[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

I know there's a whole thread devoted to Nick Cafardo's abominable Baseball Notes column, but this week's deserves its own thread by way of it just being abominably bad.

The premise of the main body piece? That GMs don't think enough about potential playoff performance when evaluating players. Apparently Nick's one step ahead of the best GMs in the game, in that he sees past things like great in-season performance and looks for those players who "step up" in the playoffs. Then he seeks validation for his argument, which is where it gets to be high comedy:

Mark Shapiro:

Quote

"We look at a lot of variables in the decision-making process - primarily subjective (scouting), objective (statistics), medical, financial, mental makeup, and personality. The experience you mentioned could fit in as a small, positive intangible that helps shape decisions but not impact them in a meaningful way."

That's as close as you get from a professional responding: "Um, no, that's stupid."

How does he not see how circular his argument is:

Quote

The Red Sox won the World Series in 2004 and '07 because they had players such as Curt Schilling, Derek Lowe, Manny Ramírez, David Ortiz, Johnny Damon, Bill Mueller, Mark Bellhorn, Mike Lowell, Josh Beckett, and Jonathan Papelbon who stepped up their games when it counted most.

That's essentially saying, "The Red Sox won the World Series in 2004 and '07 because their players played well. If they had had players that didn't play well, they wouldn't have won."

No shit.

Here's Theo calling Nick dumb:

Quote

"[Identifying good postseason players]is certainly not a primary consideration - more of a secondary factor at best," said Sox GM Theo Epstein. "Ted Williams didn't perform in the postseason . . . I would take him!"

But Nick is undaunted:

Quote

While Shapiro and Epstein appear to agree, you can't help but wonder why so many of these teams missed the boat on signing players who are proven postseason performers, such as Ramírez and Lowe. How could Lowe have gone to the Braves for four years and $60 million, and not to the Mets, Phillies, or even back to the Red Sox?

What?!? Because (assuming I agree with Cafardo's logic) the Braves don't care about winning in the post season but those other teams do? What is he even talking about? The reason those teams haven't signed Ramirez and Lowe is because they're asking for absurd amounts of money. Only the Braves were desperate enough to sign Lowe at that number because they've been hammered this offseason.

Finally, I'd love to know who this genius GM is:

Quote

"I think most GMs feel, 'We've got to get there and we can get there with these players,' " said one National League GM. "I think some think about, 'OK, I know we can get there, but what happens once we get there? How can we win the whole thing?' So you try and target those players who you feel can help you win the whole thing."

Love how he's anonymous. Could that be because he hasn't actually won anything and so his brilliant targeting plan hasn't worked? And how would this work anyway? Are there so many high-quality free agents on the market that you can pick and choose like, "Well, both of these guys had sub-4.00 ERAs and a 2-1 K/BB, but this second guy is a run better ERA in the playoffs, so I'm going with him?" Those choices just don't exist.

And then there is the analysis of the payrolls, the theory being that big market team are cutting, while small market teams are adding. Here's his evidence:

Quote

The payrolls of the Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, Dodgers, White Sox, Mariners, Blue Jays, and Pirates appear to be going down.

Wha? The Mariners, Blue Jays, and Pirates are now "big market?" Because three small-market teams are adding slightly (and trying to change that), I'm supposed to see a trend? This is classic cherry-picking and isn't remotely supported by the evidence he supplies. The intro should have been, "Here are some facts about payroll. I don't know what to make of it. But there's probably nothing to make of it, so there."

Finally, anybody else notice that, in the Lugo bit, "20 pounds of muscle" was changed to "10 pounds of muscle" after everyone cried 'roids in the comments? Shady.

Just a crappy, crappy article, even by his standards.

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

There was a lot of head scratching in this article, especially the part about the big market and small market teams. It seems as if he forgot about the first part of his sentence by the time he was done with the last part of the sentence.

And the last few lines of his main piece (where he talks about Bonds sucking in the post season, but then doing very well) pretty much negated his whole column. Steroids or not Bonds was other worldly in the 2002 playoffs. But, if Sabean went by Cafardo's piece of picking players who only excelled in the postseason, then Bonds wouldn't have been on the team and the Giants wouldn't have gone to game seven of the World Series.

Like I've said before, the Boston Globe Sunday sports section is an absolute shit show in comparison to what it used to be (BTW, there was 14 pages this week) and no page in that section exemplifies this depressing downswing than the baseball notes page. Joe Sullivan has done a terrible, terrible, terrible job.

[DJnVa]

The point about the Sox winning in 2004 because they had all these guys stepping up...well, had they not won it would have been because the Cardinals had all these guys stepping up. Every single year a team wins. And it's because they had players step up in the postseason. I mean, that's how you win. It's a circular argument.

[Paradigm]

Tripe, all of it.

[URI]

The Blue Jays, and Mariners are certainly "big market" in terms of MSA/revenue generated. The Pirates are big market if you are looking at 1979.

[ngruz25]

His "Apropos of Nothing" bit is full of unintentionally hilarity. As such, it's always my favorite part of Cafardo's putrid Sunday Notes (which is tremendously sad, because I grew up on the Sunday Notes). Let's take a look at this week's pearls of wisdom!

Quote

Apropos of nothing
1. Great to see old friend and baseball fan Jim Schwartz get the Lions' head coaching job; 2. I think Gary Sheffield will have a very good season; 3. John Harrington receives the prestigious Bud Selig Award at the Scouts Foundation dinner tonight in Beverly Hills, Calif.; 4. We will miss one of the purest baseball shows, XM's "Baseball Beat" with Charley Steiner; 5. Why aren't the Angels doing anything?

1. What? Why are you talking about the Detroit Lions? I have no idea who Jim Schwartz is.
2. Okay, thanks for the opinion Nick. Care to explain why you have it?
3. That's probably interesting to someone.
4. Will we? I don't have XM radio, not that many people do, tell me a little more about the show.
5. I have no fucking clue, why don't you do your job and find out?

I know, it's just a little spot for his little thoughts, but it's such a waste of space, it's pathetic.

[Paradigm]

And people wonder why newspapers are folding around the country.

But don't let those gosh darn bloggers vote for the MVP!

[xjack]

I don't understand why any sportswriter would put much stock in what Theo has to say about anything.

Theo's only priority when dealing with the press seems to be saying what ever is in the best interest of the club. Sometimes that means shading the truth -- like saying he'd be content going into spring training with Brown and Kottraras competing for the second catcher slot. Sometimes it's an outright lie -- like saying he hasn't made an offer to a free agent or had trade talks with a team when in fact he's done just that. But most of the time it means avoiding saying anything meaningful and just stringing a bunch of milquetoast ideas together and watching in amazement as the the Globe and Herald actually bother to print what he says.

[philly sox fan]

The column was terrible, but you missed the most egregious thing he wrote. I'm not gonna give that idiot another click to find it, but in the payroll discussion bit he cited the 2008 Sox as an example of a big market team that cut payroll because they trade Ramirez and brought in Bay.

The whole freakin summer the only talk about the team is that they wanted Ramirez gone so badly that they paid him to play for the Dodgers while also paying his replacement. Yes, that means the payroll actually went up. I have a low opinion of most of these sports writers, but I was literally dumb founded. The lead baseball writer, the one with big picture national point of view apparently missed that. Just freakin astounding.

[Grubbery]

And he's lazy. He's filled the same 9 inches of space with the same run down of the same free agents with nominal updates for a couple months now.

He really should be fired.


Does he read this site? Nick! You should be fired. Seriously.


Edit: No, really. I mean it. I honestly would prefer frogboy. He's at least entertaining in a car wreck sort-of-way.

This post has been edited by Grubbery: 19 January 2009 - 11:35 PM

[JulE6]

I fear Cafardo won't be going anywhere because he's the one who "broke" the Manny trade on NESN (granted Gordon Edes did most of the work, but it was Cafardo hunched in the corner on his cell phone writing stuff on a napkin).

This column stunk though, I agree.

[gingerbreadmann]

It's this kind of writing that makes you long for FJM, but regardless, Cafardo is being shelled (Angels writer) across the internet (Baseabll Analysts, great site) anyway.

I especially love the Analysts article:

Quote

Anyway, I thought I would assemble a roster Cafardo can go to battle with. Some postseason standouts who, once in the playoffs, would certainly shine and carry his team to a title. Because, you know, if they have done it over the course of two starts or 50 plate appearances, you can trust they will do it again. It's just how they're constituted. It's how they roll.

Postseason OPS
C Y. Molina .809
1B C. Chambliss .726 (um, 1976 people. it's about impact)
2B J. Offerman 1.024
3B S. Brosius .696 (8 home runs. guy's clutch. count the rings.)
SS D. Eckstein N/A
LF B. Agbayani .853
CF D. White .815
RF P. O'Neill see Brosius

[FelixMantilla]

Thanks for the links gingerbreadman.

That column was bad even by Cafardo standards.

[hunter05]

So some of the best players in baseball at their respective positions played well for the Red Sox in 04 and 07, thus helping them win the world series. I can't believe Cafardo isn't a GM somewhere with that cutting edge logic. If it wasn't for Mike Reiss, there would be absolutely no reason to read the Globe other than for torture.

[johnmd20]

gingerbreadmann, on Jan 20 2009, 01:01 AM, said:

I especially love the Analysts article:

Postseason OPS
3B S. Brosius .696 (8 home runs. guy's clutch. count the rings.)

AWESOME, nice post ginger! Brosius comments are fantastic and it's great to see Cafardo get pummeled for such a pathetic column. Yeah, forget about assembling a team that might make the playoffs, I want a team that will perform well in the playoffs and if we don't make it, who cares, my team is championship ready.

Edit - Cafardo is being shelled (Angels writer). THIS IS A MUST READ, HILARIOUS!

This post has been edited by johnmd20: 20 January 2009 - 09:30 AM

[mt8thsw9th]

Not to derail this, but what would be so wrong with Devon White as your center fielder?

Quote

CF D. White .815

[Pumpsie]

Cafardo's a certifiable idiot who's less qualified to write about baseball than half the people on this board. He just does not understand the game. And that unidentified, anonymous GM who agrees with him? Sounds a lot like the equally dense Omar Minaya, who signs players for what they've done in the past instead of what they're going to do in the future. How's that Pedro Martinez signing working out for you, Omar? Did it matter how well Pedro pitched BEFORE you signed him? Did it matter how well Pedro pitched in the postseason before you signed him? Didn't think so.

[IpswichSox]

johnmd20, on Jan 20 2009, 09:24 AM, said:

Edit - Cafardo is being shelled (Angels writer). THIS IS A MUST READ, HILARIOUS!

Not sure this is getting enough attention, especially if you're not clicking on the link. But "Angels writer" is Sam Miller, who is the Angels beat writer for the Orange County Register. Nick isn't being taken to the woodshed by some faceless "blogger" who's writing from a computer on a card table in the corner of his parent's unfinished basement. Miller is a colleague of Cafardo's. He doesn't just take Nick to the woodshed. Miller eviscerates Cafardo. He all but calls him an imbecile. This is from a colleague. It's very nicely done, and it shows Miller has some cubes. How can we get him to the Globe?

[JulE6]

IpswichSox, on Jan 20 2009, 10:07 AM, said:

It's very nicely done, and it shows Miller has some cubes. How can we get him to the Globe?

Bard and a PTBNL?

[JimD]

I sort of feel bad for Cafardo. He's probably a nice guy but he's not going anywhere. His game stories are fine but he is out of his element writing a weekly notes column. He doesn't seem to have the type of access that Gammons and the best notes column writers have, and while he is privy to information that most people on this board would love to get their hands on, he seems incapable of drawing any interesting conclusions from it. He's probably safe at the Globe as long as they stay in business, though, at least until the current convulsions cease and whatever print/digital hybrid emerges.