Does the Punishment Fit the Crime?

Alright, time to be controversial and talk about Donald Sterling. For those of you who don't know, Donald Sterling is the billionaire owner of the L.A. Clippers who also happens to be an extraordinarily big racist. On Friday, tapes of a conversation he had in private with his "girlfriend" were leaked and the news got out. A firestorm ensued, and yesterday he was fined $2.5 million, banned from the NBA for life, and will likely be forced to sell the Clippers. There's the back drop. Now let's dig deeper.

First off, the guy is racist and in the wrong, undoubtedly. I don't think there is a place in our society for people like him. That said, let's look at the punishment. I get what the NBA did here. They had to do it, but they had to do it because they are all about the money. There was no other reason for this. Anything less and they alienate coaches, players, and their fanbase, and they cannot jeopardize their profits in the midst of the NBA playoffs by not coming to a harsh, swift judgment on a guy that no one likes. But was the punishment fair? I'm going to say no, and I think there's so much hypocrisy inherent in the whole situation. I'm not banging the free speech drum here; the NBA is a group run by owners and players, and if they want him out, they have the right to do so. I am more speaking to the message they are sending being inconsistent. Here's the message: we don't want sleazeball people in our league.

Or is it? Is that the message, or is "we don't want racists in our league" the message? Or still yet, "we don't want white racists in our league"? It's a fuzzy picture. Certainly they, along with the rest of the professional sports world, couldn't care less about having sleazy people in the league. These leagues employ people from all backgrounds and of all skin colors who have been guilty of many things; they employ rapists, woman beaters, gang members, drug dealers, dog murderers, racists, people intolerant of LGBT people, etc. Where is the message being sent to those people? Michael Vick, you can murder animals and run an illegal gambling racket, welcome back to the NFL, here, take millions of dollars while you're at it. Jason Kidd abused his wife, had extramarital affairs, and has been caught driving under the influence. What did the NBA do about him? It's a ridiculous double standard that this league employs so many individuals who are guilty of actual crimes and have committed heinous acts, but when an owner has his private laundry aired and says some very racist things, now they have to bring the full force of the league down on him. Maybe I am misguided here, but I think that beating the crap out of your wife or murdering living creatures are worse than having some very misguided, disgusting beliefs.

Here's the other thing: why has this come as a surprise to people? Now, all of the sudden, it's a big deal. There are times where I have felt Kareem Abdul Jabbar should keep his opinions to himself, but he expressed a very intelligent point of view on this. Why weren't people outraged sooner? The guy was a known racist; he got in trouble and was fined millions for denying housing to black Americans. He said racist remarks back then. Bomani Jones contributed to ESPN on this matter back in 2006 on this matter, linked here. The NAACP had given this guy an award for all of his contributions to the black community and were about to give him another one. It's an appalling display of doing whatever possible to get money and attention in the moment, to not stand for rights or morals unless it is profitable. That's exactly what this is all about. The NAACP did nothing to further the treatment of colored people then; why would they if it jeopardized the money being doled out? Hell, let's throw a parade for the racist as long as he keeps sending millions our way. Same with the NBA: we've got no problem with the racist, oh wait, now people are upset and it might cost us money, let's get him out of here! The whole thing is so disingenuous, and I feel that people should be appalled by it all, much the way I am and much the way Jabbar is.

To top it all off, the whole Magic Johnson piece of this just makes me sick. The guy is exalted in the media and loved by the community. Need we forget that this guy got HIV by cheating on his wife with who knows how many other women outside of his marriage? No, he's not unique in that, and certainly it doesn't put him in the league of many of the other sleazeballs, racists, and criminals associated with the major sporting leagues. But he's still not the citizen people make him out to be, yet now he's the moral compass, and the stage is set for him and his group to come in and buy the Clippers and become a savior in the process. Spare me, please. I don't want to diminish a lot of the good work Magic has done, and he's done a lot, but can we stop putting him on this grand pedestal, please?

To circle back around, I understand the punishment handed down to Sterling. What I don't like is the hypocrisy and the actions resulting from greed and convenience, not out of strength of conviction or of fairness. If you want to sanction the guy on moral grounds, fine, but hold others to the same standards. I don't want to hear other NBA players making racist remarks and getting a pass for it. I don't want future occurrences of racism to be ignored or swept under the rug until it is profitable to act on them. And I don't want this event to be a rallying point for people trying to stir the pot that further divides people based on the color of their skin. Maybe instead of using this occurrence as a finger pointing session, we should take the opportunity to take a look back within. Was it right to take this guy's money and give him awards? Was it right to look the other way all these years? Instead of using Sterling as a scapegoat, let's take an honest look in the mirror and see where priorities are. Maybe we'll learn something, and maybe we'll find that the priorities of so many people out there need some re-evaluating.

"You Sold Out"

In the time I have spent on baseball message boards in the past, I have always found that I do not get along with Yankees fans. This seems unusual given I am a Yankees fan myself, but I wouldn't call the Yankees fanbase a very sensible one. Aside from all of the bandwagoners, the fanbase has a great deal of unreasonable and unappreciative fans. There are those who would run the franchise like they were playing a video game, there are those who criticize prospects who do not immediately succeed and run them out of town, then complain when we never have prospects come up through the system, and there are many who are simply never satisfied. When Robinson Cano returned to the Bronx in a Mariners uniform, he met jeers of "You sold out!" from the crowd.

Let's think about that one for a second. The Yankees fans are criticizing someone for taking more money to go to another team. Let's ignore the fact that there's absolutely nothing wrong with that, and that they all would do the same thing when presented the same situation. These are the YANKEES. Have they looked at their roster. C.C. Sabathia is a sellout. Mark Teixeira is a sellout. Brian McCann is a sellout. Jacoby Ellsbury is a sellout in the worst way, leaving the rival Red Sox for the Yankees (albeit he was not exactly treated warmly by their fanbase). Go down the list of players over the years. How do the Yankees get their free agents? They throw more money their way than the next team. To criticize him, well, pot, meet kettle. No, Cano was not someone that was ever going to be the face of the franchise. Despite him being the best player on the team, he still was in Derek Jeter's shadow. People didn't like his lack of hustle, and fans grew weary of his October disappearing act. It still doesn't change his MVP caliber play year in and year out for the team that earned him the offer he got with the Seattle Mariners.

I get that fans are going to jeer opponents, but what they are doing to Cano is unfair. The guy was a great player for the Yankees, and the Yankees, quite frankly, weren't interested. Yes, he had a nice seven year offer from them, and a pretty sensible one from the team's perspective. It's hardly something that people would take as disrespectful. It's what they did after that really changed things. They offered Jacoby Ellsbury an enormous contract of a similar size and amount, and Ellsbury is not in Cano's league as a player. Center field was also not a position of huge need for the Yankees, which they had to know since they had Carlos Beltran on their radar and several outfielders already under contract. Then they offered a five year contract to a player on the downswing at the catcher position, the only real position they have promising talent in the minors at. THEN they offered a contract (including the posting fee) in the same amount of Cano's to a pitcher who has never thrown a pitch in the big leagues. What they did afterwards was a message that they didn't value Cano. No, a ten year contract for any player at that age doesn't make much sense. It's a bad contract, for sure. But so is Ellsbury's, and so is McCann's. You kind of lose credibility for making a smart decision when you follow it with two dumb ones (and those weren't the only two dumb ones, either). So put in this context, why are fans booing him when the team didn't really want him?

At the end of the day, the fanbase will do as it pleases. They pay their hard earned money to go to the games, and it's up to the players to tune them out and not let it impact them. I would have hoped for better from the fans, but I am not surprised. This is a fanbase whose opinions change as often as the wind changes direction. When people show their disgust when I say I am a Yankee fan, I can't blame them, and it's due in large part to the fact that I share the same disgust for so many of the fans of the team. He'll never read this, but for what it's worth, Mr. Cano, thanks for all the great years in pinstripes, and I wish you success with the Mariners.

Put Away Your Map

More and more of late, my emotions have been returning to a more up and down fashion. It's purely situational, as I've been working a ton of hours on a very high stress project; it's possibly got the potential to be the biggest thing I work on in my entire career, past or future. There's also the anxiety associated with moving (again). This past moving endeavor really took a lot out of me, and this forthcoming one promises to be the most draining of all since I will be owning, not renting. Not only do I have to do all the things I'd normally do, but all the things that are done for you upon moving into an apartment or a rented condo are now my responsibility, too. There's no management company to do touch up paint, patch nail holes in the walls, clean/replace carpets, and all those other chores you're not particularly looking forward to doing when you already have all your other stuff to move and take care of. That's not even the most daunting piece, either. For me, it's the psychological component that is most precarious. Previously I have always liked moving because of the prospect of a fresh start, something new and exciting. The more I have them though, the more you begin to question how many more times you want to. I love traveling, I love living in new places, I just dislike moving, and now I dislike the prospect of being anchored somewhere. My mantra that I try to stick to is "there are no good or bad decisions, only decisions". Very few things in life are permanent, and living arrangements due to home/condo ownership are no different. Nevertheless, it's still daunting.

Deep down, I am worried about screwing up. The past several times I have relocated cities started out great. I was able to really take to a new environment and make the most of it. Each time, though, it faded. There are various reasons for that, but the thing I fear is it becoming a trend. Is it a trend? Did I screw something up? Was it life, or was it just me? Another component to this was both when I moved in 2007 and again in 2010, I was moving on an upswing. That's not quite the case this time around, so there's this element of worrying that if I come in during a low, will I even have a fresh start, or will I continue to stagnate? I've had some moments of optimism in the past several weeks; I've had some fun occasions that encourage me I will be able to shake this funk, and I routinely try to convince myself that I will get back into doing some of the things I enjoy, or at least that I think I enjoy (I never know what I enjoy anymore). The apprehension always manages to creep back in, though. Ultimately I have a fear that I share with many people, and that is a fear of not finding happiness.

And that's where I need to stop myself. That is the wrong way to think, and it's hard wired into my brain right now, but I need to eliminate that line of thinking. Happiness always comes as quite elusive, but why? Well, because so many go on a quest for happiness, which is futile. You don't take a quest for happiness, you make a quest of happiness. Happiness is not a destination. There's no formula for it, there isn't a checklist where to do a number of particular things and then happiness is attained, and you're certainly less likely to find it if you're looking for it. Happiness is an emotion. You don't look for emotions, you feel them. Searching is an analytical process, and yes, I think there does need to be some thought that goes into what makes a person happy, but they are ultimately not similar processes. It's akin to why friends go on roadtrips; if four people take a road trip across the country, it's not them ending up in, say, San Francisco that made the trip great, it's the journey there. This is where so many people, myself included, often don't have, or fail to maintain, perspective on.

So what am I advocating? If happiness is the journey, not the destination of the journey, how does that help? Well, work on enjoying the journey. Instead of being in the passenger seat reading a map the whole trip, look out the window! See what's going on around you - why would you want to miss the scenery to look at a piece of paper? There's so much beauty and vitality around us that we shouldn't question. Instead of asking "why is this beautiful?" just think, "wow, this is beautiful!" And you know what? You're going to get lost. How could you not? You haven't been reading the map, but who cares? Getting lost and enjoying it is a far greater experience than not getting lost and being none the better for it.

Favorite Songs by Most Listened to Bands

As is the norm, work is my life right now, by and large, so I write less. I wanted to do this exercise, though. I am going to list the favorite songs of my 15 most listened to bands on Last.fm. This doesn't necessarily mean they are my 15 favorite bands, or the 15 most listened to overall bands, just my 15 most scrobbled bands. If the music played in my car got scrobbled, the list would look somewhat different.

15. Android Lust - Rub Me Raw
14. EKLIPSE - Mumbai - Theme
13. Ignis Fatuu - Spielmann
12. Sabaton - The Art of War
11. Sopor Aeternus & the Ensemble of Shadows - Consider This: The True Meaning of Love
10. Alestorm - Keelhauled
9. Arkona - Zakliatie
8. Violet Stigmata - Venus in Black
7. In Extremo - Liam
6. Korpiklaani - Northern Fall
5. Eluveitie - Bloodstained Ground
4. SML8 - Reflektion
3. Mono Inc. - Get Some Sleep
2. Nightcreepers - Set Sails
1. The Birthday Massacre - Kill the Lights

Some observations:

• Four of these songs are the first song I ever heard by the band
• Six of these songs are from the first album of the band I listened to
• Eleven of the fifteen groups on here have one or more females in the group
• I have seen eleven of these fifteen groups live
• Of all these songs, Set Sails is my most scrobbled
• If I were to guess at which was actually most listened to overall, I  would say it is Kill the Lights, due in part to the fact I have listened to The Birthday Massacre the longest of all these bands.

Has anyone else had the inclination to do this before?

Five Instruments You Didn't Expect to Find in Metal

As I have alluded to before, I am not a pure metalhead, but I am very enthusiastic about particular genres of metal. I don't like more conventional types of music, music that you'd hear every day somewhere. Music is meant to awaken something in you, not simply be background noise. For me, that requires music to almost always be on the more unique and eclectic side. The majority of the music I listen to originates from another continent, and when I speak about some of the bands I enjoy or shows I have been to, it is actually met with a lot of intrigue. People are genuinely surprised to hear about these genres and either learn about new instruments, or hear them in a way they never imagined hearing them before. As such, I want to list five instruments many people wouldn't expect to find in a metal band.

1. Accordion - Yep, the polka instrument. You may remember Steve Urkel with one of these. This one probably is only mildly surprising as punk music is like to feature the accordion on occasion. Still, some people cannot place what they perceive to be a very heavy genre with an instrument like the accordion. There are quite a few folk metal bands that feature the accordion. Want to have a listen? Try Koennin Kuokkamies by Korpiklaani
2. Hurdy Gurdy - This is an instrument many people I talk to have not even heard of. What is a hurdy gurdy? Part violin, part bagpipe, part piano, and part jack-in-the-box. There's a box with a crank that spins a wheel that rubs against strings. Notes are played using keys on the hurdy gurdy while drone strings, strings not touched by the crank operated wheel, emanate a sound similar to that of a bagpipe. It's a very prevalent music in folk metal, so there are quite a few bands to choose from in order to listen to the sound. Eluveitie's Of Fire, Wind, and Wisdom features the hurdy gurdy prominently and is celtic metal at its finest
3. Harp - Quite possibly one of the most tranquil instruments, one often associated with love and poetry, can be found practiced by big hairy man with all sorts of tattoos. It's far from a fixture in metal bands, but the few who do utilize it really pull it off well. It adds a very nice subtle touch to the music. Furor Gallico is one of my favorite bands, and their song Banshee features the harp multiple times throughout the song.
4. Trumpet - You are about to enter the wonderful world of Swing Metal. Diablo Swing Orchestra, an avant garde metal band from Sweden, is one of the most unique bands you'll ever come across. Horns, strings, opera, and metal make for one hell of a dance party. Seriously, I can't listen to this band without wanting to learn how to become a really good swing dancer so I could dress up all fancy and do these amazing routines. Get ready to boogie when you listen to Guerilla Laments.
5. Bagpipes - When people think of bagpipes, they most typically think of Scotland and St. Patrick's Day parades here in America. Elsewhere, though, bagpipes absolutely don't fall into those same stereotypes. Bagpipes are often not given a fair shot by folks; the first thought that comes to mind would be the loud, slow, droning sounds that seem to drag on forever. The upbeat, more intricate melodies rarely get recognized, and when played in conjunction with other instruments, the bagpipes prove to be one of the greatest and most enjoyable instruments out there, in my humble opinion. Again, many bands to choose from on this instrument, but Liam by In Extremo shows off Dr. Pymonte's very nice custom-made pipes.

Five Items to Purchase for New Photographers

If you're like me, the first thing you thought about when purchasing your camera was what would be the next lens to get. It's understandable; while the kit lens that comes in a bundle is a perfectly suitable lens to use, it leaves you wanting more. Part of maturing as a photographer is to learn to work with what you have, though. Using certain lenses forces you to get creative (which is probably why I struggle to challenge myself: I did what I am not advising and went for lenses first). Maybe a kit lens doesn't give you the range you want. Of course there will be some photos where you absolutely need the range, but maybe it prompts you to think of an alternative photo than the shot you want. Using a prime exclusively helps you manage shot composition. You can't zoom, so learn to move around and think about how to frame your shot. Before you go ahead and buy a second lens, consider these five items to help you maximize your current gear and learn other types of photography.

1. Cable Release - This is my first recommended item to get. A cable release has a number of uses. A cable release will allow you to take longer exposure shots by putting your camera in bulb mode. The shutter stays open as long as you want it to. This is useful for night photography, to name one example, so you can instantly immerse yourself in a new type of photography by buying a very inexpensive piece of equipment. The other thing is that it also minimizes camera vibration. Even the act of pressing the shutter release button has the slightest vibration. Using a wireless remote or a cable release eliminates this, enabling the sharpest pictures possible.
2. Tripod - Now, most of the time a cable release is used when a camera is mounted on a tripod. It isn't necessary, as you can always create your own sort of setup to hold a camera steady. A tripod is much more convenient and steady, though, so you'll want to get one of these. Tripods aim to hold a camera motionless for a shot, particularly for longer exposures. Tripods (and the tripod heads, which are bought separately for higher end setups) can range from inexpensive to quite expensive. As a beginner, it might be excessive to drop hundreds on a tripod and head thinking that you'll grow into it, but it is important not to go too cheap, as the tripod needs to be steady and able to support the weight of your camera and lens (and some lenses can be quite heavy). You also don't want a ball head that slowly moves during a shot, making the picture blurry. Having a tripod enables you to more easily do night photos, maximize the sharpness in your photos, and also is best for photographing macro shots.
3. Battery - A battery might not seem like the best investment, as different cameras use different batteries. While not completely cheap, the price of a battery is worth the convenience and its ability to bail you out of a tough situation. The last thing you want is to have your battery run out midway through a trip or concert and have to wait for your only battery to have to charge before you can use your camera again. When starting out, I wouldn't recommend getting a battery grip right away; these also can vary by camera model, and these are much more on the pricey side. The extra battery is a good start.
4. Cleaning kit - Keeping your gear clean is an absolute must. No matter how careful you are, the gear is going to need to be cleaned. You can get kits that will provide all the basics for you: a rocket blaster to blow particles of dust off of the lens so you never have to make contact with the glass, a goat's hair brush for anything you cannot remove with the blower, and a microfiber cloth with cleaning solution for a wet cleaning of the lens surface. This will keep your lens (and future lenses) in prime condition. Typically it is cheapest to but all of these things in a bundle if you don't have any of them already.
5. Reversal ring - This one is more of a placeholder for a general category of macro lens substitutions. You may be able to buy macro adapters for a low price, but these, while will have an impact, also greatly reduce image quality, so opting for these cheap adapters is not a great idea. There are other alternatives, though. Many lenses can be disassembled and altered to become amazing macro lenses in exchange for the loss of certain functionality (such as autofocus). That requires a little research and acquiring a cheap lens (like $40-$50, not an actual good, new lens). One alternative, though, is a reversal ring. A reversal ring attaches to the camera body and mounts your lens backwards. By doing this, the lens becomes a fantastic macro lens at the fraction of the cost of a macro lens. The peril of doing this, however, is the rear element is exposed, which is not ideal since you cannot put any sort of filter on to protect it. If you do decide to go down this route, just proceed carefully to avoid any damage to the lens. It is a great low cost alternative that yields great quality relative to some of the junk you may find online.

So there you have it: for the price of a lens (less than most lenses, in fact), you can get five items that will expand your photography capabilities immediately that will expose you to various types of photography and help hone your skills and technique so you can really but a new lens to use well once it comes time for you to get one.

Do You Believe in Fate?

If you ever want a good topic for debate, asking if people believe in fate is a good one. To some, the concept of destiny is preposterous. It's certainly more logical, and it certainly fits nicely with the notion that, as in thermodynamics, nature tends to disorder. Others gravitate more to spirituality and feeling. The thinking goes beyond what can be proven and takes more of a "if I believe it, then it exists, even if only in my reality". Sometimes occurrences happen to people and despite having no rational way to justify it, they know how they felt and that it was something out of the ordinary. This is where people may point to fate as a determinant. Is there a balance between these two contrasting philosophies. I believe so; I can justify fate, and I can do it with something more logical than just faith or uncertainty.

I don't think this thought process is anything I truly haven't pondered before, but it presented itself to me in a real world example, which in turn prompted the concept. I don't believe I have any control over my career trajectory, and I don't think I am alone in this predicament. There's a nuance here: I am not asserting that I cannot control, say, what industry I work in, rather, I simply cannot control how high I advance. Why is this? Well, for several years I have really struggled with the fact that I really didn't love my profession. My last semester of college I realized how much I enjoyed studying health care economics. By that time I was already pretty well committed to working once I got my Bachelor's, and for reasons that have an explanation all to their own, I ended up in the insurance industry. The insurance industry is not bad by any stretch of the imagination; I can think of far worse fields I could be working in. It just doesn't give me any sort of deep satisfaction that makes me look forward to the next 40 years of my life (or 60, since retirement age will probably be 80-something with the way things are going).

Now, anyone who has talked to me might second guess my assertion right there. When I speak about insurance, I speak with conviction, and sometimes even enthusiasm. I speak with a knowledge and poise of someone with more experience than I actually have. How is it that I say I don't get stimulation from my job when these indicators suggest otherwise? And therein lies my original point: I don't have a choice. The thought that seems apparent to me is that if you are competent, intelligent, and care, you're going to end up a higher level manager or an executive. That sounds remarkably easy, but there are so few people that fit that bill. I don't think I am being unduly critical with that assessment, either. It's the old triangle rule that I seem to discuss more and more lately. People only ever seem to satisfy two of the three. I think initially there may be more of those who have all three, but the stress or demands of the job make the caring go away. That's the one that is often missing. And that is the one that, despite how much I really don't care about insurance in the big picture, the way I was reared instilled in me an insuppressible pride in my work, so no matter how little I care about what I am working on, I at least care about the outcome. I care that I gave a good effort and did what I could to make things work. I don't want people to ever second guess my dedication. And to that end, that caring, where so many others lose this in time, will never go away for me. As such, I feel destined to keep advancing in my line of work, not because I want to, but because it's just going to happen.

Think about the progression: people advance and receive promotions for exceeding expectations in their existing roles. If you are good at what you do and care to put in the effort to show you are good at what you do, you will succeed in the tasks handed to you (at least more often than not). Possessing all three of those qualities of the triangle ensures you will succeed, and if you succeed, you continue to get a promotion as you continue to meet and exceed the demands of your position. I have the attitude that no project handed to me is one that I cannot make a success (in the workplace, work me and outside of work me are night and day in many respects). Perhaps part of that comes from growing up a sports fan and being someone who is competitive. In sports, you don't like to lose. "Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser," as Vince Lombardi once said. Much like you do what it takes to win a game, you do what it takes to get the job done at work. That's the mentality, and as long as I have that, I am going to continue down the path I am. I'll end up in circumstances that I see others in and think how horrible it seems and how I'd never want to fill that role. I value my spare time, I value vacation time, and I don't want to constantly be on call and checking e-mails. Despite that, I find myself working late, working weekends on occasion, and continually moving in that direction. Some might say it's great to be able to achieve that place in a company, but to me it's just an unavoidable outcome determined by the traits that I possess via genetics and upbringing. It's developmental fate.

The thought of developmental fate made me wonder if managers or executives at companies really want to do what they do, or if they have similar circumstances. I imagine it's a mixed bag. Of course, psychopathy is four times more prevalent in CEOs than the normal population, so they don't fall into quite the same category (although one could argue that it is fate, and to the extent that epigenetics play a role, that further strengthens the case). Others may do it for the money, and some may have nothing else in their lives, so having the career is a means of validation. Each situation is unique, and not all fall into the sort of destiny I've laid out. I think it is a very real thing, though, and it certainly is a somewhat different way of looking at fate.

Major League Baseball 2014 Predictions: NL West

Finally I finish off my regular season preview. It's a few days into the season, but I hardly think this makes a difference over the span of 162 games, especially considering I have been trying to avoid looking at the results of games aside from the Yankees' lackadaisical 0-2 start. The NL West is a solid division with the powerhouse Dodgers leading the way and deceptive depth from top to bottom.

1. Los Angeles Dodgers
2. San Francisco Giants
3. Colorado Rockies
4. Arizona Diamondbacks
5. San Diego Padres

What more needs to be said about the Dodgers? They throw around more money than the Yankees, they have the best starting pitcher in baseball in Clayton Kershaw, and they back him up with a formidable rotation. They have plenty of offensive talent even without Matt Kemp, who at this point is one of the biggest teases in baseball. Yaisel Puig has the tools of Vladimir Guerrero in his prime and the brain of Manny Ramirez. Harnessing him will prove difficult, but he's a phenomenal talent who is already great and has a tremendously high ceiling. They have to manage the circus-like atmosphere more than they do the performance on the field, as that is the only thing that can derail them from a playoff spot.

The Giants can never seem to string a few good years together in a row, but they are due for a rebound year. Their biggest challenge will be overcoming a weak back of the rotation with Tim Lincecum and Ryan Vogelsong weighing down a stellar front three of Cain, Bumgarner, and Hudson. Brandon Belt has gotten better each year in the big leagues, and if he makes another good jump this season, he will be one of the best first basemen in baseball. At the very least, he should make modest progress at a minimum and help make a formidable middle of the order presence with Buster Posey, Hunter Pence, and a very slimmed down Pablo Sandoval. If Sandoval's trimmer frame helps keep him healthy and allows him to elevate his game, that will be a huge gain for the Giants, as the guy can flat out hit regardless. This is a very dangerous team if the cards fall right for them.

I really don't have much justification for the Rockies here other than a gut feeling. Their pitching was atrocious last year, and their best pitcher is on the DL right now. They took a flier on the oft-injured Brett Anderson who formerly showed some tremendous ability. If he puts together a full season, which is a huge if, he could provide a huge boost to this team. I am going to guess that happens. Their other oft-injured star, Troy Tulowitzki, also hopes to stay healthy and anchor an imposing middle of the order with Michael Cuddyer, who certainly has taken a liking to Coors Field, Carlos Gonzalez, and Wilin Rosario, one of the best catchers in the game who is relatively unknown to the casual fan. If they can get some progress out of their young pitchers, which it's hard to imagine being worse than last year, I think them staying in the hunt until after the All Star break is possible.

I'd like to put this team last simply because of all the bonehead roster moves they have made the past few years, but I just cannot do it. Paul Goldschmidt is that good, and he will put this team on his back at points of the season in order to keep them out of the division cellar. Losing Patrick Corbin to injury hurts and makes trading away a stud young pitching prospect for a low batting average, high strikeout power hitter who is a liability on defense look all the more foolish. There were better ways to infuse power into the lineup, which is still pretty mediocre. Martin Prado didn't even come close to outperforming Chris Johnson last year, let alone come close to warranting giving up the overrated but for some reason immensely valued Justin Upton. Didi Gregorious, thought to be a trade that would potentially give the Diamondbacks their answer at shortstop, has made no progress with the bat and starts the season in AAA. Like I said, they made some really questionable trades.

The Padres ended last year with a team ERA that was a quarter of a run worse than the NL average. That's pretty bad for a team that plays in Petco Park. They have Andrew Cashner who should continue to improve, and they have a few other guys that could have better seasons than last year, but I wouldn't call them a pitching rich team at the big league level. They trot out a very pedestrian outfield, have a huge disappointment at first base in Yonder Alonso, and it remains to be seen how Everth Cabrera bounces back after being suspended 50 games last year. Chase Headley should play better than he did last year, but I think it's pretty obvious that the Padres should have sold high on him and stocked up more for the future. The bullpen of this team is a real strength, though, so if the starters can get through the fifth or sixth inning, they are going to give themselves a lot of chances, which will win them a few games.

Wild Card Game: Giants over Reds
NLDS: Giants over Dodgers, Cardinals over Nationals
NLCS: Giants over Cardinals
World Series: Giants over Tigers

The Giants are a team that have some great pieces and have a knack for getting hot at the right time, which is what the playoffs are all about. This isn't a high probability pick, but what is the fun in a Dodgers/Cardinals vs. Red Sox/Tigers prediction?

Major League Baseball 2014 Predictions: NL Central

Arguably the best division in the National League, the Central showcases one of the NL favorites to win the pennant in the Cardinals, a Pirates team that exorcised their demons and made the playoffs last year, a very strong pitching team in the Reds, and a Brewers team that is capable of making a run. While this division might not have some of the suspense of the other divisions on who wins it, as I feel the Cardinals will ensure this doesn't come right down to the end of the season, it will produce some great baseball.

1. Cardinals

2. Reds

3. Brewers

4. Pirates

5. Cubs

The Cardinals really need little explanation. They can pitch, they can hit, they're a deep team, and they've got a good combination of youth and experience. They do play in a tough division, and injuries can always rear their ugly heads, but I don't see much that can derail this team. They have the best catcher in baseball in Yadier Molina leading the team who not only excels offensively, but is heads and shoulders above the competition defensively. Post PED Jhonny Peralta may not pan out for them, but they managed all last year in the infield with Pete Kozma and Daniel Descalso, so I think they can manage. Losing Carlos Beltran hurts, but their outfield defense gets a boost with Peter Bourjos in center, and if Matt Adams can play like he did last year, they'll get another good bat in the lineup with him at first and Allen Craig moving to the outfield.

Last season had to be a letdown for the Reds. They came in with high expectations and fell short, much to the benefit of the Pirates. They were rather unlucky, though, as they sported a great run differential, one that ordinarily would result in a better record than they achieved. They had a scary spring training injury with Aroldis Chapman getting drilled by a line drive, and their disabled list resembles a roster in and of itself. The Reds are like the Rays of the NL, though. They have pitching to spare, and despite being down five pitchers, they have the arms to hold keep them in the hunt. Joey Votto doesn't get the attention of Miguel Cabrera or Mike Trout, but this guy gets on base like it's nobody's business. The X-Factor for them will be Billy Hamilton. While people excitedly wonder if he can steal 100 bases, I wonder if he will even reach base 150 times.

No, still no Pirates. It pains me to put the Brewers here simply because of my disdain for Ryan Braun, but I genuinely think this is a better team than the Pirates. Their starting rotation is adequate, they have a pretty good offense with power and speed in the outfield and a good hitting catcher in Jonathan Lucroy, and if Jean Segura can put up a year like he did last year, I cannot see them finishing lower than third place. Aramis Ramirez seems to manage to put up respectable numbers when he is healthy, and while this could be a dropoff year for him, they have some guys that have the potential to pick up the slack. This team might end up being a little too reliant on power hitting without enough high on base guys, but I think the team finds a way to win games and exceeds expectations.

It doesn't feel good to shift the Pirates back to fourth, but I see last season as more of a fluke than anything. They have a GREAT young outfield and will for years to come, but their pitching really outperformed expectations, and they were actually very far behind the Reds in run differential. Translation: they had some luck. With the likes of Wandy Rodriguez and Edison Volquez in the rotation, that's a guarantee for some regression relative to their 2013 success. Their defense certainly plays a role in their pitching success, but ultimately I just don't think they have the arms or the on base percentage to make last year's run a reality again this year.

Can we just mark this down as another year without a World Series ring? They've got a couple of nice players on the Major League roster, but this team is in full on rebuild mode, and it will pay off for them within the next couple of years. More than anything, they really have to be frustrated not knowing what Starlin Castro is going to pan out like. They had to be hoping he'd be the premier young shortstop in the game right now, and he simply isn't paying the dividends they thought he would. It's easy to forget he's still only 24, so there's still time for him.

Can Money Buy Happiness?

It's such an old cliche, "money can't buy happiness". I get it; I get what people are trying to convey with it. It doesn't mean they are right, because they aren't. They're wrong both philosophically and logically. Fundamentally, the message should be "money doesn't guarantee happiness". I would absolutely argue money can buy happiness, it does not mean it will buy happiness, though. At its core, there are two main issues: how you get the money does a lot in determining if it can buy happiness, and money cannot buy happiness without self-awareness.

Of course, one of the proverbs of "money can't buy happiness" is that if you dedicate your life to acquiring money, you will have wasted your life. That's absolutely true unless you have a job that you positively love, which most of us don't. Even in that scenario, it's not the money that is buying you happiness. The pursuit of wealth is one that is ingrained in our heads in the United States; money gets us the things we want after all, right? Well, yes, but the time costs and the quality of life costs are very real, and our bodies and minds are paying up in order to get another digit on that paycheck. A big issue here is that many people don't realize it until it is too late. It's not until later in life do individuals regret spending more time in the office and less with their loved ones or doing personally enriching things. Having money enables a person to do a lot of things, no doubt. But expenditure of money in this scenario really result in a temporary feeling of happiness, not a greater overarching sense of contentment in life.

So what causes the issue above? I'd argue it's a lack of self-awareness, which in itself precludes happiness. Working your life away to attain money demonstrates the inability to recognize the futility of having money and not being able to enjoy the luxuries or experience afforded by having it. But take that away for a moment and just assume that a person inherited a small fortune and didn't trade off working for money. That money still won't buy happiness without self-awareness. Sure, there's a comfort level with not having to worry about financial security, but it doesn't make life any more worthwhile or fulfilling. Maybe you use the money to try and "buy" friends, maybe you buy possessions that give you a momentary sense of satisfaction, but it leaves you sitting in a spot where you still don't know what you want. Deploying the money requires knowing what makes you tick, how you can put the money to use in a way that provides a deeper fulfillment that doesn't quickly fade.

I think at the end of the day, most people dream about having some sort of windfall and imagining some awesome life subsequent to that. I can imagine it, too. You can really only take so many long days at the office doing something that really doesn't make you feel like you've made a difference in the world before you begin to think about it. That's actually what triggered this; once again having the realization that my mood fluctuates so greatly with environment at work alongside the notion that no matter what job I have, I am not going to have the job of my dreams, made me feel that my mood is almost always going to be down, in a constant struggle to try and be happy in my personal life whilst ignoring how meaningless my career is to me. For me, having money wouldn't be about living some lavish lifestyle, it would just allow me to relax, to not worry about failure. Stress often comes from being forced to do things at a pace you aren't comfortable with. When you take the anxiety of failure, take away most of your spare time due to work, you're left with a great deal of stress because you don't feel you have the time to do what you'd like because you're afraid of failing in the period of time you have. That's where the self-awareness and knowing what changes and how to make them become important, and that is where money can buy happiness.