The difference, Nick, is that Gomes owns Peralta, which even if you didn't know at the time, you certainly could have found out between the moment he hit the home run and the moment you lazily scribbled this post-game note
Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread
- Thread starter MyDaughterLovesTomGordon
- Start date
- Status
The difference, Nick, is that Gomes owns Peralta, which even if you didn't know at the time, you certainly could have found out between the moment he hit the home run and the moment you lazily scribbled this post-game note
Not to mention using platoon splits for a half of a season for a reliever who has faced a total of 129 batters.
Nick just said on NESN: "The Blue Jays are just 5 wins in back of the Red Sox in the loss column." That's fantastic.
I noted that as well -- but what struck me wasn't that he was conflating wins and losses, but the actual disparity the teams have in games played. Usually, the wins and losses between teams in the standings are close to equal -- in this case, however while the Jays may only be 5 "wins" back in the loss column, they're actually 8 back in the win column. That's not really nipping at the Sox's heels.
Van Everyman said:
The disparity in games played between teams is precisely why its better look to look at the loss column than the win column.
A couple of things about the win column/loss column.
1. Surprising that a team w/a retractable roof has played less games than a team from the Northeast w/o one....plus it's rained a shitload around here in June.
2. In this era, w/the pitching staffs so fragile, doubleheaders and extra games really burn teams out. For that reason, I think until the last week or so of the season the win column is much more important than the loss column. Much better to play the game than to save it for the end.
1. Surprising that a team w/a retractable roof has played less games than a team from the Northeast w/o one....plus it's rained a shitload around here in June.
2. In this era, w/the pitching staffs so fragile, doubleheaders and extra games really burn teams out. For that reason, I think until the last week or so of the season the win column is much more important than the loss column. Much better to play the game than to save it for the end.
The headline on the Globe site referencing Nick's latest "mailbag" column asks whether WMB is "trade bait". Before clicking the link, I knew his answer would be essentially "who knows, we'll have to wait and see."
His answer, though, was even better than I could have imagined: "Love this question. Given the rise of Xander Bogaerts, he could very well be."
He loves the question (but apparently not enough to investigate it with anyone who might be in a position to provide any insight).
His answer, though, was even better than I could have imagined: "Love this question. Given the rise of Xander Bogaerts, he could very well be."
He loves the question (but apparently not enough to investigate it with anyone who might be in a position to provide any insight).
His Scott Feldman column today was classic Cafardo.
This could be a huge move for the Os. Feldman could be a Ryan Dempster equivalent. The Os were bold and acted early. The Sox have stayed pat for now. But then again, they do have more time (though Nicky's math is kind of fuzzy as he pronounces it "three weeks").
And here's the grand finale:
"But Baltimore has led off with a nice hit. We’ll see if it’s a home run."
And this one really made me giggle:
"The competition between these teams is going to be fierce. Did the
Orioles just gain an advantage, if not on the field, then
psychologically, by dealing for Feldman?"
I mean, who can't see Ben Cherington, John Farrell, Juan Nieves and the entire team in a fetal position right now? Oh, the trauma....
This could be a huge move for the Os. Feldman could be a Ryan Dempster equivalent. The Os were bold and acted early. The Sox have stayed pat for now. But then again, they do have more time (though Nicky's math is kind of fuzzy as he pronounces it "three weeks").
And here's the grand finale:
"But Baltimore has led off with a nice hit. We’ll see if it’s a home run."
And this one really made me giggle:
"The competition between these teams is going to be fierce. Did the
Orioles just gain an advantage, if not on the field, then
psychologically, by dealing for Feldman?"
I mean, who can't see Ben Cherington, John Farrell, Juan Nieves and the entire team in a fetal position right now? Oh, the trauma....
This caps a splendid week for Boston sports media, print, radio, you name it. There is no greater gulf in any American city at this hour between the intelligence of those who run the pro teams and the idiocy of those who cover them. A mismatch made in hell.
One of the things (among the millions of things) that bothers me about Nick Cafardo is that his questions lead to no where. Case in point, his question to St. Louis Cardinals manager Mike Matheny: "Is your team the best team in the league?" There is one thing factually wrong with that question and one that is another that is wrong via common sense:
1. Factual: no, they aren't the best team in the league and aren't even the best team in their division. The Pirates have won one more game than the Cardinals and the Red Sox have the most wins in the Major Leagues. So no Nick, the Cardinals are not the best team in the league.
2. Common sense: Matheny, or really any player, coach, manager or executive, is going to say that his team is the best team in the league. Especially in July. Especially when his team is not in first place.
What Cafardo is doing is taking his thesis, "The Cards are the best team in the league" and is trying to get support. When he can't, he writes around it. "Oh, the standings may show that St. Louis is in second place, but this team has gut, grit and guile that the Pirates may not have. And who knows? Maybe a rematch of the 2004 World Series might happen?"
Who knows indeed.
Also, this is the second week in a row where Cafardo has sung the praises of Alex Rodriguez. I have no idea why Cafardo has turned his eyes towards this pariah, but man, he's developing a crush. I'd like to see where this goes.
1. Factual: no, they aren't the best team in the league and aren't even the best team in their division. The Pirates have won one more game than the Cardinals and the Red Sox have the most wins in the Major Leagues. So no Nick, the Cardinals are not the best team in the league.
2. Common sense: Matheny, or really any player, coach, manager or executive, is going to say that his team is the best team in the league. Especially in July. Especially when his team is not in first place.
What Cafardo is doing is taking his thesis, "The Cards are the best team in the league" and is trying to get support. When he can't, he writes around it. "Oh, the standings may show that St. Louis is in second place, but this team has gut, grit and guile that the Pirates may not have. And who knows? Maybe a rematch of the 2004 World Series might happen?"
Who knows indeed.
Also, this is the second week in a row where Cafardo has sung the praises of Alex Rodriguez. I have no idea why Cafardo has turned his eyes towards this pariah, but man, he's developing a crush. I'd like to see where this goes.
ForKeeps said:
Pretty much. It's easy, the team with the most wins is usually the best team at that time. Otherwise, why bother counting wins and losses, we can just ask Nick Cafardo and you who looks the best on April 1 and we can all have a summer without these pesky games.
The Cards are leading the Pirates in most hitting categories (except for HRs) but the Pirates are outdistancing them in just about every pitching category. So yes, it's close and that's kind of the point. It's more than a black-and-white exercise that Cafardo is trying to do here. It took me two minutes to go to MLB.com and run through the ~20 stats and see that the Pirates have a really good team and they aren't doing it with smoke and mirrors.
I mean, if you want to say that the Cards are better than everyone in the league tell me why don't just write a bunch of bullshit about how St. Louis "looks" better because his latest crush (Yadir Molina) is having a terrific year and he's trying to shoehorn another mention of him in a column.
Seriously, if you're going to defend Nick Cafardo, you should do better than this.
Edit: And if you think that Cafardo is going beyond the wins and losses, you're nuts.
David Laurila said:
Or, to use a word you used, keep playing your game of bingo. The rest of us, Baseball front offices included, have moved on to a game of hold 'em. Because you don't, can't or ignorantly refuse to grasp the minor complexities of that game, despite the ease of it, speaks mirrored volumes along the same lines as your buddy Nick.
You post below only solidifies what I just said. JMOH didn't spout off any wishcasting, hopes of circumstantial anything. He posted concrete evidence, evidence that is backed up by numbers rather than a soundbyte, that supports his assertion. St. Louis isn't the better team.
Not in the least. You have every right to your own opinion, but determining "better team" by record in early July is something I completely disagree with. You can play semantics and claim the Pirates are better than the Cardinals for that reason, but do you really thing they're better? Were the Indians better than the Tigers a few days ago with a marginally better record?John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
It's extremely weak evidence, though. It doesn't conclusively establish the conclusion, let alone justify mocking Cafardo for raising the question.Dogman2 said:
Bellhorn said:
No, it isn't. It establishes the fact that St. Louis isn't the better team like Nick's assertion when he asks his rhetorical question in his column.
David Laurila said:
The thing is, the Cardinals may be a better team than the Pirates right now, but I'm not going to find that out by reading Cafardo's piece. There are a lot of ways to build a case for St. Louis rather than asking the manager if the Cards are the best team in the league (and unless Matheny is the reincarnation of Billy Martin and is drunk, he's going to give the same boring answer that he gave to Cafardo*), talking about Molina, talking about Chris Carpenter potentially coming back (the same Chris Carpenter who pitched three games last year and pretty much retired in February) and waxing about a Red Sox/Cardinals 2004 repeat.
* Nick Cafardo comes from the school of journalism where he thinks that he is a human tape recorder. If you ask a question that elicits a boring response, you aren't obligated to use said quote.
If Cafardo really wanted to do an interesting job, he could have done the following:
- He could have compared the win-loss records against like opponents. The Cards and Pirates are in the same division, presumably they've played the same teams and it might shed some light on who the two teams have beaten and how. This isn't a comparison between Athletics and the Red Sox where the Sox are in a division with four teams above or close to .500 and Oakland gets to beat up on the M's and Astros. The Cards and Pirates are in the same division, therefore they both get to punch around the Cubs and Brewers.
- How about a run-down on the games that the games that Pirates and Cards played against each other. Did the Cards kick the crap out the Pirates? Did the Pirates only beat St. Louis by a few runs?
- You can do what I suggested earlier, look at the team stats. The Pirates are doing really well in just about every pitching category--except they're walking a ton of guys. The Cards are leading the NL in just about every hitting category except for home runs--which the Pirates are leading. What does this mean? You may be able to argue that good pitching and good hitting are equal, though that would mean rethinking baseball a little bit and letting go of cliches.
- It might be interesting to talk about how one team that is a consistent World Series contender for the last 15 years and does a terrific job drafting and reloading their system and making smart free agent signings is now neck-and-neck with a team that has sucked for 20 years, did a terrible job of drafting and couldn't sign a good free agent to save their lives.
- We know how much Cafardo loves and overvalues managers, a comparison between the St. Louis manager (who pretty much went from a player to a manager and took over for a Hall of Famer) and the Pittsburgh guy who is currently ~90 games under .500 for his career and aside from a hot month in 2007 has never taken a team above .500 in his life. BTW, Cafardo couldn't have asked Hurdle the same question he asked Matheny? There is a bunch of ways to get in touch with the Pirates' honcho.
- If Cafardo is so keen of cherry picking players to show that the Cards are better, why doesn't he just go the whole nine yards and do a position-by-position comparison between the two teams. Because you show me Yadir Molina, I'll show you Andrew McCutchen.
The point is this: the bullets above are full of really simple data to find and it's an even easier story to write--maybe not as easy as writing a bunch of empty cliches and platitudes and acting like a human tape recorder, but it's crap that after reading his article (an article that was printed to give me information) I have to do more research to fill in the gaps that Cafardo created. This isn't a teacher/student relationship here. It's a reporter/reader relationship where I give his bosses money, he provides me with data.
Unfortunately, Cafardo writes like two people who don't really know too much about baseball having a polite conversation about baseball. I think, that as readers, we should demand more.
BTW, the Pirates and Cards have played five times (one game was rained out) with Pittsburgh holding a 3-2 series lead. They haven't played since the end of April, and Pittsburgh has outscored St. Louis 26-22.
And here is who St. Louis has played so far:
Opponent
Split W L RS RA WP
ARI 3 4 45 43 .429
CHC 4 2 23 14 .667
CIN 6 3 48 29 .667
COL 2 1 8 8 .667
HOU 1 1 16 9 .500
KCR 3 1 17 11 .750
LAA 1 2 18 13 .333
LAD 2 1 15 8 .667
MIA 4 2 31 26 .667
MIL 8 2 57 31 .800
NYM 5 2 34 22 .714
OAK 1 2 13 14 .333
PHI 2 2 14 18 .500
PIT 2 3 22 26 .400
SDP 2 1 17 9 .667
SFG 4 2 37 12 .667
TEX 0 3 7 12 .000
WSN 3 0 9 4 1.000
And here who Pittsburgh has played so far:
Opponent
Split W L RS RA WP
ARI 2 1 13 18 .667
ATL 3 4 23 26 .429
CHC 7 5 35 28 .583
CIN 6 4 35 34 .600
DET 3 1 12 9 .750
HOU 2 1 8 8 .667
LAA 3 0 21 12 1.000
LAD 2 4 14 18 .333
MIL 9 4 58 49 .692
NYM 3 1 23 10 .750
PHI 4 3 26 24 .571
SEA 3 1 18 9 .750
SFG 2 1 20 20 .667
STL 3 2 26 22 .600
WSN 1 2 9 12 .333
This isn't rocket science, Cafardo fans. What is rocket science is creating tables, I'm terrible at it. If you want to see a better view go here for the Cards and here for the Bucs. Again, this took me less than two minutes and I'm watching my kids and "Justice League Unlimited" at the same time.
So I guess I did do Cafardo's work for him. Huzzah!
And here is who St. Louis has played so far:
Opponent
Split W L RS RA WP
ARI 3 4 45 43 .429
CHC 4 2 23 14 .667
CIN 6 3 48 29 .667
COL 2 1 8 8 .667
HOU 1 1 16 9 .500
KCR 3 1 17 11 .750
LAA 1 2 18 13 .333
LAD 2 1 15 8 .667
MIA 4 2 31 26 .667
MIL 8 2 57 31 .800
NYM 5 2 34 22 .714
OAK 1 2 13 14 .333
PHI 2 2 14 18 .500
PIT 2 3 22 26 .400
SDP 2 1 17 9 .667
SFG 4 2 37 12 .667
TEX 0 3 7 12 .000
WSN 3 0 9 4 1.000
And here who Pittsburgh has played so far:
Opponent
Split W L RS RA WP
ARI 2 1 13 18 .667
ATL 3 4 23 26 .429
CHC 7 5 35 28 .583
CIN 6 4 35 34 .600
DET 3 1 12 9 .750
HOU 2 1 8 8 .667
LAA 3 0 21 12 1.000
LAD 2 4 14 18 .333
MIL 9 4 58 49 .692
NYM 3 1 23 10 .750
PHI 4 3 26 24 .571
SEA 3 1 18 9 .750
SFG 2 1 20 20 .667
STL 3 2 26 22 .600
WSN 1 2 9 12 .333
This isn't rocket science, Cafardo fans. What is rocket science is creating tables, I'm terrible at it. If you want to see a better view go here for the Cards and here for the Bucs. Again, this took me less than two minutes and I'm watching my kids and "Justice League Unlimited" at the same time.
So I guess I did do Cafardo's work for him. Huzzah!
For a simpleton like Cafardo, wouldn't the answer to his question be "They aren't even the best team in their own fucking division"?
Had he wanted to make that point, he could have pointed to run differential or pythag, which would show the Cardinals as a marginally better team than the Pirates. Or league rankings in offense. Or...anything at all, really, rather than just throw useless questions at the Cards' manager and sit back and wait for intellectual reinforcements.
He's a stupid man asking stupid questions with nothing to back up his constant dimwit assertions. Maybe he should have given JP Ricciardi another phone call and gotten his opinion too.
This is the senior baseball writer for the Boston Fucking Globe and THIS is the best they can offer? Shameful how they have fallen.
Had he wanted to make that point, he could have pointed to run differential or pythag, which would show the Cardinals as a marginally better team than the Pirates. Or league rankings in offense. Or...anything at all, really, rather than just throw useless questions at the Cards' manager and sit back and wait for intellectual reinforcements.
He's a stupid man asking stupid questions with nothing to back up his constant dimwit assertions. Maybe he should have given JP Ricciardi another phone call and gotten his opinion too.
This is the senior baseball writer for the Boston Fucking Globe and THIS is the best they can offer? Shameful how they have fallen.
This is the point. Whether St. Louis is the best team isn't the point. No matter what Matheny says the response has zero bearing on whether they are the best team or not and it's just another example of extremely lazy journalism.John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
I got a kick out of this "Stats" stuff from Nick:
So what? What does this mean? There's no context here at all. Did they also get more PA's than the rest of the league in June? That's not here, but it would be nice to see that, and easy enough to look up. Note- they did with 1116 PAs in June, 30 more than the Phillies, and 82 more than MLB team average. So the Sox probably had about 275 more pitches to swing at, take, hit and foul off than a typical team.
You'd think that this would be a good chance to explain that as the best offense in the AL, they are going to get more PAs and see more pitches, driving these numbers up. Or that the line drives contributed to an incredible team BaBIP of .350. Nope. Nothing but the meaningless numbers.
That's it.
So what? What does this mean? There's no context here at all. Did they also get more PA's than the rest of the league in June? That's not here, but it would be nice to see that, and easy enough to look up. Note- they did with 1116 PAs in June, 30 more than the Phillies, and 82 more than MLB team average. So the Sox probably had about 275 more pitches to swing at, take, hit and foul off than a typical team.
You'd think that this would be a good chance to explain that as the best offense in the AL, they are going to get more PAs and see more pitches, driving these numbers up. Or that the line drives contributed to an incredible team BaBIP of .350. Nope. Nothing but the meaningless numbers.
Over the many many years they've been in the Globe, the "chuck files" and Chuck Waslewski (sp?) stuff has gone (for me anyway) from "wow, really," to "so what?"
And then it gets combined with Carfardo's view of all stats other than W,L, ERA, BA, HR and RBI, as "nice things to look at but numbers dont tell us anything" and you get a regurgitation of numbers that literally dont mean anything. He's managed the nearly impossible task of reducing "apropos of Nothing" to numbers, instead of just words.
EDIT: What Brianish said more concisely.
And then it gets combined with Carfardo's view of all stats other than W,L, ERA, BA, HR and RBI, as "nice things to look at but numbers dont tell us anything" and you get a regurgitation of numbers that literally dont mean anything. He's managed the nearly impossible task of reducing "apropos of Nothing" to numbers, instead of just words.
EDIT: What Brianish said more concisely.
JGray38 said:
It means that Nick just came across some COOL website that allowed him to see those numbers for the first time and he thinks it's impressive that he can even deliver those stats in the first place. I wonder what website that might be? It must be a secret one that only writers for the Globe have access to, I'm sure.
Or you could use those numbers to write about how this is getting back to the idea of a team that is "agressive within the strike zone" but patient/skilled enough to lay off pitches outside the zone- something we saw a lot of in 2003-2004, but had clearly gotten away from recently. Anyway- there's a story somewhere in these numbers, but the storyteller never bothered to write it.
You're being too hard on him. To be able to write a story the writer has to first understand the premise. There's no chance in hell Cafardo has the capacity to figure it out.JGray38 said:
glennhoffmania said:
What are you talking about? The Cards are tied with the most wins in the NL Central with the Pirates. Obviously, the Cards are the better team because of Molina. The number of wins are telling us the story here.
Well maybe Nick has mastered that concept, but I don't think he could use JGray's pitch data effectively.Dogman2 said:
And yes, I realize you were being sarcastic.
And yes, the Cards are the best team in the world since Nick told me so. But what happens if Yadier's knee issue is worse than expected?
I think it's possible to dislike Nick and also agree that the Cardinals are the best team in that division. By expected W-L, the Cardinals are a 56 win team, to 49 for the Pirates. Baseball Prospectus has them closer to the third-place Reds than they do to the Cardinals. Compared to the Cardinals, the pitching has largely been a wash, but the Pirates' offense just hasn't really been close. And there's been a little smoke and mirrors from the staff, particularly Locke and Gomez who have thrown 152 innings with a combined ERA of 2.31. Their respective xFIPs are 4.22 and 4.24.
The Pirates are a fringe playoff team, which is actually a good thing for the franchise given how awful they've been for so long. I'm hesitant to call them "really good" at this point.
The Pirates are a fringe playoff team, which is actually a good thing for the franchise given how awful they've been for so long. I'm hesitant to call them "really good" at this point.
Cafardo doesn't have anyone on the Pirates' roster that he can call a "proven winner", so he has to go with the Cards. If the Pirates can find Clint Barmes' rookie year magic and get Neil Walker and Garrett Jones to buy into Clint Hurdle's gritty philosophy they may have the gutty-ness to will a division title.
If Papelbon were on release waivers in August would he be claimed? I doubt it.
NIck, of course, could call a few buddies with front offices and ask them 'would you claim Papelbon and take that contract?' and help us assess perceptions about the above question, of course.
NIck, of course, could call a few buddies with front offices and ask them 'would you claim Papelbon and take that contract?' and help us assess perceptions about the above question, of course.
Now he's just ceased doing English:
"John Farrells experience with Wakefield has certainly taught him how to approach knuckleball pitchers. He understands theyre different, but he also sees their value."
Yes, Nick, because "different" implies "lack of value."
"John Farrells experience with Wakefield has certainly taught him how to approach knuckleball pitchers. He understands theyre different, but he also sees their value."
Yes, Nick, because "different" implies "lack of value."
joe dokes said:
Sorry, but that's not what he's implying at all. He's saying that Farrell understands you have to evaluate a knuckleballer differently than you do a pitcher with the standard assortment of pitches, but because he has experience with Wake, Farrell knows how valuable they can be.
Cafardo makes enough legitimate mistakes w/o twisting every comment to suit our needs.
I'm sorry, but "understands they're different, but also sees their value" is a non-sequitur. "Understands that once in a while they get lit up like Christmas trees, but understands their value" would make sense. It is either crappy English, or trying to make Farrell look like some sort of savant because he can have a knuckleballer on the team, which is ludicrous.
joe dokes said:
Please first explain how exactly one goes about "doing English," then go ahead and critique his word choice.
Not to pick on a tweet, but this one needs like 20 more characters to be legible.
@nickcafardo
Red Sox a little deeper in Matt Garza interest than they were said a major league source
@nickcafardo
Red Sox a little deeper in Matt Garza interest than they were said a major league source
- Status