Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread
- Thread starter MyDaughterLovesTomGordon
- Start date
- Status
If only Marrero could hit. I can definitely see a player that hasn't shown the ability to hit at even AA replacing a player that's two years his junior that has shown the ability to hit in the World Series.
I think perhaps Nick is giving too much credence to the opinions of his baseball sources. Those guys aren't exactly mainlining the secret truth of the universe.
I think perhaps Nick is giving too much credence to the opinions of his baseball sources. Those guys aren't exactly mainlining the secret truth of the universe.
SteveF said:
Not sure if serious...
Marrero's development has been fine. He was always identified as being more glove than stick, which is the opposite of Bogaerts. I think Marrero will be more than a banjo hitter. In fact, I imagine the Sox brass project his offense to be more consistent than Iglesias', with a less significant gap in defensive proficiency.
Cafardo pays virtually no attention to the gobs and gobs of information available about the Sox' prospects and relies on his anonymous "Bitter Beerface" buddy in the locker room and the mysterious AL/NL scouts who don't see these prospects nearly as frequently
Not really sure why this piece exists. Jonny Gomes is the winnery-est winner that ever winned though:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/03/09/for-man-with-suitcase-gomes-makes-case-stay/VOO9hNEUxbQrLXsvQQ7AyK/story.html
Also, usually when you're writing an article you might want to clean up the guy's quotes, put them in context, make them flow a little better. This reads like Gomes just spoke in a stream-of-consciousness and Cafardo transcribed what he said exactly.
He won't deserve it if he doesn't play well this year, Nick. No matter how cool you think he is.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/03/09/for-man-with-suitcase-gomes-makes-case-stay/VOO9hNEUxbQrLXsvQQ7AyK/story.html
Yes, Gomes' "plight." We're crying.
I quoted this because of how ridiculous Gomes sounds. Yes, your .666 OPS for Tampa in '08 had a huge part in their improvement. What a pro.
Also, usually when you're writing an article you might want to clean up the guy's quotes, put them in context, make them flow a little better. This reads like Gomes just spoke in a stream-of-consciousness and Cafardo transcribed what he said exactly.
He won't deserve it if he doesn't play well this year, Nick. No matter how cool you think he is.
There's a small part of me that fears Gomes is going to turn into this year's version of 2005 Millar. Overpraised for his role in the World Series win who becomes a bit of a malcontent when he deservedly loses out on playing time to a less flamboyant but clearly more deserving platoon mate. Gomes will hold on to beards, punted helmets and the team's post-season record in games he started the same way Millar thumped his own chest about Cowboy Up, Don't Let Us Win Tonight, shots of Jack, and The Walk.
The only solace is that I have far more confidence in John Farrell to bitch-slap him to the end of the bench when he deserves it...something Tito struggled mightily with in dealing with diva Millar.
The only solace is that I have far more confidence in John Farrell to bitch-slap him to the end of the bench when he deserves it...something Tito struggled mightily with in dealing with diva Millar.
Honestly, I think Gomes is kindof a douche. He came off as one immediately in the aftermath of the World Series. Remember that question he told Ken Rosenthal to ask him? I mean, just read that quote to Cafardo again.
Not "I've been a part of" or "I've helped". He's more than happy to take full credit for it. It takes a lot to be unlikable in the face of a World Series championship, but I think he's done it. As long as his teammates like him, I guess that's all that matters.
Not "I've been a part of" or "I've helped". He's more than happy to take full credit for it. It takes a lot to be unlikable in the face of a World Series championship, but I think he's done it. As long as his teammates like him, I guess that's all that matters.
To be fair to Gomes, he's free to think whatever he wants. He wasn't the one, though, who decided it was worthwhile to put into a newspaper - or to put it in without any discussion of why it might be flawed.
Reverend said:
Unanswerable, really. And in my mind irrelevant. My point is more that for whatever role he played in 2004, that didn't really give him free reign to play diva regarding playing time in 2005 when his performance (and the performance of his replacement) warranted him spending less time in the starting lineup than he wanted.
There's a fine line between "look at me" antics that can be for the betterment of the team and "look at me" antics that end up being a net negative for the team. Hate to see Gomes flirt too much with the latter. He's the same age now as Millar was in 2005, and at the same stage career/contract-wise. It's easy to see some parallels. I hope I'm dead wrong.
I do remember Gomes basically clowning an on-field reporter (forget who) after Lackey outdueled Verlander and the first question was about Verlander.
It went something like:
Q: "How did you guys get to Verlander?"
A: "Yeah, we couldn't have asked for a better effort from John Lackey today ..."
It went something like:
Q: "How did you guys get to Verlander?"
A: "Yeah, we couldn't have asked for a better effort from John Lackey today ..."
When Jonny Gomes actually complains about playing time and/or his contract, then I'll be concerned about this stuff. From Day 1 all I've seen/read/heard from him and his teammates is how much he wants to win, how he'll do whatever it takes to win, how he'll "be ready when his number is called" whenever that may be, how he's there for his teammates, etc.....
Does Gomes come across great in this interview? No. But it's spring training. This is just Cafardo stirring the pot because there's virtually nothing else to write about now that we're 3 weeks in. Nothing to see here.
Does Gomes come across great in this interview? No. But it's spring training. This is just Cafardo stirring the pot because there's virtually nothing else to write about now that we're 3 weeks in. Nothing to see here.
Someone needs to tell that stathead Cafardo that there is more to the game than just spring training statistics. What about the team's grittiness and heart, and their energy? What about their work ethic and grinding out at-bats, and their approach to the game and respecting teammates? Nick, surely those are all more important than your fancy ERA numbers and computer On-Bases Percentages and VURPs and all your other nerdy statistics?
Statheads like Cafardo are ruining the preseason game with all their numbers. What about the human element of spring training?
Statheads like Cafardo are ruining the preseason game with all their numbers. What about the human element of spring training?
He's so far off the rails this spring it's becoming ludicrous. It's like he's determined to be more aggressive with his ignorance.
What's fascinating about Gomes (and much of the anti-stathead crowd) is that they are very keen to use statistics that prove their worth (in Gomes' case, the stats how teams improved once he got on the team) but are very quick to debunk stats that show his arrival to a team might not be that great (in this case, WAR). If Cafardo was any kind of writer, he may have pointed this out*.
* I'm not a devout SABER guy either, I tend to think that numbers show a ton; but not everything. So I sympathize a little with what Gomes is saying here, but saying stats suck and then trying to prove your worth through other stats, is a bit absurd.
* I'm not a devout SABER guy either, I tend to think that numbers show a ton; but not everything. So I sympathize a little with what Gomes is saying here, but saying stats suck and then trying to prove your worth through other stats, is a bit absurd.
Right, because using a single data point as evidence of a trend is really showing off your statistical ninja chops.joe dokes said:
(As joe pointed out, the actual numbers make this a non sequitur even if the logic worked. But I just love the way Cafardo makes grotesquely invalid arguments as if nothing could be more compelling.)
MyDaughterLovesTomGordon said:
He's decided to entrench himself in a battle to "prove" that numbers-bases analysis has no place in baseball. He's backing the wrong horse, of course, but that's clearly the path he's decided to take. Trouble is, he's not smart enough to at least make that argument interesting. I can see other writers, like Montville or Charlie Pierce, succeeding in that path. Nick ain't gonna make it.
He's a dinosaur, idly glancing up at the meteor that spells the extinction of his relevance.
I'm surprised he doesn't get called out like this more often with the amount of rumors he pulls out of his ass.
The article today is my favorite Cafardo trope: Wherein he posits something and then everyone he talks to says he's wrong, but that's hardly a reason to not write the article he set out to write in the first place.
Article's premise: People say spring training results don't mean anything, but that's antiquated. The Sox have stumbled out of the ST gate and this is cause for concern.
What say you, interview subjects?
Anonymous (for some reason) Scout:
The manager:
The veteran catcher:
Okey-dokey, Nick. Soldier on, buddy.
Of course, Nick does, indeed, soldier on, with random items in the same story such as:
How would that work? Nick's hanging out field-side and overhears: "Hey guys, remember that time we won the World Series last year? That was awesome..."
Also, "most either have shaved or moved on to the next thing" means what exactly? They have either shaved or ... not shaved while moving on to, well, listening to rap music while having a beard? Goatees?
Finally, after all that rambling, we get to a new thesis, which probably should have been much higher in the story, which would have made sense:
Ah-ha. The "hunger meter." Numero uno on the "focal points of this camp." Does Nick kneel down beside them and put his ear to their stomachs listening for rumbling?
How much time did Nick spend coming up with "hunger meter" and then being pleased with himself? 2005 and 2008 when they didn't make it back to the World Series? Not hungry enough. Will they be hungry enough this summer?!??!
Stay tuned to Nick's columns. I fully expect some kind of dial to appear. Are they 10 games above .500? Plenty hungry! Hovering around .500 after 10 games. NOT FUCKING HUNGRY ENOUGH. TAKE AWAY THEIR SNACKS.
It's all just so insipid.
Article's premise: People say spring training results don't mean anything, but that's antiquated. The Sox have stumbled out of the ST gate and this is cause for concern.
What say you, interview subjects?
Anonymous (for some reason) Scout:
The manager:
The veteran catcher:
Okey-dokey, Nick. Soldier on, buddy.
Of course, Nick does, indeed, soldier on, with random items in the same story such as:
How would that work? Nick's hanging out field-side and overhears: "Hey guys, remember that time we won the World Series last year? That was awesome..."
Also, "most either have shaved or moved on to the next thing" means what exactly? They have either shaved or ... not shaved while moving on to, well, listening to rap music while having a beard? Goatees?
Finally, after all that rambling, we get to a new thesis, which probably should have been much higher in the story, which would have made sense:
Ah-ha. The "hunger meter." Numero uno on the "focal points of this camp." Does Nick kneel down beside them and put his ear to their stomachs listening for rumbling?
How much time did Nick spend coming up with "hunger meter" and then being pleased with himself? 2005 and 2008 when they didn't make it back to the World Series? Not hungry enough. Will they be hungry enough this summer?!??!
Stay tuned to Nick's columns. I fully expect some kind of dial to appear. Are they 10 games above .500? Plenty hungry! Hovering around .500 after 10 games. NOT FUCKING HUNGRY ENOUGH. TAKE AWAY THEIR SNACKS.
It's all just so insipid.
I don't like defending Cafardo, but he's actually right about this. I've heard and read a bunch of people talking about how the players all agree that 2013 is over and they can't sit around and dwell on what an awesome year they had. And as far as "most have shaved or moved on to the next thing" I think what Cafardo means is that the beards were a 2013 thing and that a majority of them are done with that, there is going to be a new thing that will define 2014. What that is, I have no idea, but maybe they'll all have personal hovercrafts or something.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
I was mostly just making fun of the writing - the "discussion" of last year and the either/or construction. I've also read a lot about their focus on the future, but I thought it was funny to imagine the players on the field or in the locker room sitting around and chatting about last year.
"Hey guys, remember game 6 when Vic hit that double? That's when I KNEW we had it."
Heard Felger & Mazz talk about the Gomes article today on their show. Enjoyed this quote:
Isn't the implication from this that he lost playing time later in the season? If you go from being pinch hit for, to being a pinch hitter, you're going from having several at bats a game to likely just 1. I wouldn't be gloating about that.
Isn't the implication from this that he lost playing time later in the season? If you go from being pinch hit for, to being a pinch hitter, you're going from having several at bats a game to likely just 1. I wouldn't be gloating about that.
Today, Nick posted this: http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/baseball/2014/03/11/scouts-see-world-potential-red-sox-xander-bogaerts-will-middlebrooks/ewwXeQwWp5Hd5V3tR8a29K/story.html
It is, quite literally, a list of quotes from anonymous scouts. And why am I not surprised this was one?
It is, quite literally, a list of quotes from anonymous scouts. And why am I not surprised this was one?
Reading that Gomes article, it reads like Cafardo got Gomes on the defensive in an unpublished question or two (likely something about how the "nerds don't think you're worth keeping around" or something), and Gomes spent the rest of the interview defending his belief that he's a good player. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Gomes has been doing this for a few months now (going back to the World Series, at least) so I don't think that Cafardo had to do much pushing.
My favorite part was about the Rays in 07 and 08 and how he said he was on both teams. Kind of kills his whole explanation for how good he is.
I don't read Cafardo as a rule, but today I read an article that quoted Cafardo's article about Stanton and I couldn't help but get annoyed at these this:
Assuming the Red Sox would put Xander Bogaerts and Henry Owens on their no-trade list, the Marlins have always liked Will Middlebrooks and certainly feel Garin Cecchini is a top prospect. Add one of them to a package of Matt Barnes, Christian Vazquez, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Mookie Betts? Would that be enough? Would that be too much for the Sox to give up?
Remind me again what position the Marlins best position prospect plays? Oh yeah, third. That's what I thought. I suppose the Marlins could always put Cecchini in left field, that's been discussed before... oh wait, Christian Yelich.
And did Nick not at least run this idea by someone? I feel like he's legitimately asking his reading "audience" if the package would be reasonable or not.
Assuming the Red Sox would put Xander Bogaerts and Henry Owens on their no-trade list, the Marlins have always liked Will Middlebrooks and certainly feel Garin Cecchini is a top prospect. Add one of them to a package of Matt Barnes, Christian Vazquez, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Mookie Betts? Would that be enough? Would that be too much for the Sox to give up?
Remind me again what position the Marlins best position prospect plays? Oh yeah, third. That's what I thought. I suppose the Marlins could always put Cecchini in left field, that's been discussed before... oh wait, Christian Yelich.
And did Nick not at least run this idea by someone? I feel like he's legitimately asking his reading "audience" if the package would be reasonable or not.
It sounds like a post you would read on a message board. "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we got Stanton?! I wonder what it would take. We're definitely not going to trade Xander or Owens, they're untouchable! I wonder if the Marlins would take Middlebrooks, Cecchini, and Bradley Jr... And, I don't know, let's toss in some other guys, like Barnes, Vazquez, and Betts... Do you think that would get the Marlins to do it? Or would we be giving up way too much there? What do the rest of you guys think?!"
You know, I have a tendency to do what Cafardo does on message boards. I ask a lot of questions, answer with a contradicting question. It isn't bad for message boards or discussion forums.
But, for the love of all that is, it is abhorrent in a published piece. I want to get paid to be a reporter that has a list of questions I'd ask someone, but didn't ask anyone so I'm just publishing the list of questions to the reader.
But, for the love of all that is, it is abhorrent in a published piece. I want to get paid to be a reporter that has a list of questions I'd ask someone, but didn't ask anyone so I'm just publishing the list of questions to the reader.
Yes. But not only that, we ask questions on a board since we have little recourse but to hash out any possible answer among ourselves. Nick actually has access to actual people in the know to get these answers but he's too lazy to do it. Unless of course one of his usual sources decides to use his column as the talking sock puppet it often is.Curll said:
Hilarious concept.Rasputin said:
FADE IN
INT. OFFICE - DAY
BRIAN CASHMAN'S SECRETARY: (over intercom) Mr. Cashman, Nick Cafardo on Line 2 again.
CASHMAN: (Under his breath) Christ, what does he want now? He's got four baseball people max in his phone and I'm one of them. (Louder, over intercom) Uh, tell Nick that I'm in a meeting with Brian Benben from HBO's hit series Dream On and I can't be disturbed.
BRIAN CASHMAN'S SECRETARY: Really?
CASHMAN: Yes. He's an idiot, he'll buy it.
BRIAN CASHMAN'S SECRETARY: (On the phone) I'm sorry Nick he's in a meeting with Martin Tupper from HBO....Okay... I'll tell him you called. (Over intercom) Yeah that worked. He said he doesn't have HBO but that Jason Bay loves that show.
CASHMAN: Of course. That thread on SoSH that I subscribe to really nails him.
FADE OUT
"Hey Scott ... yeah, it's Nick ... Cafardo. You know, from the Globe ... Right, Nick. Yeah, anyway, what do you want me to say about Drew this week? ... Okay, so just that he's an awesome defender and way better than Xander and that Xander will probably need a replacement halfway through the year to make the pitchers feel better about themselves? ... Ok. Yeah, got it.
"Talk to you next week, Scott!"
"Talk to you next week, Scott!"
- Status