Jump to content


Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?

Photo
* * * * - 8 votes

"Way above my intellectual capacity" AKA the Wisdom of Nick Cafardo


2821 replies to this topic

#1 MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

  • 4,326 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 12:55 PM

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:

"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:

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:

"[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:

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:

"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:

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.

#2 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 01:09 PM

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.

#3 DJnVa


  • Yes


  • PipPipPipPip
  • 17,253 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 01:28 PM

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.

#4 Paradigm


  • juju all over his tits


  • 5,935 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 01:31 PM

Tripe, all of it.

#5 URI


  • stands for life, liberty and the uturian way of life


  • 10,251 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 01:55 PM

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.

#6 ngruz25


  • Bibby


  • 9,780 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 08:59 PM

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!

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.

#7 Paradigm


  • juju all over his tits


  • 5,935 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 09:08 PM

And people wonder why newspapers are folding around the country.

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

#8 xjack


  • Futbol Crazed


  • 5,162 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 10:39 PM

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.

#9 philly sox fan


  • SoSH Member


  • 9,748 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 10:51 PM

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.

#10 Grubbery

  • 2,880 posts

Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:33 PM

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.

Edited by Grubbery, 19 January 2009 - 11:35 PM.


#11 JulE6


  • the crying game


  • PipPip
  • 3,750 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 12:37 AM

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.

#12 gingerbreadmann

  • 277 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 01:01 AM

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:

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



#13 FelixMantilla


  • reincarnated mr hate


  • 8,731 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 01:43 AM

Thanks for the links gingerbreadman.

That column was bad even by Cafardo standards.

#14 hunter05


  • SoSH Member


  • 5,166 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 02:33 AM

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.

#15 johnmd20


  • voice of soccer


  • 17,372 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 09:24 AM

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!

Edited by johnmd20, 20 January 2009 - 09:30 AM.


#16 mt8thsw9th


  • anti-SoSHal


  • 14,226 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 09:34 AM

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

CF D. White .815



#17 Pumpsie


  • The Kilimanjaro of bullshit


  • 10,649 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 10:05 AM

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.

#18 IpswichSox

  • 1,895 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 10:07 AM

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?

#19 JulE6


  • the crying game


  • PipPip
  • 3,750 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 10:36 AM

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

Bard and a PTBNL?

#20 JimD

  • 4,794 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 10:39 AM

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.

#21 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 11:56 AM

You feel bad for Cafardo? Seriously?

If Nick Cafardo, who has been around for a few decades, doesn't have the contacts to fill a weekly sheet of notes, then Nick Cafardo shouldn't be a writer at a major metropolitan newspaper. Let him cover the suburban lacrosse beat. And having nuggets of information and turning them into interesting stories is the most basic of his job, if he can't do that he should be fired.

Whether Cafardo is a nice person is not at all germane to this subject. I'm sure when he rips a player, he doesn't first weigh whether the player is a nice guy. If you make an error, you made an error. And right now, Cafardo is making a weekly error and his editor either doesn't care or doesn't see it. And that's a big problem for the Boston Globe.

#22 Smead Jolley

  • 1,012 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 12:19 PM

Yeah, I'm sure the Bosox just knew that Papi would be a postseason beast after he had zero HR and BB in two series with the Twinkies in '02, slugging .370 in the process.
Mark Bellhorn would have been considered a huge goat if the Bosox hadn't pulled off a few miracles to get to Game 6 of the '04 ALCS. Same with Damon for Game 7, plus he had the boost of Torre bringing in Javier Vazquez. There would have a been a lot more attention paid to Bill Mueller making a gob of errors that postseason, as well as Manny doing his Gymboree act in LF in the 8th of Game 1 of the WS, if things had tipped the wrong way. Manny was funny a half inning later after Bellhorn bailed him out, but those tumbles were devastating at the time.
Why didn't Schilling step up in Game 1 of the '04 ALCS??
Oh, because he was seriously injured...which trumps step up ability 99% of the time. Good thing they figured out where to put those stitches, huh? Docs should just learn how to stitch the "choke" nerve aside during the postseason, then all the pitchers would have 0.00 ERAs while every batter HRed every time up. Doesn't make sense? Hey, they're all stepping up...anything is possible!
And, boy, didn't "Mr. Postseason" Ramirez have exactly ZERO RBI against the Yanks in that '04 ALCS?
Man, what a crappy column. I love Theo's comment.

#23 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,863 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 12:58 PM

Nick's a 70s newspaper guy working in an environment that's utterly passed him by. He's used to making a few phone calls to his usual contacts around the league ("Hi JP! You get fired yet?"), pining for the same players year after year after year (Lowe, Trot, Loretta) and giving us useless non-updates on them, and then throwing a bunch of slop together for the Sunday Notes column and calling it a day.

Funny thing is that when he was on the Pats beat he did the same thing for the Football Notes columns, only it was Bills GM Tom Donohoe he always called instead of JP.

I don't doubt he's a nice guy, but I also don't doubt that he's hopelessly lost now and should take the buyout should it be offered.

#24 btaultimate

  • 57 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 01:42 PM

fwiw, Billy Beane has said that getting the postseason is all you can plan for. What happens after that is mostly luck.

#25 Grubbery

  • 2,880 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 01:57 PM

I agree that the "nice guy" thing has no bearing on whether he should keep his job or why the Globe continues to employ him in this role. My guess it's largely a seniority issue, and what we have here is a Peter Principle exacerbated by the fact that non-newspaper outlets have become more lucrative and inviting for the better writers out there (see Edes, Gordon).

Carfado keeps his job, frankly, because the Globe can't afford to lure anyone better in given the state of the industry's economy and union rules would make it difficult to elevate a youngster like Benjamin to the gig because she lacks the necessary seniority to warrant the move and the related boost in pay (at least short of a completely unforgivable act, a la Ron Borges - and he sucked for a long time before he finally showed his ass). I fear the best option here is the aforementioned buy out, or that Carfado gets so desperate he starts lifting text wholesale from other writers without attribution.

#26 ifmanis5


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,792 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 03:13 PM

Nick's a 70s newspaper guy working in an environment that's utterly passed him by.

I think that pretty much nails it.

Moreover, If you were somebody who read the Globe Sunday Sports Section in the 70's and 80's, or really almost any pre-internet year, after you read it (and it took you a good while to read it all) you felt like you knew more about sports than just about anybody else in America, at least on that day. It put you well ahead of the sports curve and the proof of its worth is the fact that every TV network in the business hired these people to repeat the same insider info for their air. It was truly privileged, unique information.

And just look at it now. You've read all the important stuff already on the net (some of it on this site) or it's just lazy useless crap like the column cited in this thread. You're certainly not smarter for having read it (it doesn't take too much time to read it all now), the information is hardly insider and the customers are voicing their opinion of its worth by the decreasing circulation. The Globe can blame the net for its failing business if it wants, but the truth is that they are making themselves obsolete with their own poor product. They are being passed by in every sense of the phrase.

#27 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 03:31 PM

And just look at it now. You've read all the important stuff already on the net (some of it on this site) or it's just lazy useless crap like the column cited in this thread. You're certainly not smarter for having read it (it doesn't take too much time to read it all now), the information is hardly insider and the customers are voicing their opinion of its worth by the decreasing circulation.


That's not true. Marc Spears and Mike Reiss have great notebooks that dig up information that you may not find on line. Even KPD has a stellar hockey notebook that, while written a little breezy and tries a bit too hard with some forced humor, is miles ahead of Cafardo.

What they ought to do is have a Sunday blog roundup where they go to established blogs (like the Angels one referenced above or USS Mariner or whatever) and run some of that content into a notebook style. Obviously this stuff has to be noted and fact checked (for sites like USSM) but if writing a good notebook is that hard for Cafardo (and the last year has been terrible) then maybe it's time to take the form into another direction.

Of course it won't happen because newspapers are afraid of the internet.

#28 ifmanis5


  • SoSH Member


  • 12,792 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 04:27 PM

I'll give you KPD, but are you really going to put the other two in the same league as the way the Sunday Section used to be? That was more my point. Is CBS about to hire Mike Reiss to gain access to his stuff over everybody else they could possibly hire on the NFL? I don't think so. That was the standard that used to exist.

I like your other roundup point too, but as you said, highly doubtful that would happen.

#29 The Four Peters


  • can peacefully dougie off this mortal coil


  • 11,160 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 04:38 PM

I'll give you KPD, but are you really going to put the other two in the same league as the way the Sunday Section used to be? That was more my point. Is CBS about to hire Mike Reiss to gain access to his stuff over everybody else they could possibly hire on the NFL? I don't think so. That was the standard that used to exist.

Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this happened. Reiss is widely regarded as one of the best beat reporters in all of football, and I've been expecting a national move for him fairly soon. He has absolutely mastered the combination of print and internet, and is able to tailor his writing to each medium. He's the best reporter at the Globe right now, by far.

He's genuinely a nice and standup guy too, which means nothing, but warrants mentioning.

Edited by The Four Peters, 20 January 2009 - 04:39 PM.


#30 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 04:58 PM

Reiss may not have the juice that Peter King or Wil McDonough did before him, but I've been really impressed with the way he digs up stories, follows leads and tries to bring new information to the notes page every Sunday. Like I've said in previous discussions of Cafardo, his Sunday columns look as if they were written at 4:45 on Friday while he has one foot out the door.

Reiss and the others at least have different stories from different sources around the league and their pieces read as if they spent the entire week manning the phones or talking to people. For example, Spears writes a bunch about the west coast teams and the New Orleans Hornets. When was the last time Cafardo wrote anything about the Royals or the Brewers or the Mariners or the Astros (aside from a knob slobber about Brad Ausmus)? Cafardo runs the same boring shit: interview, appropos of nothing, a top 10 list of who's in the news and a bullshit main story.

I know that you're not exemplifying Cafardo, but you should really take a peek at the other guys and scrutinize what they do and how they do it. You'll be pleasantly surprised. I don't think that Spears or Reiss will be around the Globe much longer anyway, but right now, they're the best of a young crop.

#31 richgedman'sghost

  • 540 posts

Posted 20 January 2009 - 05:06 PM

The above posts are correct. The quality of the Sunday sports note columnist in the Globe has gone downhill. To me the heyday of the Sunday Globe was in the 1980's when they had Will McDonough (football), Bob Ryan (basketball) and Peter (baseball). I used to really look forward to reading the Sunday Globe. Not anymore.

#32 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:18 AM

I'm reading the Baseball Notes section this morning and in Cafardo's longer piece about steroids, he quotes three people: a prominent agent, a prominent general manager and another agent. All made quotes with attributing their names.

Seriously, what the fuck? I have no problem with an unnamed source here and there but when their entire piece is built around unnamed sources, it's not right and it's lazy, shoddy journalism. This isn't the first time that Cafardo has done this, week after week after week most of his quotes are built around unnamed players, general managers and agents.

This is getting absolutely ridiculous.

BTW, ripping on ESPN for a type-o? Talk about people in glass houses.

#33 MarkInLondon


  • Texas resident


  • 5,139 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:31 AM

Seems like Cafardo is like a kid putting off doing his homework until the last possible minute, including on the morning bus into the school.

He gets to Saturday afternoon and suddenly realises he has an hour until deadline. He then throws a huge panic, swearing at his wife and kids at the slightest interruption until his wife decides to pack the kids off to the pictures or her mothers for the afternoon.

He drinks a bottle of very cheap cooking sherry, puts on a Blink182 album and comes us with some spurious theory that he then tries to 'evidence' with equally spurious arguments and made up quotes from anonymous sources.

When the article is done, he hits the send button, runs around his office punching the air and then falls asleep in a pool of his own vomit.

#34 jacklamabe65


  • A New Frontier butt boy


  • 6,120 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:40 AM

In terms of garbled syntax and the entire absurdity of “special player,” we can make fun of Old Hickory all we want but Gammo's Diamond Notes columns in the Sunday Globe in the '70's were weekly birthday presents, especially compared to the newspaper insert that Cafardo had today.

#35 johnmd20


  • voice of soccer


  • 17,372 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:46 AM

He gets to Saturday afternoon and suddenly realises he has an hour until deadline. He then throws a huge panic, swearing at his wife and kids at the slightest interruption until his wife decides to pack the kids off to the pictures or her mothers for the afternoon.

He drinks a bottle of very cheap cooking sherry, puts on a Blink182 album and comes us with some spurious theory that he then tries to 'evidence' with equally spurious arguments and made up quotes from anonymous sources.

When the article is done, he hits the send button, runs around his office punching the air and then falls asleep in a pool of his own vomit.

This is hilarious and much better written than anything Cafardo puts out every week.

#36 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 17,370 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 09:56 AM

3. If intimidation is part of pitching, the Red Sox have some big, strong, mean men on the hill;

Link


Nick, this is what you could muster up?? Please hand your laptop in and go hang out with your pal Roger in Houston.

#37 SaladParmesan

  • 582 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 11:36 AM

BTW, ripping on ESPN for a type-o? Talk about people in glass houses.


Ironic, since in his own column he wishes a happy 40th to Joe Hesketh.

Edited by SaladParmesan, 15 February 2009 - 11:37 AM.


#38 Smiling Joe Hesketh


  • now batting steve sal hiney. the leftfielder, hiney


  • 25,863 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 12:56 PM

Ironic, since in his own column he wishes a happy 40th to Joe Hesketh.

Just what I was thinking. :rolling: It didn't occur to him that Hesketh would have been out of baseball at age 25 had he been turning only 40 today?

It's his 50th, Nick. And for the love of God, take the buyout.

#39 MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

  • 4,326 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 01:32 PM

Seriously, what the fuck? I have no problem with an unnamed source here and there but when their entire piece is built around unnamed sources, it's not right and it's lazy, shoddy journalism. This isn't the first time that Cafardo has done this, week after week after week most of his quotes are built around unnamed players, general managers and agents.


The anonymous sources have indeed got out of hand. What, exactly, is he protecting this guy from - everyone knowing he sucks at his job?

A prominent agent said, "I don't have the data, but I would say that there have been more one-year deals and one-year deals with options and incentives than we've ever seen in one offseason."

Hey, "prominent agent," you don't have the data? Isn't it your job to follow the market? How hard is it to put deals in a spreadsheet every year then sort by number of years? And if this guy doesn't have the data, then why is he a worthwhile source? And what am I supposed to take from this: Some agent, who may or may not be prominent and who apparently isn't very good at his job thinks this is a crazy offseason for one-year deals? Wow!

Then we have the exact same worthless quote from another unnamed guy:

A prominent general manager agreed, saying, "There's no doubt - without knowing what the numbers are - that more players have signed one-year deals than ever before."


Does that not seem fishy to anyone? Both quotes are formulated the same way, are anonymous, and are convenient to Cafardo's argument, and yet no one, including Cafardo, has done any research to support these claims. How can you have "no doubt" about something "without knowing what the numbers are"? That's insane and utterly worthless.

Someone explain to me why this agent would be anonymous:

"Players who normally get three years are getting one; players who got four years would normally have received five," said another agent.

What could possibly damage him there? It's journalistic malpractice to quote him anonymously.

And then there's this:

Commissioner Bud Selig has come down hard on A-Rod, saying that anyone who used steroids shamed the game.


Cafardo and I apparently have a different idea of coming down hard. What else could Selig have possibly said, while doing absolutely NOTHING?

Cafardo is a toad and his columns have become beyond worthless to the point that they are actually damaging to a person's understanding of the game. He makes you stupider and less informed by reading him.

#40 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 27,139 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 01:46 PM

Are we sure this wasn't a Nick Cafardo Column Generator entry they post in error by mistake?

#41 ngruz25


  • Bibby


  • 9,780 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 02:05 PM

This is about the 12th time he's mentioned Kris Benson in his little free agent round-up, each time expressing some surprise that someone hasn't signed him.

Kris. Benson. Yes, the one who hasn't pitched since 2006, and who had been mediocre or worse in his last 5 seasons. The 34-year old Kris Benson with a career 102 OPS+.

WHY WOULD ANYONE CARE ABOUT KRIS BENSON?

#42 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:19 PM

2. Adam Dunn, Nationals outfielder: Most teams were offering Dunn a one-year deal in the $3 million-$5 million range, and that just wasn't going to get it done. The Nationals, because of Jim Bowden's past relationship with Dunn in Cincinnati, sealed the deal with a two-year, $20 million contract. It's a $3 million pay cut, but in this market, Dunn was fortunate to get an eight-figure contract. The Nationals were very serious about Mark Teixeira and were one of the few teams that had the money to spend. Dunn, meanwhile, did a good job resisting the seven-figure offers. He didn't want to sign with a team that lost 102 games last season, but really had nothing close to that offer.


In the bolded part, is he congratulating Bowden for signing Dunn to an offer for double the money and double the years while most other GMs would give him one year at $5 mil? And the last two lines seem to be contradictory.

This is beyond embarrassing.

#43 E5 Yaz


  • Transcends message boarding


  • 27,139 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 04:38 PM

This is about the 12th time he's mentioned Kris Benson in his little free agent round-up, each time expressing some surprise that someone hasn't signed him.

Kris. Benson. Yes, the one who hasn't pitched since 2006, and who had been mediocre or worse in his last 5 seasons. The 34-year old Kris Benson with a career 102 OPS+.

WHY WOULD ANYONE CARE ABOUT KRIS BENSON?


It's all about Anna

#44 mcpickl

  • 2,105 posts

Posted 15 February 2009 - 07:16 PM

In the bolded part, is he congratulating Bowden for signing Dunn to an offer for double the money and double the years while most other GMs would give him one year at $5 mil? And the last two lines seem to be contradictory.

This is beyond embarrassing.


I noticed that line right away too.

Laughable.

#45 johnmd20


  • voice of soccer


  • 17,372 posts

Posted 16 February 2009 - 10:59 AM

In the bolded part, is he congratulating Bowden for signing Dunn to an offer for double the money and double the years while most other GMs would give him one year at $5 mil? And the last two lines seem to be contradictory.

This is beyond embarrassing.

This thread is more informative, engaging, and entertaining than all of Cafardo's recent columns(say, 2 years of them?) combined. Good reading in here.

#46 Foulkey Reese


  • foulkiavelli


  • 20,341 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 08:53 PM

Cafardo's day has been made.

SURPRISE, Ariz.—Right-hander Kris Benson, the first pick in the 1996 draft by the Pittsburgh Pirates, signed a minor league contract Saturday with the Texas Rangers.



#47 RedOctober3829


  • SoSH Member


  • 17,370 posts

Posted 22 February 2009 - 07:47 AM

Also, "What does Alfonso Soriano have in common with Jose C*nseco, Barry B*nds, and Alex R*driguez?


Seriously, what respectable reporter does this?

#48 bluefenderstrat

  • 933 posts

Posted 22 February 2009 - 08:18 AM

Now that Kris Benson has signed, can Bernie Williams and Shea Hillenbrand be far behind?

#49 Zedia

  • 1,309 posts

Posted 22 February 2009 - 02:33 PM

Seriously, what respectable reporter does this?


To be fair, he was directly quoting Bill Chuck, asterisks and all.

Before this thread, I don't think I paid much attention to Cafardo's silliness. But he's definitely entered the Peter King zone.

Apropos of nothing: 1. Jose Canseco, Nobel Peace Prize candidate?; 2. CC Sabathia is a huge fan of boxer Manny Pacquaio;



#50 John Marzano Olympic Hero


  • has fancy plans, and pants to match


  • 15,345 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 03:44 PM

Four unnamed sources today. I believe (if you throw out his interview with Bobby Cox and his contribution by the "Maniacal One") there were only six people quoted on the entire page. In other words, two-thirds of his quotes are from "unnamed sources". Good lookin' out, Deep Throat.



Reply to this topic



  


2 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    TheDestroia