Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread

[soxfan121]

Today he declares Toronto a deadline winner in part because they "stuck to their guns" and didn't deal Downs for "pennies on the dollar."

Toronto only wins if Downs is signed as an FA by a team outside the top 15 and net a first round pick and a supplemental pick in return.

If Downs is signed by a top 15 (protected) pick or worse, doesn't sign at all because teams don't want to sacrifice a first round pick for a reliever on the wrong side of 30...this might be a complete disaster for Toronto.

 

[Manramsclan]

Cahfahdo in Today's Globe

Ellsbury would seem to be the top trade bait, but that may not go over big with the masses who love Ellsbury no matter what. If it means trading for Gonzalez, would those people change their minds?

Does Nick really believe that the Red Sox personnel decisions are guided by "the masses"?

He also speculates that they will be thinking about the ratings when making personnel moves. That is patently ridiculous.

I think there remains much ado about the ratings going down and discussed in the thread ad nauseam, but the real reason the ratings are down is because the team hasn't been whole all year. There was an immediate sense of treading water that occurred in the beginning of the season with the Ellsbury injury, then Cameron, etc. and it has just snowballed. Yes they've been winning at a decent clip, but there has been a sense from the beginning of the season that the Red Sox best players were going to have to perform their best in order to beat strong Tampa and Yankee teams. When the likes of Darnell McDonald and Daniel Nava playing the outfield for a long stretch it's already hard to imagine the Sox would remain competitive. When those two, among others, performed admirably there was a growing sense that maybe they could overcome this injury bug and make a strong run. The weekend in San Francisco changed all that.

While the results have been so-so this year, (hard to say that with the sox at a .550 plus winning %) this year is a very successful one for the front office. They showed that the depth of their scouting and attention to detail (e.g Nava) provided the kind of depth that has kept the team in the race against pretty much impossible odds with all of the injuries. I seriously doubt the Personnel department is sitting around a table discussing how they can find players with a higher Q rating so that Nick Cafardo can write more compelling stories to help boost TV Ratings. They are focusing on making the team better. With that the ratings will come.

When does Pete Abe get to take over this notes column? Or Amalie for that matter?

 

[joyofsox]

During my travels as a baseball writer, and particularly in New York, I’m often asked what Theo Epstein will do this offseason, with huge issues like Adrian Beltre, David Ortiz, Victor Martinez, and perhaps Jonathan Papelbon, to name a few.

Don’t believe for a second that the Sox brass isn’t thinking about this. ...

Who the fuck would assume that the Red Sox front office is not thinking about its 2011 team?

 

[bd11]

From Nick:
Beltre is having a sensational season, but will he be a one-year wonder (can you say “Nick Esasky’’)
[font="Georgia][size="4"]
[/size][/font]
[font="Georgia][size="4"]So Nick is comparing Beltre to a guy who faltered because of vertigo? Couldn't he have found a better example of a one hit wonder? That is just lazyness, nothing more.[/size][/font]

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Not to mention that Esasky had been a platoon player who'd never played more than 125 games in a season before his splash with the Sox (he'd only had more than 100 hits once over six seasons), while Beltre has a 146 OPS+ season on his resume and five other seasons over 100, with eight seasons over 140 games played and more than 6,000 ABs.

Tack on the vertigo and you've got completely different situations.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

The worst thing about his column yesterday was it was nine inches of questions that he didn't even attempt to answer.

Will Jacoby Ellsbury be around next year? Will the Sox sign Victor Martinez? Will Daniel Bard be the new closer?

I DON'T FUCKING KNOW. YOU ARE THE EXPERT, YOU FUCKING TELL ME!

The knee-jerk lamentations of the traditional media (over on-line stuff and Bloggers) is that they have all of the access and they're the "experts". They talk to Francona every day, they're in the clubhouse, they have Theo Epstein's cell phone number. In theory, I don't disagree with this. But if you're going to waste paper by writing a bunch of stupid questions that any knowledgeable Red Sox fan could write (just by scanning the 40-man roster) and not answer them than you lost any right to trumpet yourself as an expert. It's a bullshit crutch and I can't believe that I subscribe to this.

Two other things that struck me as odd:

1. Lou Gorman is being wheeled out of the hospital and Cafardo peppers him with this gem, "Who's the best defensive first baseman you've seen, Lou?"
2. Also, this:

Jason Bay, OF, Mets — In hindsight, he should have taken the Boston deal with the medical stipulations. Bay’s first year with the Mets has been a bust. Just when he was starting to hit, he went to the DL with a concussion. What the Mets never understood is that Bay is not comfortable batting third or fourth, but that’s where they had him for the majority of the season. Bay needs to be in the 6-7 spots in the order.

Seems to be pretty inconsistent with his usual thoughts that the Sox made a big mistake letting Jason Bay go. Now, it's Bay's fault for not taking the Sox' deal. And it's the Mets' fault for not realizing that he's not a 3-4 guy. Ok, Nick.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

At least he got the splits right, much to my surprise: Bay's figures hitting 6th were much better than when hitting 4th or 5th last year.

The Esasky thing was terrible. Any cursory knowledge of what happened to Esasky would have rendered that compo invalid.

 

[URI]

But his numbers were even higher hitting 4th for the Pirates.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

But his numbers were even higher hitting 4th for the Pirates.

Bah. We all know nothing that happened before BOSTON'S JASON BAY TIME matters in this analysis. :buddy:

 

[URI]

I read stuff like that and I just want to smack his stupid jowly face. The Globe would be better served having 5th graders write it in crayon and lighting the difference in salary on fire than legitimizing this clown.

 

[RedOctober3829]

It has been somewhat baffling why the Sox haven’t added a lefthanded-hitting first baseman to complement Lowell, but perhaps the team believes it should give him a chance before it makes that move.

Link

Didn't they just sign Carlos Delgado to a minor league deal and will be up here in less than 2 weeks? They wouldn't sign Delgado then get another lefty 1B. Nick can't be this stupid can he?

 

[Puffy]

From Nick:
Beltre is having a sensational season, but will he be a one-year wonder (can you say “Nick Esasky’’)
[font="Georgia][size="4"]
[/size][/font]
[font="Georgia][size="4"]So Nick is comparing Beltre to a guy who faltered because of vertigo? Couldn't he have found a better example of a one hit wonder? That is just lazyness, nothing more.[/size][/font]

Not to mention the fact that Beltre should at least be regarded as a "two-hit wonder" - if you follow his logic...

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Link

Didn't they just sign Carlos Delgado to a minor league deal and will be up here in less than 2 weeks? They wouldn't sign Delgado then get another lefty 1B. Nick can't be this stupid can he?

Even the moron commenters on Boston.com picked up on that. How is it possible he didn't mention Delgado?

 

[jacklamabe65]

It worked out for everyone, but years later, you wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season.

Another stupid comment from the Caf-Man.

 

[Brianish]

Toronto only wins if Downs is signed as an FA by a team outside the top 15 and net a first round pick and a supplemental pick in return.

If Downs is signed by a top 15 (protected) pick or worse, doesn't sign at all because teams don't want to sacrifice a first round pick for a reliever on the wrong side of 30...this might be a complete disaster for Toronto.

I just noticed this.

Cafardo also misses the obvious point: in a market like this, pennies and dollars are relative. If no team was willing to approach their asking price, they didn't refuse to pay for pennies on the dollar. They drastically misunderstood what comprised a penny and what comprised a dollar in the current market.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

It worked out for everyone, but years later, you wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season.

Another stupid comment from the Caf-Man.

You know, if it really bothers him that much, he could -- you know -- ask Epstein. I think that he sees him every once in a while.

 

[BS_SoxFan]

You know, if it really bothers him that much, he could -- you know -- ask Epstein. I think that he sees him every once in a while.

But that would involve exerting an ounce of effort.

 

[TheoShmeo]

It worked out for everyone, but years later, you wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season.

Another stupid comment from the Caf-Man.

I wondered about that, too...before the 2004 season.

It's too bad our boy Nick can't wonder and ask about such things as:

- Why Francona didn't bring Lester back out for the 9th last night? Did he not wonder about about Lester in pitches 110-125 being more effective than the dreck in the Sox pen, even in the heat and with a stomach ache?

- Given the lack of surprise in Ellsbury going back on the DL, how it was that Theo didn't have a better option for a start in CF than Eric Patterson?

- Why was Atchison the choice as opposed to Felix or MDC to start the 9th?

- How Theo feels about having Beckett and Lackey as the most expensive 4th/5th starters in baseball history for the next four years?

- Whether the Sox are going to get Anthony Ranaudo signed by the deadline tomorrow?

I'd take musing and inquiry about any of those topics -- and many others -- before reading a question that I had over 6 years ago.

 

[mt8thsw9th]

Excellent Cafardo impression. For the most part, those do seem like something Nick would write.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Excellent Cafardo impression. For the most part, those do seem like something Nick would write.

Yikes. I've been called worse than Cafardo-like...but not much worse.

Which of those questions do you not view as substantially better and different than the Maddon-Francona query? I'm particularly interested in what's going to happen with Ranaudo and particularly concerned with the amount of years and dollars the Sox have invested in Beckett and Lackey. I'd love Nick or someone else to be asking about those things. Addressing Eric Patterson as a starter seems like a legit question, too. The others are admittedly focused on just last night's game and not really the kinds of things one would expect to see in a weekly column.

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

My biggest problem with Cafardo is that he bases whole pieces of his column on what may or may not be faulty suppositions. In the past there's been "what will they do with a Bard who's chomping on the bit for the closing role?" - without any real basis for that being the case. And the recurring, "obviously the Sox are going to get/Padres are going to trade Adrian Gonzalez - is the the time it's going to happen?" - when, of course, it just may be that the Padres don't trade Gonzalez.

Rather than investigate the prime piece of the discussion (quotes from Theo/Tito/Bard on what is future is for the closing role) (quotes from the Padres/Gonzalez), he investigates a possible future.

Maybe it's just my taste, but I would much rather have reporting on the reality of a situation rather than reporting supporting a prognostication's outcome, even the best of which only comes true maybe half the time.

Today, we get "there haven't been many waiver trades this year/will there be more soon?" - when we don't have any foundation for the central premise, "there haven't been many waiver trades this year," so why the fuck are we postulating about what the eventual pick up in waiver trades will be? Rather than investigate the number of trades by Aug. 14 in years past, we just get some mealy-mouthed language about there being five trades so far and "That number seems small", which may be because "The races are tighter this year, so most of the activity will come later rather than sooner."

Were there fewer teams in the race last year? Were there more waiver trades? I have no idea - but I'd like the person whose media I'm consuming to go look it up for me, since that's what Cafardo's actual job is.

But let's see: This year, there are five teams total within five games of a division lead, and three teams within 10 games of the wild card in the AL, seven within 10 games in the NL.

Last year, there were six teams total within five games of a division lead, as of Aug. 15, and five teams within 10 games of the wild card in the AL, seven within 10 games in the AL.

So, actually, that piece of reasoning gleaned from "one National League GM" - whooo! can't believe he stuck his neck out like that, even anonymously! - doesn't have any basis in reality. It's exactly the same, or maybe fewer teams in the race.

Then there's the reasoning from Cafardo himself: "Another reason for the lack of activity could be that teams are focusing instead on trying to sign their draft picks before tomorrow’s deadline."

Did that date change this year? Wouldn't that always be something GMs are focusing on at this time of year and therefore this lack of waiver trades would be something that would always happen in early August?

Which leads to another flawed supposition: "others have been slow to [put players through waivers], including teams that actually have players other teams want. One of them is the Blue Jays, who hadn’t put coveted lefthander Scott Downs on trade waivers as of Friday."

The supposition is that: Of course, if you have players teams want, you're going to make them available to them. When, in fact, maybe those teams just don't want to trade those players. Maybe the Blue Jays want to keep Scott Downs. Maybe they think they're going to be good next year (they just extended Romero) and they know middle relief is hard to come by and they want to keep Downs for themselves.

Why can't he just tell me about stuff that's actually happened that I don't know about because I don't spend my entire day talking about and reporting on baseball. Can't he point out good performances by up-and-coming stars that I should be paying attention to? Can't he tell me about something that I couldn't just come up with by my own wild speculating?

All of his columns seem to involve him coming up with an idea for something that might happen, and then asking anonymous sources about what it would mean if that did happen. Which leaves the reader completely devoid of any real information: "What, an anonymous GM said something might happen, or it might not?!? Holy fuck!"

He's just so bad it drives me crazy. The other hockey, football, and basketball columns are actually pretty damn good.

 

[twoBshorty]

You know, if it really bothers him that much, he could -- you know -- ask Epstein. I think that he sees him every once in a while.

Let's not be unreasonable here. We all know that Theo only checks his Blackberry every 23 seconds and was totally inaccessible yesterday while mingling with the public at a large Fenway concert that had been advertised for months, so I don't see how Nick was supposed to get hold of him.

 

[JayMags71]

It worked out for everyone, but years later, you wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season.

Another stupid comment from the Caf-Man.

I know Carfado is making a stupid throw-away comment, but I'm still going to try to drill a little deeper into this point. Why would I "wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season"? While Francona may be far from perfect, what has Maddon done better than Tito to make me wistful that Maddon is not the Red Sox Manager? How would the Red Sox be better?

Seriously what's his logic here?

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I know Carfado is making a stupid throw-away comment, but I'm still going to try to drill a little deeper into this point. Why would I "wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season"? While Francona may be far from perfect, what has Maddon done better than Tito to make me wistful that Maddon is not the Red Sox Manager? How would the Red Sox be better?

Seriously what's his logic here?

The Sox would lead the league in the "hipster doofus glasses" department.

 

[wutang112878]

Why would I "wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season"? While Francona may be far from perfect, what has Maddon done better than Tito to make me wistful that Maddon is not the Red Sox Manager? How would the Red Sox be better?

Seriously what's his logic here?

I am not defending Nick, that was very lazy journalism. Nor am I saying that Titos job is easy, its very difficult. But what Maddon did is beyond impressive, that franchise was a joke before he got there, so the question is debatable at least. As for what he does better, we cant really compare, Tito is in a big market, Maddon a small, Tito has super resources but super expectations, Maddon has young players but very low expectations and not many crazy fans, both have different styles but are pretty good at in game management, etc. Less lazy questions and a great article would be "if Maddon and Francona switched places would either franchise be better off? Could Francona change Tampas culture and succeed in a small market? Could Maddon deal with the media and succeed with ridiculous expectations?"

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I think he's a good manager, but what did Maddon really do that was so impressive? Wait for Even Longoria to arrive? When he had shitty players in 2006 and 2007, he lost 100 games a year. Once they got some of their prospects up on the big club and made an astute trade for Garza and Bartlett (dramatically improving their defense), he started winning games.

 

[Spacemans Bong]

I think he's a good manager, but what did Maddon really do that was so impressive? Wait for Even Longoria to arrive? When he had shitty players in 2006 and 2007, he lost 100 games a year. Once they got some of their prospects up on the big club and made an astute trade for Garza and Bartlett (dramatically improving their defense), he started winning games.

Well, hold on a second. What the fuck was Joe Maddon supposed to do with those teams? Billy Martin wasn't making those teams contenders.

The man only managed his team to a 31 win improvement in 2008, beat out the Yankees and the fucking Red Sox for a division and a pennant and is on course to field a near 100 win team for the 2nd time in 3 years.

The converse of your statement is that when Terry Francona doesn't have his horses, he misses the playoffs 66% of the time. He missed them in 2006 and he'll probably miss them again this year. Only 2005 did he make them and that year the Sox got swept by the other Sox. But that's a dumb statement.

Now, if we take our attention off this and focus it on everybody's favorite mealy-mouthed sloth, we can again scratch our heads and how the Globe thinks this guy is fit to work the coffee machine, much less the baseball beat. Maddon was a leading contender for the 2004 Red Sox job and interviewed for the job. Why didn't he get it? Did he blow the interview? Was Tito just on a level above everybody else (he did give a hell of a press conference when he was hired)? Did they just want to go with Curt Schilling's pal over some no-name new guy? Did they like Tito's experience? A good beat writer would actually call some people and do research. Tito's not going anywhere and neither is Joe Maddon, so I'm sure people would talk. Heck, he might even get Maddon on the phone to tell Cafardo himself. Instead we get a stupid one liner that enlightens nobody.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

My point was that Maddon lost when he didn't have good players, and won when he did. He didn't manage a shitty team to a .500 record or anything like that. How Cafardo looks at Maddon's record and thinks that the Sox might wonder "what if" had they hired Maddon is insane.

Maddon's a good manager, and all the kudos he got in '08 were well deserved. But he can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

 

[Spacemans Bong]

I'm not sure there's any reason to believe Maddon would have done any worse with the Red Sox than Tito has. Both are the careful, considerate type. Maddon probably uses his bench more than Tito, that's about the only difference I can think of off the top of my head.

But like I said, Cafardo had an idea, he just chose to sit on the couch and pop open a bag of Doritos rather than do the hard yards.

 

[WenZink]

I know Carfado is making a stupid throw-away comment, but I'm still going to try to drill a little deeper into this point. Why would I "wonder why Theo Epstein chose Terry Francona over Joe Maddon to manage the Red Sox before the 2004 season"? While Francona may be far from perfect, what has Maddon done better than Tito to make me wistful that Maddon is not the Red Sox Manager? How would the Red Sox be better?

Seriously what's his logic here?

I don't consider it a stupid throw-away comment. In hindsight, it's easy to understand that Francona was right for Boston, but seven years ago, I was upset that the Sox opted for an NL re-tread like Tito instead of the highly, respected Maddon. I came to the conclusion that the reason the Sox went for Francona had a lot to do with getting Schilling. It seemed obvious, to me, at the time -- but obvious does not always equal reality.

In retrospect, I do think that Maddon would have been too unorthodox to play for Theo, and that some of Maddon's odd moves, over the years, would have ignited the media and fans into a legitimate frenzy of second-guessing. So, I'll give Theo some credit on this one in foreseeing that possibility.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

One of the things that we haven't discussed is how Maddon would have handled the club house. It's a given now that Tito is the perfect fit for this and the other teams he's helmed since 2004. One thing is for certain, he's been able to lead the egos of Schilling, Pedro, Manny, Ortiz, Papelbon, etc. Aside from Papelbon, these are all veteran guys and it's much different than Maddon stepping in and being the leader of a young team.

Could Maddon do this? I don't see any reason why he couldn't, but he hasn't had to do it yet. Maybe that's not his strongest suit and he's better off being a manager for a young team. Could Theo have known this? I suppose he could have, but our connection to the front office won't ask that question.

 

[bd11]

Nick you were right, Manny the Bible reader has changed. Except for quitting on the Dodgers and cussing out the ump and getting tossed on strike one with the bases loaded. Nice call.

 

[Granite Sox]

The Sox have major decisions to make on Beltre, Victor Martinez, and David Ortiz, and they must formulate some kind of plan for Jacoby Ellsbury, who played in only 18 games this season because of five broken ribs, one of the great head-scratchers in the history of sports medicine.

Apropos of nothing
... 3. When men were men: Tom Glavine made seven starts at the end of the 1992 season with a broken rib...

Relentless and obnoxious.

 

[joyofsox]

Nick Cafardo begins his Notes:

There will be no games in Los Angeles this October, no sea of red at Busch Stadium in St. Louis, and no fall baseball amid the changing leaves in Boston.

The Red Sox host the Yankees on October 1, 2, and 3.

(I know he is referring to the playoffs, but this is typical of Nick's sloppy, inaccurate writing.)

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

The broken rib meme is really getting out of hand. What is the purpose of dogging Ellsbury like this? Like Cafardo and his three spare tires is some kind of ultimate tough guy?

 

[judyb]

It's obvious the Red Sox are trying to bring some value to Navarro and Anderson especially in hopes they might be players they can throw in deals this off-season.

Genius, sticking them in the lineup against real major league pitchers is going to somehow make them look better to other teams?

 

[GreenMonster49]

Relentless and obnoxious.

I called out Cafardo in an email two days ago. (I'm not holding my breath for a reply or an amplification.)

I pointed out that, even if we could consider every cracked rib to be equal,
1) Glavine wound up missing two starts (and had a 6.05 ERA and a -0.607 WPA over the four starts before he got skipped);
2) after the fact, he told at least one writer that pitching with the cracked rib was "not the smartest thing to do"; and
3) in October 1992, he told the New York Times that pitching while hurt had screwed up his mechanics.

So, by showing that men in 1992 were men, Glavine hurt his team, hurt his mechanics, and wound up missing two starts anyway. Great example.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Good work Monster, I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say.

 

[Granite Sox]

Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis could have gone into free agency rather than take a long-term deal from the Red Sox for less, but both of them love the team, the city, the atmosphere, and the medical care, so why give up all that to make a few extra bucks somewhere else

Oh, gimme a break.

There's a smorgasbord of suck today...

 

[ifmanis5]

In Cafardo's notebook today (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2010/09/19/short_circuit_for_battery/) he brings up the point that perhaps the pitching staff's poor season this year is due to the fact that Varitek wasn't the everyday catcher. Interesting topic for debate. I was expecting to see some staff ERA and WHIP numbers with and without Tek behind the plate this year and maybe even past years. Or even put the Sox' 'subpar' season in context- how do they rank overall in terms of the key pitching metrics. Of course, this being Nick, we not only got ZERO statistics, we got a quote from an anonymous 'veteran scout' (God forbid Nick get anybody to go on the record or anything) who abrogated the need for any empirical analysis: "Sometimes it doesn’t show up in the numbers." Oh, yeah, good point. Thanks, Nick.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Did you know that Justin Morneau won the MVP twice? It's true in Cafardo's world.

Also, it's a good idea to talk to a psychiatrist who has never worked with a patient, never spoken to the patient, never eveb seen the patient (except on TV) about his "psychological issues". Also a good idea to have said psychiatrist comment unequivocally that said patient will have a relapse. Great work, Nick. Absolutely brilliant.

Oh yeah, there wasn't much to say about the Reds pitching staff. The column was ending so that was it, nothing to talk about. Especially when there's so much Yankee stuff to gab about. AJ Burnett might be good, he may not. Andy Pettitte is coming back and he might be ok, we're not sure. Phil Hughes hasn't been good during the second half, but he could have a good post season. I don't know!

Know who would look good on the Red Sox next year? David Wright. (New list number) Know who the Mets might like? Jacoby Ellsbury. Draw your own conclusions.

This week's column was an absolute low point for Cafardo, he had it all:

-- a pretty easy error (Morneau)
-- an interview with a quack doctor
-- a pretty lengthy "look" at his favorite team without much of a conclusion
-- a half-hearted rumor that he doesn't feel like chasing down
-- a Don Baylor for manager update (forgot about that one)

Well fucking done, Nick. Keep those checks coming in cash, baby.

 

[joyofsox]

Nick also tells us that Sabathia is "jitter-free in big games".

Really, Nick?

4.40 ERA and a 1.500 WHIP (4.5 BB/9) in 10 post-season games: 61.1 IP, 61 H, 31 BB, 8 HR

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Also, it's a good idea to talk to a psychiatrist who has never worked with a patient, never spoken to the patient, never eveb seen the patient (except on TV) about his "psychological issues". Also a good idea to have said psychiatrist comment unequivocally that said patient will have a relapse. Great work, Nick. Absolutely brilliant.

I'm not sure who's committing a worse form of malpractice here, Nick or the quack.

On the one hand, you've got a journalist with immediate access to a player speculating about his psychological make-up, including possible childhood trauma, without bothering to ask him a single question about it. On the other, you've got a psychologist drawing blanket conclusions about a player he's never even met because, you know, he treated another catcher one time, and, well, same thing!

I can't believe an editor at the globe let that fly.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

MDLTG, I agree. I was really surprised to read this about the shrink. Especially when it turns out he didn't "fix" Mackey Sassar until well after Sassar was out of the major leagues and needed someone to help him throw batting practice. And I'm not discounting that he helped Sassar but there's a difference between throwing the ball back to the pitcher in front of 40,000 people and being able to throw batting practice in front of 20 dudes. To comment on someone that you never met is ridiculous.

 

[GreenMonster49]

Good work Monster, I'd be interested in hearing what he has to say.

So would I. Not that I really expected an answer from the Baseball Sage of Morrissey Boulevard.

And I wonder what Nick thinks of manly Josh Hamilton, out for over two weeks now with two fractured ribs.

Edit: Added last snarky bit.

 

[Eric Van]

In the last week, Nick has informed us that both Darnell McDonald and Rich Hill will be free agents. Which I suppose will be true -- if we release them.

Re the whole Saltalamacchia remote diagnosis, having studied my fair share of psych I can opine (state with absolute confidence?) that the quoted guy is a complete and utter quack. There's no plausible mechanism for a hidden trauma such as an in-game collision to cause throwing problems at some later point in time. Problems like those or a golfer's yips (I suppose they're caused by on-field collisions, too?) are indeed mental and if a persuasive therapist can convince his patient that the cause is anything, the guy will be cured. Pure placebo effect. You could make as convincing a case for bad toilet training, provided you could convince one or two patients of it. I agree, rather astonishing that the Glove let him print it, but it really seems like no one edits his stuff anyway.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

For the first time since I've read the Sunday Boston Globe, I did not finish the Baseball Notes page.

I've read the Globe just about every Sunday since 1986 or 87 and I usually always read two things: the comics and the Baseball Notes section. Today's Baseball Notes section was so worthless that I quit reading after the eighth or ninth capsule. Every week this column gets sadder and sadder.

I'm too depressed to rant about this.

 

[Hyde Park Factor]

For the first time since I've read the Sunday Boston Globe, I did not finish the Baseball Notes page.

I've read the Globe just about every Sunday since 1986 or 87 and I usually always read two things: the comics and the Baseball Notes section. Today's Baseball Notes section was so worthless that I quit reading after the eighth or ninth capsule. Every week this column gets sadder and sadder.

I'm too depressed to rant about this.

SO I wasn't the only one. This was easily his laziest, most pointless column in quite some time. It looked like he went team by team, picked the guys with the "best" and "worst" stats and tried to pass it off as insightful analysis.

Tough weekend for Nick: first, Heidi Watney handed him his lunch on Friday night during the rain delay, and now this.

 

[DieHardSoxFan1]

For the first time since I've read the Sunday Boston Globe, I did not finish the Baseball Notes page.

I've read the Globe just about every Sunday since 1986 or 87 and I usually always read two things: the comics and the Baseball Notes section. Today's Baseball Notes section was so worthless that I quit reading after the eighth or ninth capsule. Every week this column gets sadder and sadder.

I'm too depressed to rant about this.

Boy, you weren't kidding.

Regressed: Aaron Harang has gone 18-38 the last three years and probably won’t make the playoff roster.

You're a baseball reporter for The Boston Globe, one of the most revered newspaper sports sections in the country, and you don't bother to pick up the phone and ask a scout/GM/front office executive for insight regarding the Reds' playoff rotation.

Best pitcher: Ian Kennedy’s fastball/changeup combo played well (163 hits, 168 strikeouts in 194 innings).

For those you of who are reading this bit of "insight" and wondering if it's merely an abridged snippet from a more extensive, in-depth piece of analysis...I have news for you. This is it. Yup, this was his expert breakdown of Ian Kennedy's breakthrough season.

Had I submitted something like this to one my old college professors I have no doubt he/she would have failed me and expressed disappointment in such careless, lackadaisical effort. Remember how it was always worse when your parents would say, "JMOH, we're so upset with you" in lieu of punishment? That's how I feel about Cafardo's latest 'Notes" column.

 

[Laser Show]

Regressed: The versatile Ben Zobrist lost more than 50 points and more than half his power from last season.

...I'm speechless. This is disgusting journalism.