Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread
- Thread starter MyDaughterLovesTomGordon
- Start date
- Status
The utterly irrelevant interviewing the profoundly asinine about topics beyond their understanding. Sounds like a good analogy for the entire Globe sports dept of late.
Dear Nick: NO ONE CARES ABOUT BOBBY FUCKING VALENTINE ANY MORE EXCEPT ON WONDERING WHICH BRIDGE HE'S GOING TO BE LIVING UNDER. He's a vile delusional little man and he should have been burned at the stake like a proper heretic.
My God.
Dear Nick: NO ONE CARES ABOUT BOBBY FUCKING VALENTINE ANY MORE EXCEPT ON WONDERING WHICH BRIDGE HE'S GOING TO BE LIVING UNDER. He's a vile delusional little man and he should have been burned at the stake like a proper heretic.
My God.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
I dont think an interview with him is a terrible idea. But having a ball-washer like Cafardo do it is. If someone would ask him questions about what mistakes he think he made, what he would have done differently, does he think now that the game has passed him by, what makes a guy like Leyland be able to go to 70, etc., it might be interesting. But the Globe has no one to do that.
If I didn't know better (and I'm not saying I do), I would say he is just trolling us at this point. A Jason Bay reference in the article would have sealed the deal.
The big problem is that the article lead off the sports section with this drivel with about a 40 font "Valentine's Say". Where the hell are the editors at this point. The World Series starts tomorrow and this is the best they can roll out. I can't believe how far the Globe has fallen. My biggest fear is that Henry will not want to look like a meddler and take a hands off approach to the sports department.
The big problem is that the article lead off the sports section with this drivel with about a 40 font "Valentine's Say". Where the hell are the editors at this point. The World Series starts tomorrow and this is the best they can roll out. I can't believe how far the Globe has fallen. My biggest fear is that Henry will not want to look like a meddler and take a hands off approach to the sports department.
joe dokes said:
I think an interview with him is an awful idea. Why should we care about that fucking jackass any more? He piloted the ship into the iceberg, he should at least have the decency to go down with it and never be heard from again. Giving him a platform to defend himself on is a terrible idea.
Perhaps Nick can dig up Grady Little and see how he's doing these days. Maybe go visit Pinky Higgins' grave. You know, for the perspectives.
My morning since I got into work a few minutes ago:
I went to yahoo.com, saw that they linked to this: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/22/bobby-valentine-offers-high-praise-to-john-farrell-ben-cherington/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
Came here immediately, knowing that it would be ripped apart. Nick Cafardo. Of course he would be the guy to interview Bobby V as the World Series approaches. I've come here to laugh SOSH, don't let me down!!
EDIT: The key quotes of that article:
1. Sox president and CEO Larry Lucchino and yours truly still hear it for recommending Valentine after Terry Francona presided over the awful September 2011 collapse, when it was clear the Red Sox needed more of a disciplinarian in the manager’s office so the boys wouldn’t get away with chicken and beer during the game.
It was clear? Are we still linking the collapse of 2011 to "chicken and beer", and not the fact that the team, health-wise, was falling apart by the day, and in September they were running out truly awful pitching on a day to day basis? Who here remembers how every game seemed like a 5-0 deficit by the 3rd inning. I sure do. This "chicken and beer" shit is the most overblown, ridiculous, summation - that really needs to just go away.
2. It was Valentine who took the fall on the management side. Nobody else lost their job.
Holy cow Nick Cafardo. Let it go.
I went to yahoo.com, saw that they linked to this: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/22/bobby-valentine-offers-high-praise-to-john-farrell-ben-cherington/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs
Came here immediately, knowing that it would be ripped apart. Nick Cafardo. Of course he would be the guy to interview Bobby V as the World Series approaches. I've come here to laugh SOSH, don't let me down!!
EDIT: The key quotes of that article:
1. Sox president and CEO Larry Lucchino and yours truly still hear it for recommending Valentine after Terry Francona presided over the awful September 2011 collapse, when it was clear the Red Sox needed more of a disciplinarian in the manager’s office so the boys wouldn’t get away with chicken and beer during the game.
It was clear? Are we still linking the collapse of 2011 to "chicken and beer", and not the fact that the team, health-wise, was falling apart by the day, and in September they were running out truly awful pitching on a day to day basis? Who here remembers how every game seemed like a 5-0 deficit by the 3rd inning. I sure do. This "chicken and beer" shit is the most overblown, ridiculous, summation - that really needs to just go away.
2. It was Valentine who took the fall on the management side. Nobody else lost their job.
Holy cow Nick Cafardo. Let it go.
Nick Cafardo wrote this lede? Holy shit, he needs to find a dictionary and look up the term irony. Because Cafardo doesn't beat the crap out of things at all on a monthly, weekly, daily or hourly basis. No, Nick is cool enough to let things go.
And if his mother makes rugs like her son writes, I bet it was the shittiest rug on the planet.
This isn't true at all, at least for me. The only time that I think of Bobby Valentine is when Nick Cafardo brings him up.
A film company? I guess that makes sense considering the year-long snuff film he made last year of the 2012 Boston Red Sox.
Oh, this is just rich. Yes Nick, you and Lucchino are pretty much on par when it comes to making Sox decisions. And the fans know it. This guy is seriously delusional. The only reason why you "hear it" from fans is because you won't let it go. The one time the team and Cafardo were both of the same mind on one decision and it blows up in both of their faces and Cafardo can't hack it.
Wasn't the Connecticut strong man brought in here to clean up the team and beat those questionable attitudes into submission? Wasn't that the reason why the Red Sox hired an authoritarian like Bobby V? Because if it is, he obviously didn't do his job properly.
Bobby Valentine always said stupid things but we shouldn't hold it against him because he isn't smart enough to control the stupid things he says. Only dishonest people watch what they say.
One. Hundred. Percent. Bullshit. Where did he pick the Red Sox to win their division?
That's revisionist history on Cafardo's part because Valentine was shown the door the day after the 2012 season was over. Farrell wasn't sent here until three weeks later. Maybe there was a deal in place, I don't know that, but there is no way in hell that Valentine was coming back next year. None.
I love how Ortiz is written to be the bad guy in these two sentences. Cafardo would have been a great Soviet propagandist.
Again, Valentine is the victim in all of this. Was Bobby V. wrong about the Yankees in 9/11? Who knows? Who cares?
I know I say this over and over and over and over again, but I have no idea how Nick Cafardo has a job. This is pure, unadulterated claptrap. Even a first-year journalism major wouldn't turn this piece of garbage into his professor. God, the death of the Boston Globe sports pages is complete now. Bury the thing.
The cherry on top of this shit sundae of an article is Nick's conclusion that Valentine failed because of his honesty.
:barf:
:barf:
Also, that Valentine is the victim and has no real black marks against him (except his honesty).
Up until I read this, my days at getting angry at sportswriters were pretty much over. Even the shit that Cafardo spews in his Notes column, I don't get mad at, I just laugh at the predictable idiocy. But man, did this column angry up my blood. So, good on you Nick, you got me to give a rat's ass about what you write.
Up until I read this, my days at getting angry at sportswriters were pretty much over. Even the shit that Cafardo spews in his Notes column, I don't get mad at, I just laugh at the predictable idiocy. But man, did this column angry up my blood. So, good on you Nick, you got me to give a rat's ass about what you write.
I don't read the Globe so I get my Nick comedy fixes here. If his pieces were posted without saying he wrote them, I'd assume they were by one of the ESPN personalities trying to generate a fake debate.
If Nick were the GM of the Red Sox, the team would have looked like this in 2013:
Manager: Bobby Valentine
Assistnt GM: JP Ricciardi
2B: Pedro Ciriaco-- he can really run, solid batting average
SS: Jose Iglesias-- good with the glove, which is invaluable
CF: Josh Hamilton-- brings energy, definitely worth the $140 million contract
LF: Jason Bay-- proven power hitter, clutch
C: 8-time Gold Glove winner Russell Martin-- catcher defense is invaluable, 8 Gold Gloves don't lie
RF: Cody Ross-- can't let his energy and intensity go, will be worth the 4-year contract
DH: Ryan Kalish-- plays hard, will have to DH at first because he might be injured.
1B: Nate Frieman-- he's from Wellesley, which is local.
3B: Will Middlebrooks-- strikes out too much, but might become trade bait to bring in a veteran presence
SP:
Hall of Famer Andy Pettitte
Roy Oswalt-- he's rediscovered his passion for the game
Jake Peavy-- Got to have that bulldog mentality. Worth giving up Pedroia for him
Gavin Floyd- solid veteran presence
Closer: Papelbon-- brings energy and intensity
Dumped to acquire the new guys:
Lester and Lackey-- Chicken and beer, enough said.
Pedroia-- they'll miss his intensity, but you have to give up quality to get a bulldog like Peavy
Ellsbury: good player when healthy but not tough enough to play injured. Packaged with Buchholz, Lester and Lackey to NY for Pettitte and Martin in a blockbuster trade that will bring a real lift to the organization, adding grittiness and energy.
Ortiz-- too old, can't get along with Bobby V, so he won't be re-signed
Salty-- had to go to bring in Floyd
See what we missed out on by not having Nick as our GM?
Manager: Bobby Valentine
Assistnt GM: JP Ricciardi
2B: Pedro Ciriaco-- he can really run, solid batting average
SS: Jose Iglesias-- good with the glove, which is invaluable
CF: Josh Hamilton-- brings energy, definitely worth the $140 million contract
LF: Jason Bay-- proven power hitter, clutch
C: 8-time Gold Glove winner Russell Martin-- catcher defense is invaluable, 8 Gold Gloves don't lie
RF: Cody Ross-- can't let his energy and intensity go, will be worth the 4-year contract
DH: Ryan Kalish-- plays hard, will have to DH at first because he might be injured.
1B: Nate Frieman-- he's from Wellesley, which is local.
3B: Will Middlebrooks-- strikes out too much, but might become trade bait to bring in a veteran presence
SP:
Hall of Famer Andy Pettitte
Roy Oswalt-- he's rediscovered his passion for the game
Jake Peavy-- Got to have that bulldog mentality. Worth giving up Pedroia for him
Gavin Floyd- solid veteran presence
Closer: Papelbon-- brings energy and intensity
Dumped to acquire the new guys:
Lester and Lackey-- Chicken and beer, enough said.
Pedroia-- they'll miss his intensity, but you have to give up quality to get a bulldog like Peavy
Ellsbury: good player when healthy but not tough enough to play injured. Packaged with Buchholz, Lester and Lackey to NY for Pettitte and Martin in a blockbuster trade that will bring a real lift to the organization, adding grittiness and energy.
Ortiz-- too old, can't get along with Bobby V, so he won't be re-signed
Salty-- had to go to bring in Floyd
See what we missed out on by not having Nick as our GM?
Ciriaco would have a tough time beating out Adam Kennedy in spring training. He's got a good career batting average in Fenway Park, don'tcha know.
Yeah how bout interviewing Zim, Houk, and Johnny Mac and making it a panel discussion? LOL :q:Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
God, how the Globe sports section has fallen.
What kills me is when MLB TV or radio will have Shank or Carfardo on for their "expert knowledge" of the Sox. Have Harold Reynold interview them for Must Miss media.
What kills me is when MLB TV or radio will have Shank or Carfardo on for their "expert knowledge" of the Sox. Have Harold Reynold interview them for Must Miss media.
Anyone else catch Nick's brilliant question in Farrell's postgame press conference?
"The Lester‑Ross relationship, is that emerging in your eyes or is that something that you will continue to go with?"
I mean, where do you begin with this one?
"The Lester‑Ross relationship, is that emerging in your eyes or is that something that you will continue to go with?"
I mean, where do you begin with this one?
So true. Farrell answered it diplomatically but you could tell he was like 'Uhhhh... that's your actual question?'Corsi said:
There are two perfectly appropriate responses: "No, it's not emerging in our eyes at all, there's nothing to it whatsoever. That's why we'll be staying with it from now on."
Or: "Uhhh... what?"
Or: "Uhhh... what?"
I'm surprised that Cafardo didn't wish us all Happy 27th Anniversary of the Bill Buckner/Mookie Wilson play yesterday.
Must be slipping.
Must be slipping.
Yeah, Nick, because history is littered with 37 year-old catchers (3/19/77) playing 90-100 effective games. (Someone better at BRef sorting can do it, but I'd bet the farm that its a couple of dozen at most.)
Especially among those who have only played more than 70 once in their life. (even fewer)
Its funny (not really, but you get it.....) as the Sox amazingness continues, writers with talent, like Finn and even Shaughnessy "up their games" and raise their own level. Meanwhile, Cafardo's ineptitude just stands out even more.
Ol' Nick must be super sad today. It's as if all that water he carried for the last two years spilled then he slipped in the water and the bucket ended up on his head.
Actually he told "us" that it was a total 11 calls from an unknown number of GMs about 2 players. So now 11 calls = ringing off the hook.
By next week, GMs will be "storming Boras's ramparts" with bags of cash.
Of course they will.
Yes, because if teams have learned on thing from the Sox success, its that paying big FA money to a proven closer is the sure route to a WS win.
Choo is a better hitter than Ellsbury by any measure.
32 4-inning starts willl keep his innings count down.
yes, some would.
Too bad this information wasn't available *before* the Series. Oh wait . . . . .
I learned from the graphic in Cafardo's column today that Charlie Manuel is still an active manager.
Cafardo probably had nothing to do with the graphic, as it was "compiled" buy someone else. But you never know what you might learn from the Glob's baseball reporting. Russell Martin with his 8 gold gloves, Charlie Manuel still with a job. Very insightful stuff.
Cafardo probably had nothing to do with the graphic, as it was "compiled" buy someone else. But you never know what you might learn from the Glob's baseball reporting. Russell Martin with his 8 gold gloves, Charlie Manuel still with a job. Very insightful stuff.
I don't usually join in the bashing, but to assert that Grady Little's only "crime" was letting the 'best pitcher on the planet' stay in the game, is pretty pathetic for a writer with a paying job.
doctormoist said:
I read that and the only thing I could think of for an explanation was that Cafardo is feeling irrelevant and desperate so he's doubling down on the usual stupidity of his opinions. He doesn't want to give in to any of this new-fangled thinking, so he's going to get entrenched in the offal of his own analysis. Remember, the 2012 Red Sox were essentially put together according to Cafardo's wishes. They did everything he wanted them to, according to his articles. How'd that turn out anyway? And his only response was to write that awful defense of Valentine not too long ago and to carry Grady Fucking Little's water.
It's fascinating, really. He's a man who's getting dumber with more experience.
With the Boras stuff, he's obviously feeding his source and doing a bit of trolling too.
But with the Little paragraph (are you KIDDING me? This happened in 2003, who gives a crap?) and the Buck Martinez mention (100-115, last year managed? 2002!) he obviously slipped in the shower, bumped his head and forgot what year he's in. Next week will be an in-depth review of Apple's iPod and what the "Friends" finale meant to current Red Sox manager Joe Kerrigan.
Seriously though, I would love to know what his colleagues think about his work.
But with the Little paragraph (are you KIDDING me? This happened in 2003, who gives a crap?) and the Buck Martinez mention (100-115, last year managed? 2002!) he obviously slipped in the shower, bumped his head and forgot what year he's in. Next week will be an in-depth review of Apple's iPod and what the "Friends" finale meant to current Red Sox manager Joe Kerrigan.
Seriously though, I would love to know what his colleagues think about his work.
Do you know that the Yankees are going to be in on every single free agent this year? If you read Cafardo's piece today you would.
You would also get very important updates on all of Scott Boras' clients.
Best of all, you'd get to read all of the stuff you already read online this week in one convenient place.
But the best part is trying to decipher this sentence:
I have no idea what this means. Was Clark a shitty third base coach in Houston? Was he a bad base running coach? With that crappy Astros team, did it even matter? I mean, does this even go back to when Clark played for the Astros and may have been an adventure on the base paths?
According to Wiki, Clark was the first base coach for the Astros last year, so I'm not sure how that job translates into "not work[ing] out so well in Houston on the base paths". Whatever. Words are needed to fill up a broadsheet, just keep typing Nick.
You would also get very important updates on all of Scott Boras' clients.
Best of all, you'd get to read all of the stuff you already read online this week in one convenient place.
But the best part is trying to decipher this sentence:
I have no idea what this means. Was Clark a shitty third base coach in Houston? Was he a bad base running coach? With that crappy Astros team, did it even matter? I mean, does this even go back to when Clark played for the Astros and may have been an adventure on the base paths?
According to Wiki, Clark was the first base coach for the Astros last year, so I'm not sure how that job translates into "not work[ing] out so well in Houston on the base paths". Whatever. Words are needed to fill up a broadsheet, just keep typing Nick.
I liked this little section:
Since Cafardo et al have already been trolled and reported exactly the opposite, he's making these assertions to cover up his gullibility as a Boras cipher.
He's such a doofus.
But here are a few things to take away from the meetings:
■ Never believe it when a GM says a certain player isn’t going to be traded. New Marlins GM Dan Jennings already has said publicly that Giancarlo Stanton isn’t available. Everyone has a price. Any player can be traded, unless there is a contract clause that says he can’t, and even that’s negotiable. So, never believe a GM when he says he’s not shoppinga player or a player is off-limits. It just isn’t so.
■ ...Don’t believe for a minute that the Tigers won’t re-sign Max Scherzer, who can be a free agent after next season, or that they’re not going to enhance the team, as we’ve read in certain circles. Why would you have Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder, Torii Hunter, Justin Verlander, Scherzer, and Anibal Sanchez on a team that isn’t going for it? Or why would a team with an elderly owner such as Mike Ilitch suddenly decide, when all he wants is a championship, to pull back the reins? Don’t buy it.
Since Cafardo et al have already been trolled and reported exactly the opposite, he's making these assertions to cover up his gullibility as a Boras cipher.
He's such a doofus.
Is Nick Cafardo actually still living? That column is so uninformative, speculative, and bland that it could easily have been produced by an algorithm.
I typed "Dave Clark" and "base running" into Google and the top hit stated he was in charge of base running at the major league level. I suppose a few more words could have helped clarify that. I like the thought of him running into the base paths during games, though.John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
The idea that the Sox would trade both Middlebrooks and Doubront for Trumbo is laughable; I seriously doubt they'd trade either one for Trumbo, much less both. Nick's total misunderstanding of how the team evaluates players and value is just stunning after a decade with this ownership group.
I really want to know what he was thinking when he decided to add that little tidbit. Even if he's trying to fill space, that "rumor" is laughable.
It is a really dumb rumor, but didn't Massarotti say something similar earlier last week? So I wonder if it's "out there" and Cafardo is just reporting, not thinking.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
No, someone here said Trumbo & Bourjos for Middlebrooks & Doubront, which was almost immediately dismissed. Nick read it and decided that any idea here must be off by a factor of 2 and took out Bourjos after looking up Trumbo's stats at baseballreference.com
Lurkers with media jobs - they exist, yo.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
Perhaps, but that doesn't change that someone whose job is to analyze the Red Sox should have a more informed perspective on how they'd very likely respond to such an offer.
I can't tell if this a serious Cafardo tweet:
"Had Jose Iglesias winning on my AL rookie ballot but Wil Myers gets it."
Could he really have had him as RoY?
Edit: well, weak class I guess. He got lots of votes and there isn't much behind him.
"Had Jose Iglesias winning on my AL rookie ballot but Wil Myers gets it."
Could he really have had him as RoY?
Edit: well, weak class I guess. He got lots of votes and there isn't much behind him.
Hoplite said:
Man, I would take back the initial pieces of the Punto trade if the Dodgers would take those three off our hands.
(Heck, I'd probably do it just to get rid of CHB)
- Status