brandon Crawford
7. LF - Hunter Pence
8. 2B - Joe Panik

I think this projection is counting on Belt taking a lot of walks and having a high On Base Percentage.  Maybe with McCutchen hitting behind him, they expect he'll see more fastballs?  I think Panik is a much more ideal #2 hitter so I don't really see this one happening, but it's an option I suppose.  Anyway, at this point I think the Giants are done making moves unless they can add a veteran starter and a bullpen arm on the cheap.  I don't usually write much about pitching so I'll stick to the lineups.  Who else is ready for Opening Day?

Edit:  I made a mistake that Jackson played mostly against left-handers.  He actually had more plate appearances against right handed pitchers (177) than lefties (141).  But his batting average, on base percentage, and slugging percentage were all higher against lefties, hence why a platoon might be in the cards.  See below:

                                            vs. LHP          vs. RHP
Plate Appearances                     141                 177
Batting Average                       .352                .291
On Base Percentage                 .440                .345
Slugging Percentage                .574                .411

Giants trade for Evan Longoria. Do we have hope for 2018?

This Wednesday, 12/20/2017, the San Francisco Giants completed a trade with the Tampa Bay Rays receiving 3B Evan Longoria in exchange for OF Denard Span, IF Christian Arroyo, and two minor league pitchers.  The Rays also sent $14.5 million to the Giants to offset the cost of Longoria's contract, so that's something too.  Now, for those of you who were set on seeing Arroyo as the Giants' starting 3B in 2018, this probably comes as unwelcome news.  But 3B was one of the weaknesses singled out by Giants upper management and this, if nothing else, is a major upgrade.  Sure, Longoria was coming off a "down" year in 2017, but still his 20 Home Runs and 86 RBI would have led the Giants.  Also, he JUST set a career high in Home Runs with 36 in 2016 so it's not unrealistic to think he can settle somewhere between the two.  Longoria also won his 3rd Gold Glove in 2017, meaning he will be playing alongside another 3-time Gold Glove winner in Brandon Crawford, and former winners Joe Panik and Buster Posey.  Given that many people feel that Brandon Belt should already have won a Gold Glove at 1B, the Giants should have an All Star caliber defense around the diamond.

Longoria should immediately slot into the 3rd position in the batting order hitting ahead of Posey.  Given that Longoria is a career .270 and has never hit above .294 in his career, I'm not sure this is the right spot for him.  I still feel like your best "hitter" should be hitting #3, which would suggest that this is where Posey should be.  Keep in mind Posey hit into 17 Double Plays in 2017 and Longoria hit into 18 so there's not really an advantage either way.  For argument's sake, let's assume that Bruce Bochy will keep Posey as his clean-up hitter.  We'll take a look at what this might mean for the lineup in a bit.

As for what the Giants gave up, let's look at Arroyo first.  Arroyo tore up the Cactus League and AAA in 2017 earning a callup to the big club on April 24.  But Arroyo was clearly overmatched in his first cup of coffee in the Major Leagues hitting only .192 with 3 Home Runs and 14 RBI.  He likely would have been a September callup when the rosters expanded, but he suffered a broken hand after being hit by a pitch on July 1 and apparently re-injured the same wrist in a Dominican Winter League game on October 30.  So it's unclear really to project what Arroyo could have offered the Giants in 2018.  Clearly the Giants felt that addressing this need now was of greater importance than waiting to see what kind of player Arroyo was going to be.  As for Span, he overcame a very slow start to the season and finished with respectable numbers hitting .272 with 12 Home Runs and 43 RBI.  We can also remember Span for contributing 5 Splash Hits in his 2 years with the Giants including 3 in 2017.  However, Span was the worst defensive Center Fielder in all of baseball in 2017 and had already discussed a move to Left Field with Giants coaches for 2018.  This was another position of need singled out by Giants management.

So what's next for the Giants?  Well, they now have a hole in Center Field, or Left depending on how you look at it, they have an aging Hunter Pence in Right Field, and oh in case you missed it, they traded #3 Starter Matt Moore to the Texas Rangers on December 16, so there may be a need for another Starting Pitcher.  Let's look at the outfield first.

The Giants have been linked to several Center Fielders since the end of the 2017 season.  Billy Hamilton from the Cincinnati Reds has been discussed.  Hamilton is a light hitter who does play stellar defense and steals a ton of bases (career high 59 in 2017), but is a career .248 hitter with a career On Base Percentage of only .298.  Does he get on base enough to make a true positive impact on the offense and will his defense offset his inability to get on base?  Jackie Bradley from the Boston Red Sox has come up as well.  I like this a little better.  Bradley is good defensively and doesn't steal bases like Hamilton (only 8 steals in 2017), but hits with a more power (17 Home Runs in 2017 following 26 in 2016).  But Bradley is not a for-average hitter with a career average of only .239.  He does get on base more than Hamilton with a career OBP of .318, but again you're banking on the improved defense offsetting the lack of offensive production here.  More recently with the Yankees trading for Giancarlo Stanton (who the Giants desperately wanted), the Giants have been linked to current Yankees Center Fielder Jacoby Ellsbury.  Statistically this might be the best move as Ellsbury hit .264 with a .348 OBP, 7 Home Runs, 39 RBI, and 22 Stolen Bases in 2017.  But he's the oldest of this trio at 34 years old (Hamilton and Bradley are both 27) and is under contract through 2020.  The Giants have a young player by the name of Steven Duggar in the Minor Leagues and is looked at by the organization as the Center Fielder of the future.  He was limited to 44 games due to hip and elbow injuries in 2017, but hit .262 with a .365 OBP, 6 Home Runs, 26 RBI and 10 Stolen Bases.  If those numbers project to the Major Leagues, that's pretty much interchangeable with Ellsbury, so do you want to block a 24-year old prospect for the next 3 years with a player who is basically identical on paper?

As for the a corner outfield spot, the Giants are again linked to Jay Bruce (seems like this happens every year).  Bruce hit .254 between the Mets and Indians in 2017 with 36 Home Runs and 101 RBI.  But how will his defense play in AT&T Park?  He'll turn 31 at the beginning of the 2018 season.  The Giants have also been linked to J.D. Martinez for the past couple of seasons.  Martinez hit .303 with 45 Home Runs and 104 RBI in only 119 games between the Tigers and Diamondbacks.  Again, this comes at a sacrifice of defense.  Martinez was a good fielder for Detroit as recently as 2015, but has rated as a poor defensive player the past 2 seasons.

While this doesn't seem to help the issue in Right Field, I'd like to see the Giants go with Austin Slater in Left Field for 2018.  Slater looked good in San Francisco in 2017 hitting .282 with an OBP of .339, 3 Home Runs and 16 RBI in 34 games.  While these numbers don't exactly jump off the page, they're still solid and Slater is only 25.

While the Giants have all but guaranteed that they're not done making deals yet, let's assume for a minute that Longoria is the only acquisition made, and Duggar and Slater will be the starters in Center Field and Left Field for 2018.  The lineup could look something like this.  I'll also include the player's age and batting hand:
1. CF - Steven Duggar (.262, 6, 26 (Minor League) - 24, bats L)
2. 2B - Joe Panik (.288, 10, 53 - 27, bats L)
3. 3B - Evan Longoria (.261, 20, 86 (Tampa Bay) - 32, bats R)
4. C - Buster Posey (.320, 12, 67 - 30, bats R)
5. RF - Hunter Pence (.260, 13, 67 - 34, bats R)
6. SS - Brandon Crawford (.253, 14, 77 - 30, bats L)
7. 1B - Brandon Belt (.241, 18, 51 - 29, bats L)
8. LF - Austin Slater (.282, 3, 16 - 25, bats R)

Now it's possible that the Giants will swap Panik and Belt in the lineup, though I've always felt like Panik is a more ideal #2 hitter and Belt belongs batting #6 or below, but I'm not a coach so what do I know.  It's also possible, considering Stanton hit in the #2 hole in Miami 110 games out of 162, that the Giants could consider hitting Longoria at #2 to split up a couple of your lefties, but then you're left with Panik, Crawford, or Belt as your #3 and I don't see any of them as a #3 hitter.  Depending on who they might sign in the outfield and maybe you hit Longoria #2, Posey #3, and the new guy #4 if it's Martinez or Bruce.  Currently you have 4 lefties and 4 righties.  If they sign Bruce you now have 5 lefties and 3 righties.  I don't know if the Giants want to unbalance the lineup like that.  Plus, let's say you put Bruce as your #5 and play him in Right Field.  Assuming the lineup above, you now have 3 left-handed batters in a row.  You could platoon Bruce and Pence, but that's an expensive platoon considering Bruce made $13 million in 2017 and Pence is scheduled to make $18.5 million in 2018.

So there you have it.  What do we think?  I think this is a lineup that could probably do some damage, especially if some of the guys like Crawford and Belt who had down years play up to their career averages, but they're probably at least 1 and probably 2 bats away from being serious contenders.  And that's before we've even looked at the pitching staff.  Rest assured, the Giants management has almost guaranteed that another big move is ahead.  Based on everything I'm reading right now, it sure sounds like it's going to be Bruce.  Stay tuned.

Fighting For Our Right to Sing: Music and the Freedom of Speech

            The Ed Sullivan Show, broadcast Sunday evenings on CBS from June 20, 1948 to June 6, 1971, was the most significant entertainment show in the United States reaching approximately forty million viewers each week.  On September 17, 1967, the Doors were set to perform their number one single, “Light My Fire.”  However, due to censor concerns regarding drug references, producer Bob Precht asked the band to change the line “girl, we couldn’t get much higher.”  The band acquiesced and even replaced the offending word “higher” during rehearsal.  Then the Doors performed the song live, maintaining the word “higher” and going so far as to emphasize the offending word.  Precht was livid and the Doors would never again appear on The Ed Sullivan Show.  Musicians have long been targeted by the attempts of major institutions, and later their own government, to blame music for everything from individual massacres to influencing behavior and the debasement of society.  The Columbine High School massacre of 1999 saw various groups and reporters including Bill O’Reilly of Fox News blame violent influences in entertainment and specifically the music of Marilyn Manson for the event.  The First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech,” and what are lyrics but speech put to music?  However, the American government has consistently singled out and attempted to censor music and lyrics which might be considered offensive or controversial.  Despite the governments repeated attempts to exclude music and lyrics from the free speech clause of the First Amendment, it is essential that these art forms are protected under our fundamental rights.

            It is true that the earliest forms of censorship in the United States can be traced back to the times of the colonies.  As American judge Robert H. Bork points out, “From the earliest colonies on this continent over 300 years ago, and for about 175 years of our existence as a nation, we endorsed and lived with censorship.”  Bork notes that some examples of censorship during these times were actual laws, while others were more casual, singling out the Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) introduction of the film rating system.  It seems, though, that in the last fifty years there has been a significant rise in the number of items which are deemed offensive.

            During the decade of the sixties, the government did not play a very significant role in censorship.  Instead, instances like the interference by The Ed Sullivan Show in the Doors’ performance took place in front of an American audience and forewarned future performers that the power of censorship was the property of the establishment and not the artists.  Sullivan showed the ability to grant or deny publicity on a national platform, while the artists had to come up with creative ways to work within the system.  80’s pop-icon Robert Palmer notes, “rock ’n’ roll has . . . been described as “dangerous” . . . to racists, demagogues and the self-appointed moral guardians of the status quo.”  For example, on May 12, 1963 Bob Dylan was set to appear on The Ed Sullivan Show to perform “Talkin’ John Birch Society Blues” and opted to walk out rather than perform a different song as instructed by the show-runners.  Defense attorney Ian Inglis writes, “[‘Talkin’ John Birch Society Blues’] satirized the extreme right-wing, anti-Communist organization, comparing its policies to those of Hitler.”  So it stands to reason that the general public, which was certainly more conservative at the time, might have been inclined to change the channel rather than watch Dylan’s performance.  In an effort to better inform consumers to an album’s potentially controversial content, retailers like Lynn Batcheck, executive Vice President of Record & Tape Outlet and CD & Tape Outlet, suggest a rating system similar to that of the MPAA.  Similar rating systems have also been suggested by other pro-censorship groups as reported by Rhoda Rabkin, an adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.

            One of the most significant arguments in favor of censorship is that it is beneficial in protecting our youth from hearing something that would alter or affect their behavior.  Rabkin reasons, “One should not assume that music with lyrics featuring profanity, violence, casual sex, drug use, and so on is itself the cause of negative behaviors.”  But, Rabkin continues, “On the other hand . . . some troubled teenagers focus on music with morbid, aggressive, profane, or vulgar lyrics because it seems to legitimize their impulses.”  This implies the image of the impressionable youth whose behavior may be influenced by everything he or she touches, smells, sees, or hears.  Librarian Carolyn Caywood adds, “the underlying presumption is that the teenage listener or viewer cannot think critically about the messages expressed in music and will be hypnotized by them.”  Bork goes a step further suggesting that it is not just the youth, but society as a whole that has degenerated, and that the artists of today, while reflecting today’s society, pale in comparison to pre-World War II artists in terms of their message, complexity, and musicianship.  Billboard magazine writer Bill Holland notes that several states have gone so far as to introduce legislation making the purchase or distribution of albums with “explicit sexual or violent content” a crime.  This would take the accountability of labeling these albums accordingly out of the hands of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and place it into the hands of our government.

            Bork, a noted conservative, places blame squarely on the shoulders of liberals.  “American popular culture is in a free fall, with the bottom not yet in sight.  This is what the liberal view of human nature has brought us to.”  Bork recounts a story where head of the National Political Congress of Black Women D. DeLores Tucker and former secretary of education and drug czar William Bennett visited Time Warner in protest of distribution of explicit content.  Tucker distributed lyrics to “Big Man with a Gun” by Nine Inch Nails to each executive and requested the lyrics be read aloud, but none of the executives did.  Upon reciting the lyrics, the Tucker-Bennett assembly asked if anyone considered the lyrics offensive. Bork then comments, “The discussion included such modern liberal gems from Time Warner as ‘Art is difficult to interpret,’ ‘What is art?’ and ‘Who decides what is pornography and what isn’t?’”  Bork argues that “the public acting through its designated representatives can decide [what pornography is].”  Bork also asserts that racial and misogynistic motivations in society may contribute to the uprising in explicit lyrics.  Bork argues:

It is possible to think these songs reflect a generalized rage, particularly rage against social authority . . . That may also explain the fury directed at women in this music.  In that part of the black community where men are absent from the home, women are often figures of considerable power.  White adolescents, with similar rebellious impulses, may resent the authority figures of mothers and female teachers, and the domineering whining feminists.

Bork further argues that the lack of religion contributes to the debasement of society contending, “With the decline of religious influence, the moral lessons attenuate as well."  Again, Bork suggests that morality and virtue must be legislated to the people rather than the people deciding on their own individual values by emphasizing, “We tend to think of virtue as a personal matter, each of us to choose which virtues to practice or not practice . . . But only a public morality . . . can long sustain a decent social order and hence a stable and just democratic order.”  However, we are warned that defending the freedom we hold so dear means also defending the rights of those we do not agree with.  An article in The New Republic asserts, “To defend freedom, you must also defend foulness.”

            Songs about violence have been a staple of American tradition for years.  Artists ranging from Bob Marley to Eric Clapton to Woody Guthrie to Johnny Cash have glorified violence and even murder in their songs.  Eric Clapton (covering a song written by Bob Marley) sings, “I shot the sheriff,” and no one cries out in disgust.  Woody Guthrie writes a song about 1930’s bank robber Pretty Boy Floyd killing a deputy sheriff and no one thinks twice.  Johnny Cash sings, “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die,” and is celebrated as a folk hero.  Now it is clear that the artists in question did not commit these crimes, but how are these songs any different than “Cop Killer” by Los Angeles rapper Ice-T?  Attorney David Hershey-Webb posits whether the attention given to “Cop Killer” is “another reflection of the racial bias that Ice-T and other rappers denounce in the legal system?”  Hershey-Webb suggests that “Cop Killer” is a protest song not unlike any number of protest songs from the past and is a reflection of the changing times, observing, “If the anger is more extreme than in other protest songs, it is because the wrongs that have provoked such anger are more extreme.”  There is also a precedent set by country music and the connection to politics.  Country music is by far the most popular musical style in the United States, with over 43 million people listening to country radio stations each week.  The Simmons Study of Media and Markets notes that country fans are better educated and wealthier than those listening to other styles of music, declaring, “36 percent of country music fans have a postgraduate degree . . . Forty percent of individuals with annual incomes over $40,000 listen to country music, as do a third of individuals who earn over $100,000 a year.”  Still, country music shares a common note of protest and violence with these other music styles.  Authors Jimmie N. Rogers and Stephen A. Smith point out, “Customary among recent [country music] songs which refer to the government and its actions is the theme that those who propose and enact the laws . . . are viewed with skepticism and cynicism set to music.”  Country music also writes regularly about “crimes of passion” such as the song “Goodbye Earl” by the Dixie Chicks which tells a story of a woman who poisons and murders her physically abusive husband, or “Before He Cheats” by Carrie Underwood where she sings about vandalizing the vehicle of an unfaithful significant other.  Where is the public outcry?  Where is the backlash?

            Again, the argument seems to circle back to the mental stability, race, or class affiliation of certain types of music which continually find themselves in the crosshairs of censors.  Writers Jill Leslie Rosenbaum and Loraine Prinsky observe, “Minors on probation in California are sometimes required to comply with a list of ‘Rules to De-punk or De metal.’”  Rosenbaum and Prinsky also relate a story where a researcher posing as a father called multiple mental health facilities describing a fictional teen with “no symptoms of mental illness, drug abuse, criminal behavior, or even bad grades, but who dressed like a punk, kept his room a mess, and listened to heavy metal music.”  Eighty-three percent of these facilities recommended admission of the teen.  Caywood further notes, “The idea of brainwashing has entered pop psychology to bolster the supposition that, while the older generation’s favorite music did no harm, what teens enjoy now is dangerous.”  Rolling Stone writer Anthony DeCurtis recounts a violent confrontation between rap group N.W.A. and the Los Angeles police, prompting N.W.A. to write and record their song, “Fuck tha Police.”  DeCurtis argues, “They are presumed to be too primitive to understand the distinction between words and actions, between life and art.  Their reward is organized boycotts and FBI harassment.”  DeCurtis further notes a similar parallel from the 70’s when the Nixon administration attempted to deport John Lennon due to his “activism and the political content of his music.”

            In 1985 Tipper Gore founded the Parents’ Music Resource Center (PMRC) upon discovering a lyric about masturbation in the Prince song “Darling Nikki.”  DeCurtis asserts, “Rock & roll was the first target in the war on the arts that would soon escalate.”  Rabkin argues that the PMRC’s avocation of censorship “was a straightforward issue of consumers’ rights that parents know about references to sex, drugs, alcohol, suicide, violence, and the occult in their children’s music.”  DeCurtis adds, “The drive to place warning stickers on albums was underway.”  DeCurtis argues that the two primary musical styles singled out by the PMRC were rap and heavy metal.  DeCurtis observes, “It is impossible not to see elements of racial and class prejudice in that development . . . the core audience for rap is still black and the core audience for metal still consists largely of working-class whites.”  Rabkin singles out John Denver’s testimony that his song “Rocky Mountain High,” which is a song celebrating nature, had been unjustly black-listed by radio in an effort to appeal to the anti-drug crowd.  Author Mary DesRosiers comments that a compromise was reached in 1989 between the PMRC and the RIAA to place Parental Advisory stickers on albums containing offensive content and ushered in the era of self-censorship.  Rabkin admits, “The RIAA created no guidelines or recommendations and left the use of the labels to the discretion of the individual recording companies,” but it is safe to assume that the system is working.  Hastings Books, Music & Video, based in Amarillo, Texas, has an in-house stickering policy, but at least one manager believes that the RIAA system is more than adequate and the in-house sticker is a redundancy.  Even further, artists themselves are censoring their own content in exchange for radio play and marketing advantages, just to name a few benefits.  They are working within the system, much like the artists performing on The Ed Sullivan Show.  In the case of Ice-T, DeCurtis grants, “Ice-T rescinded the song voluntarily” amidst boycotts and protests by law-enforcement groups.  Rolling Stone writer Matt Diehl reports that rapper Xzibit rerecorded an entire verse of the song “Front 2 Back” in order to have it played on the radio.  Dan Seliger, Vice President of Marketing at Rawkus Records argues, “For radio, the amount of editing depends on how much airplay you’re getting.”  Somali-born artist K’Naan, now based in New York, admits to being instructed by his team to write for his American-based audience.  K’Naan comments, “When I write from the deepest part of my heart, my advisers say, I remind people too much of Somalia . . . My audience is in America, so my songs should reflect the land where I have chosen to live and work.”  Despite the successful voluntary system in place, legislators continue to pursue stricter censorship laws.  Lawmakers in Illinois, Georgia, South Carolina, Washington, and Michigan are considering bills that would make buying or selling recordings that contain “explicit sexual or violent content” a crime.  Yet as long as there are legislators willing to tread on the First Amendment, there will be groups willing to stand up and fight back.  Randy Lee Payton, founder of Rock Out Censorship, argues, “Provocative rock lyrics are in the same category as comic books and adult materials, which makes them the most vulnerable to attacks.  This is the front lines of freedom of speech in America.”  Tom Morello, guitarist of Rage Against the Machine, argues against chains such as Wal-Mart refusing to stock CD’s with the Parental Advisory sticker.  Morello argues, “Particularly in small towns where people have limited choices about where to shop for their music, the practice of stores restricting sales of stickered product literally keeps our music away from kids who want to hear it.”

            The battle lines have been drawn.  On one side is the conservative right trying to tell listeners what they are allowed to listen to.  On the other side is the liberal left telling listeners that all lyrics, no matter how vulgar or explicit, are art.  It is a slippery slope that requires a hard stand if citizens are to protect the Freedom of Speech as well as the other freedoms afforded by the First Amendment.  DeCurtis argues that “yielding to censors is a strategy that never works in the long run.”  The RIAA and PRMC agreement should have put an end to continued legislation, but the situation has gotten worse.  If the recording industry backs down in the face of legislators, how long before the same legislators become emboldened and wage war on the press, or religion?  Rabkin acknowledges, “What cannot be achieved by the heavy hand of the law can be achieved by industry self-regulation—but this requires the cooperation of the regulated.”  The solution seems clear.  The RIAA continues to sticker albums, and if the people, as responsible consumers, don’t like it they don’t have to listen to or buy it.  Allowing the government to regulate what people are allowed to listen to pushes society further toward Fascism where citizens are told what can be said and even what can be thought.  Therefore, it is vital that artists fight for the right to free speech, for the right to free thought, and for the right to express those words and thoughts in song.  It is a battle they cannot afford to lose.

Welcome to 2017

Hello everyone.  It has been about 2 1/2 months since my last blog, and boy a lot of things have changed.  Before I get into that, however, I want to make notice of a trend I have seen on social media this last week.  It seems that a majority of people are moving away from resolutions because "we're all going to the same assholes in 2017 as we were in 2016".  I have to disagree with that sentiment.  YOU might be the same asshole, and that's great for you, but do not project your own lingering on everyone else.  There are those of us who are actively trying to better ourselves.  The point of the new year is that we have the excuse to look at the world through new eyes.  Everything is possible.  If you are a sports fan, every season begins with hope and optimism.  "This is our year" they'll say.  Don't dash that optimism before it even begins.  Nurture it, let it grow.  You have the rest of the year to be miserable.  Is it so much to ask that for one day we are allowed to believe that anything is possible?

One of the biggest changes we're going to see in 2017 is we will have a new President for the first time in 8 years.  That in itself is a HUGE change (pun intended).  Many people already feel that we are doomed.  I am trying to maintain a position of cautious optimism.  I am a little disheartened by the many voices of hate on both sides of things as this shows just how divided as a country we are.  And what is it that divides us?  Color?  Religion?  Financial status?  Which animal represents your political party?  Take your pick.  I am hopeful that some of these voices and their hateful rhetoric will tone down over the coming months and we can attempt to grow and continue moving forward.

So that's the worldly part of this.  Now for the personal part.  And here's where I truly disagree that 2017 will be the same as 2016.  I left my job in October and moved back to California.  I had been living in Colorado for 13 years and it was time to make this change which was long overdue.  I have enrolled at Shasta College for the Spring 2017 semester.  I am expecting a job offer from Shasta County.  Over Thanksgiving I got a membership at Fitness 19 and, with a few exceptions, I have gone every day for the last month and a half.  Over the last 3 weeks I have been going at 5 AM during the week in preparation for receiving the job offer and starting school.  I am going to give meal prepping a try, though I don't know how long that will last.  I have identified some very clear and specific goals for myself, and for the first time in a long time I feel I am in a good place physically, mentally, and emotionally to accomplish them.

I do not anticipate that I will change my opinions drastically.  My personality will still be the same.  My beliefs, morals, values, will likely be as resolute as they have always been.  But I do not believe that is the point of making resolutions.  The point is not to dramatically shift who you are.  The point is to continue to grow and evolve in order to be better.  Whether that's to eat better, to get into better shape, to learn a new skill, to take a relationship to the next level, it is all in the interest of self improvement.  Evolution is a marathon and most of these things take time to achieve.  I believe that in 2017 I will be able to start to be the best version of myself.  So in the spirit of goodwill, I begin 2017 with a message from Bill & Ted.  Be excellent to each other.

Even year, no championship

A Shakespearean tragedy is defined as a drama which has a noble protagonist, who is flawed in some way, placed in a stressful heightened situation and ends with a fatal conclusion.  Could there be a better a better analogy for the 2016 San Francisco Giants?  So it is with great calamity that I write this eulogy for the dearly departed.

I am still stunned about the finish to game 4 of the NLDS against the Chicago Cubs, but we must not dwell on the past.  We must look forard to the future.  Does this mean we can now hope that the Giants will start an odd year streak?  Well, before we jump too far ahead, let's address the Giants' end-of-year press conference handled by General Manager Bobby Evans.

Before we get into the roster, let's talk about two changes on the coaching staff.  First-base coach Bill Hayes and third-base coach Roberto Kelly have been relieved of their duties.  There is a possibility that one or both could remain with the organization in different roles, but this is all that has been reported to this point.

Let's save the elephant in the room for a minute and talk about the offense.  The Giants had a terrible time scoring runs and stringing together wins in the second half.  Where can they improve?  Well the immediate target could be Left Field where both starter Angel Pagan and #4 outfielder Gregor Blanco will be free agents.  I don't see Pagan returning and while Blanco might have been a candidate to return, the emergence of Gorkys Hernandez late in the season could signal the end of Blanco's tenure with the team.  The Giants will look to Jarrett Parker and Mac Williamson to top the list of potential Opening Day outfielders.  I've written about this before, but let me say again, I am not excited about this plan as I do not see either Parker or Williamson as an everyday option and I do not favor a platoon scenario for a position they will need to be a significant contributor to the offensive production.

Parker batted .236 with 5 Home Runs and 14 RBI in 127 at bats in 2016.  He also struck out 44 times (35%).  As a left-handed batter, his splits would suggest a platoon as he hit .289 against righties and only .108 against lefties.

Williamson hit .223 with 6 Home Runs and 15 RBI in 112 at bats in 2016.  His strikeout percentage was only slightly better striking out 35 times (31%).  A right-handed batter, Williamson actually fared better against righties hitting .239 while hitting only .212 against lefties.

A possible question that could be asked here is, if the Giants had any confidence in either Parker or Williamson as a starter, why didn't they win the job out of Spring Training in 2016 and why did the Giants sign Denard Span?  I think that was a more forward-thinking move.  I believe the Giants knew Pagan would not be back in 2017 and signing Span in 2016 allowed them to make a more seamless transition rather than having to replace their Center Fielder this year.  So I do not question that move as there was a more long-term plan in place.  That said, I do not believe either Parker or Williamson is the answer, but as we've touched on before, there really aren't many options on the free agent market for outfielders.

The Giants also seem committed to Eduardo Nunez being their starting third baseman for 2017.  Again, I'm not excited about this.  Nunez was a reserve/part-time player from 2010-2015, only becoming a starter for the first time in 2016.  For the season he hit .288 with 16 Home Runs, 67 RBI and 40 Stolen Bases, but as a Giant he hit only .269 with 4 Home Runs in 182 At Bats.  He also drew only 29 walks in 553 At Bats for the season, which doesn't seem to fit the mold of what the Giants hitters have been.  Patient, good plate discipline.  There are some encouraging notes though.  Nunez hit 3 of his 4 Triples for the season with San Francisco in 50 games (compared to 1 in 91 games with Minnesota).  He also had half of his walks in a Giants uniform (14 in 50 games with San Francisco compared to 15 in 91 games with Minnesota).  So there is some upside here.

Now, about that elephant.  The Giants had the best record in baseball (57-33) at the All-Star game, and then went on to record the 4th worst record in baseball (30-42) in the second half.  While there were surely multiple culprits for the Jekyll and Hyde act, a large portion of the blame has rested on the bullpen who blew a league-high 30 saves including 9 in September.  Evans said, "an overhaul (of the bullpen) would be a tremendous overstatement."  As a fan it is easy to throw your hands up, but when you look closer it actually makes a lot of sense.  First, Santiago Casilla, Javier Lopez, and Sergio Romo are all free agents.  Lopez at 39 may retire and after his struggles and the fan outcry I don't think there's any way Casilla is back.  Romo could be a candidate to re-sign, but on a 13-man staff (5 starters, 8 relievers) let's assume he won't be re-signed.  Also, Jake Peavy will be a free agent so let's assume he also won't be back.  Who does that leave?  Derek Law, Hunter Strickland, Will Smith, and either Steven Okert or Josh Osich (one will start the year in AAA), will definitely be back.  George Kontos and Cory Gearrin are both arbitration eligible so I would expect both to be back.  That's 6 pitchers.  Matt Cain is in the last guaranteed year of his contract and will be paid $21 million in 2017.  I expect the Giants will give him every opportunity to win the #5 starter role in Spring Training, but Cain has not been an effective starter since 2012 and Ty Blach has emerged as an intriguing candidate for the starting rotation, especially after his 10/1 start against the Los Angeles Dodgers (opposite Clayton Kershaw) where Blach went 8 innings, allowed 3 hits, 0 runs, 1 walk and 6 strikeouts.  If Cain is not in the rotation, he should fill the role of long-reliever.  That leaves one open spot and I think we all know what that should be.  Say it with me now.  CLOSER!!!!!

We've talked about this before, but the potential free-agent targets at closer will include Kenley Jansen, Aroldis Chapman, Wade Davis, and Mark Melancon.  The Giants did explore trading for Davis and Melancon at the trade deadline but were unable to secure a deal.  I would expect the Giants to pursue both with Davis being the prize and Melancon being the plan B.  Fans could clamor for Jansen as it would double to not only solidify the closer role, but also to weaken the rival Dodgers.  I would expect the Dodgers to be very motivated to keep their guy and their contract offer could price Jansen out of the Giants' plans.  Chapman is an iffy prospect after Domestic Violence allegations stemming from an incident in October, 2015 and a resulting 30-game suspension to begin the 2016 season.  Yes Chapman is an elite closer with his average fastball velocity hitting 99 mph, but the Giants have seemed to make character a priority in their clubhouse and, speaking as a fan, I would hate to see them abandon that approach and replace it with a "win at all costs" attitude.

Despite the way 2016 has ended, I for one am very excited for 2017.  The offense returns mostly in tact, and there is plenty of room for improvement.  The pitching rotation is very good and, with the addition of Matt Moore, I believe can match up with any other team's 1-4 starters.  Yes the areas for improvement are pretty obvious, but they are not so many that is unreasonable to expect that the Giants front office will not be able to address them.  So we will hope for a quick Winter and look forward to Spring Training.

Giants interested in Carlos Gomez

Hey everyone.  So this is my 2nd blog in the last 24 hours.  Yes, I know I just posted the previous one, but I wrote it yesterday and just didn't upload it.  But it's interesting timing considering I was talking about what the Giants might do with their outfield in 2017 considering both Angel Pagan and Gregor Blanco are scheduled to be free agents following the 2016 season.  Well, on Friday, the Houston Astros released outfielder Carlos Gomez.  And apparently the Giants might have some interest.

The quote goes "He's a name who's in play".  According to Grant Brisbee of mccoveychronicles.com, Brian Sabean says Gomez is being discussed internally, but the Giants have to find out if Gomez would fit in their outfield and would be agreeable to a possible part-time job.  So he's not currently being discussed to replace either Denard Span or Angel Pagan in the starting lineup.  More likely Gomez would displace Gregor Blanco as the #4 outfielder and allow the Giants to rest Span or Pagan as we move towards October.

So who is Carlos Gomez?  Gomez is a 2-time All Star who has spent time with the Mets, Twins, Brewers, and Astros.  In his best 2 seasons in Milwaukee, 2013 and 2014, he hit .284 each year, with 24 Home Runs and 73 RBI in 2013, and 23 Home Runs and 73 RBI in 2014.  He also stole 40 and 34 bases respectively.  Gomez has had a down year hitting only .210 and .221 overall with Houston since they acquired him in 2015.  Still, his most productive years were in the NL so it's possible his production was affected by moving to a new league.  Overall Gomez is a .256 career hitter who has averaged 15 Home Runs and 32 Stolen Bases per year over a 10 year career.

Gomez is only under contract through 2016 so this signing would amount to essentially a 2-month tryout.  Is he a better option than Blanco?  At this point I'm going to say yes.  Last night Blanco was announced as a pinch-hitter against the New York Mets, but after the Mets brought in Jerry Blevins to pitch, Blanco was called back and Ehire Adrianza pinch-hit instead.  That means that Blanco did officially enter the game, but did not bat and did not play in the field.  Is Gomez a better option than either Mac Williamson or Jarrett Parker?  Again I'm going to say yes.  Despite flashes, both Williamson and Parker seem to be overmatched at the Major League level, and Gomez has a track record that suggests that he is better than his numbers in Houston.  If the Giants do pull the trigger, I'm on board.  What do you think?  Would you like to see Carlos Gomez in a Giants uniform?

Looking forward to 2017 - San Francisco Giants edition

Well folks, the Giants won a game!!!!  And not to pat myself on the back too much, but did you see how much energy was in the stadium and the dugout following Madison Bumgarner's home run?  Yep, home runs = signature moments.  Read my last blog.  Seriously, go read it.  I'll wait.  No?  That's cool, you're an adult, you can do what you like.  What?  No, I'm not crying.  Why?

Sorry about that.  Now back to business.  So with Matt Cain being placed on the 15-day DL, I got to thinking who might the Giants be targeting in free agency in 2017.  I know 2016 isn't quite over yet, but it's never too early to look ahead, right?  Is it?  Actually I had believed that Cain's contract was coming off the books after this season, but it looks like he's under contract through 2017 (with a $21 million club option or a $7.5 million buyout for 2018).  Not that I don't appreciate the contributions he's made over the years but he is a below league average starter at this point and his $22.5 million salary is currently the highest cap hit on the team.

BREATHE!!!!!

So on the current roster, here are the contracts that will be coming off the books following the 2016 season:
LF - Angel Pagan
SP - Jake Peavy
RP - Santiago Casilla
RP - Sergio Romo
RP - Javier Lopez
OF - Gregor Blanco

That's the 3 remaining relief pitchers from the core 4 that were a part of all 3 recent championships, the starting Left Fielder and the #4 outfielder.  I wouldn't expect the Giants to re-sign Peavy as the rotation is pretty well set up (provided you have confidence in Cain as the #5 starter).  So it would seem the obvious targets would be the outfield and the bullpen.  I'm also going to throw third base into the mix because I am not 100% sold on Eduardo Nunez as the starter, and Nunez is a free agent following the 2017 season.  What about Christian Arroyo, you ask?  Well Arroyo might be the future, but he has still not played above AA ball and is still only 21, and historically the Giants have been slow to promote young position players.  Remember how long it took to promote Joe Panik in 2014?  We first had to suffer through Brandon Hicks, and then a week of Dan Uggla (!!!!!) where he didn't record a single hit in 12 plate appearances.  So yes, I'm going to include third base.

Let's start with the outfield as this is probably the one position where the Giants don't have an in-house replacement waiting in the wings.  But what about Mac Williamson or Jarrett Parker?  Fair enough.  Williamson is hitting .245 in 113 plate appearances with 27 strikeouts (24% strikeout rate).  Parker is hitting .248 in 131 plate appearances with 38 strikeouts (29% strikeout rate).  Unfortunately I don't see either of these guys as a long term option in left-field.  At best you can probably platoon them, but that takes up a spot on your bench because you're basically using 2 roster spots to create one semi-effective Major League player and the Giants bench is already pretty thin as is.

Wow, this list does not inspire a lot of optimism.  The first name that stands out is Ian Desmond.  Desmond was a shortstop with the Washington Nationals but transitioned to the outfield this year with the Texas Rangers.  He's played primarily in Center Field but has played 20 games in left.  Desmond has had something of a career resurgence this season hitting .292 (his highest average since 2012 when he was an All-Star) with 20 Home Runs and 73 RBI in 120 Games.  He's also stolen 18 bases.  The problem with Desmond that I see is a high strikeout rate.  He had a career high of 187 in 2015 and has 129 this season.  He is making $8 million this year which is comparable to the $10 million that Angel Pagan is making, but Desmond will likely be seeking a multi-year deal and a pay increase.

Dexter Fowler could be a target after being a target last offseason before ultimately re-signing with the Cubs.  Fowler would need to decline his option for 2017 to become a free agent.  Fowler is hitting better in 2016 (.279 average vs .250 in 2015) but his power numbers are down (9 vs 17) and is stealing fewer bases (8 vs 20) this year.  Fowler is making $8 million this year, so again, comparable salary to both Pagan and Desmond.

Jon Jay was whispered in trade rumors this season so we'll throw his name into the mix.  Jay doesn't really have any numbers that jump off the page, but he was a part of the 2011 St. Louis Cardinals World Series team so he has that championship pedigree.  He's hitting .296 this year which is a huge improvement from .210 in 2015.  Jay is making just under $7 million so he might be a bargain option.  One thing to note, Jay hits left-handed and the Giants line-up already boasts 4 lefties so Jay may be a lower tier option particularly if the Giants are searching for more lineup balance.
Matt Joyce would be another bargain addition, currently making $1 million with the Pittsburgh Pirates.  Joyce has some power (12 Home Runs in 2016), but is a career .244 hitter.  And he's another left-handed batter.

Chris Coghlan might be worth a look as a former Rookie of the Year (2009), but has been disappointing in 2016 following 2 fairly solid seasons in Chicago, seeing his average slump to .165.

The last name I'm going to throw in, though I expect this is probably the least likely option, is Josh Reddick.  Bay Area fans will be familiar with him from his days with the Oakland A's but Reddick is another left-handed batter and hasn't played left field since 2011.  Reddick is a .253 career hitter, but hit .272 with Oakland in 2015, and has some power, hitting 20 Home Runs in 2015.  His career high in home runs came in 2012 when he hit 32.  Reddick is slumping since moving to the National League hitting only .158 in 14 games with the Dodgers.  Reddick is making $6.575 million in 2016, but figures to have multiple suitors so expect that number to go up.


The Giants typically build their bullpen from within so I wouldn't expect them to dive too deep into free agency to address this position.  They already have Will Smith under contract through 2019.  Josh Osich has Major League experience and is under club control through 2021.  With Steven Okert also on the 40-man roster, the Giants have 3 left-handed options to replace Lopez.  As for a right-hander to replace Romo in a set-up role, Cory Gearrin has already been working in the 8th inning this season and Derek Law has proven very reliable in his rookie season.  If the Giants do dive into the free agent pool for the bullpen, I would expect them to target a Closer, and there are some names out there.

Wade Davis is the first name that jumps off the page.  Davis was mentioned in trade rumors this year, and will only be available if the Royals decline his option for 2017.  But Davis has been dominant in the bullpen.  He had a 2.43 ERA with Tampa Bay in 2012, but has been absolutely lights-out with Kansas City the past 3 seasons posting ERA's of 1.00, 0.94, and 1.60 respectively.  He has 17 and 21 Saves the last 2 seasons after taking over the Closer role in 2015.  Davis would be an expensive option, however, making $8 million this year, and his option for 2017 is for $10 million.

Kenley Jansen is another exciting, albeit expensive, option.  Jansen has been the closer for the Dodgers for the past 5 seasons and is having one of his best statiscal seasons in 2016 posting a 1.80 ERA with 70 Strikeouts in 50 Innings Pitched (12.6 strikeouts per 9 innings).  Jansen is making $10.65 million this year and would no doubt warrant a pay bump.  But this signing would not only strengthen the back end of the Giants' bullpen immensely, it would also weaken a division opponent.

Mark Melancon was a trade target before being dealt from the Pittsburgh Pirates to the Washington Nationals.  Melancon recorded a league best 51 Saves in 2015 and is boasting a 1.45 ERA in 2016.  Melancon does not boast high strikeout totals recording 46 in 49.2 innings.  Melancon is making $9.65 million this year, so again, an expensive option but definitely an improvement to the back end of the bullpen.


And now for my own self-indulgence, the Third Base options.....um....
So the first name is a guy the Giants were rumored to be interested in prior to the trade deadline, Yunel Escobar.  Escobar would only be avaiable if the Angels decline his $7 million option for 2017.  Escobar doesn't provide a lot of power, his season high for Home Runs is 14 in 2009, but he has been a .300+ hitter in each of the last 2 seasons (.314 in 2015, .320 in 2016).

David Freese is a veteran option who is currently hitting .283 with 11 Home Runs and 46 RBI with the Pittsburgh Pirates.  Freese is playing under a reasonable $3 million contract.

Justin Turner was slumping early in the season but has found his stroke of late hitting .278 and setting a career high in Home Runs with 23 through only 113 Games.  Turner is making $5.1 million this year and signing him would weaken a division rival, so good things.

Let's also point out that Ian Desmond played Shortstop with the Washington Nationals so he could potentially move back into the infield or offer some roster flexibility shifting between the infield and the outfield.

So there you go people, some potential Free Agent targets for the 2017 season.  What do you think?  Who would you like to see in a Giants uniform next year?