True, but he didn't get to do the playoff predictions and everyone else with the exception of Ryan and Kilgore did another section of the preview as far as I remember. But, perhaps you are right and being on the staff predictions isn't overly significant.He wasn't on the six person staff member page because he wrote every single one of the capsules on the previous pages.
My point was that it was surprising to see him not get a spot on the predictions staff, and have less room for his own column (Notes), and maybe that was a sign he was slowly losing influence or something. I don't care what his predictions are. All speculation, like much of the stuff around here. But, I guess I was wrong.Who the hell cares what his predictions are anyway? Frankly I'd listen to my dog over him.
Maybe he should break a sweat and do some research to see how many African-American players are in the Red Sox minor-league organization and how that number compares to other teams.Today, Nick wasn't even one of the 6 baseball staff members to give a prediction in the '09 Preview Section, and all he had for his Notes was a half-page at the very back. Approximately one-fourth of which, of course, was used wailing about the "growing concern" of the decline of black players in MLB and proceeding to list every single African-American on a Major League roster, grouped by team and sorted by frequency. That means that the very last line of the article simply reads "NONE: Boston" and honestly, reading that ignited something in my head which just thought that the whole positioning of that line, how it stands out (it is indented as its own paragraph" was somehow intended as a shot at the city, trying to chomp on any last crumb supporting the racist stereotype of the city and everything associated with it. It may sound crazy, but that whole section kind of aggravated me a little, both for its lameness and annoyance.
Also, apparently both Upton brothers will be the breakout players of the year and Jay Payton, because of how shocking it is that no one has taken a shot on him, is a "victim of the times."
As much as I despise CHB at times, I find it hard to believe Cafardo makes that list but Shank does not.Over on BSMW this morning, Bruce has a list of the Globe sports staffers who were apparently given "jobs for life" and who cannot be laid off without their permission.
Unfortunately, Cafardo's on it. Thankfully, Shaughnessy is not.
Maybe Nick thinks certain MLB veterans have "job for life" guarantees too?6. Frank Catalanotto, free agent OF/1B. The fact that Catalanotto, a superb extra bat, is still looking for a job after being released by Texas is a head-scratcher. The Royals have lost Jose Guillen to the DL with a hip injury, so they might be a candidate. Milwaukee needs a lefthanded veteran bat off the bench and would seem to be a fit. Catalanotto may have to consider a minor league deal or an Independent League stint to keep his stroke sharp.
Um, the team with Kris Benson starting his first game in forever? Or the team that plays baseball, which has a 162-game season where you're going to lose some games?They clobbered Cy Young winner Cliff Lee, Fausto Carmona, and Carl Pavano, looking like a team that could surpass the major league-high 901 runs they scored last season. And their pitching looked as if it might be better than the staff that posted a dead-last 5.37 ERA in 2008.
But after the Cleveland series, the next day in Detroit they were dismantled by the Tigers, 15-2, giving rise to the obvious question, "Which team are they?"
The problem is that teams, especially those with a good eye for talent such as the Braves, will know that Delcarmen's stats aren't indicative of how he pitches ... especially in high pressure situations. Cafardo should also know this, and really should know that the people who read his Sunday column would know it as well.Yes. He strikes out a batter an inning and had an ERA below 3 last season. What's the problem?
Are we still debating this clutchness nonsense?The problem is that teams, especially those with a good eye for talent such as the Braves, will know that Delcarmen's stats aren't indicative of how he pitches ... especially in high pressure situations. Cafardo should also know this, and really should know that the people who read his Sunday column would know it as well.
Yes, but the 'overall numbers' would include the playoffs....and including the playoffs, Delcarmen's 2007 ERA was 2.60 (instead of 2.05 based on regular season stats alone) and his 2008 ERA was 3.89 (instead of 3.27). That might well impact his value.Are we still debating this clutchness nonsense?
Manny Delcarmen's value will be set not by the splits but by his overall numbers. Look at K-Rod. The guy choked during both the 2007 and 2008 playoffs, yet even in a down economy he was able to land a 3-year, $37 million contract.
The difference being that K-Rod was a known, all-star commodity whereas MDC is a reliever that many of the fans of his own team would like to see traded and even those who don't won't admit to wanting to see him enter with a game on the line.Are we still debating this clutchness nonsense?
Manny Delcarmen's value will be set not by the splits but by his overall numbers. Look at K-Rod. The guy choked during both the 2007 and 2008 playoffs, yet even in a down economy he was able to land a 3-year, $37 million contract.
The last two years, K-Rod's post-season ERAs have been 7.71 and 54.00. That really dampened his market.Yes, but the 'overall numbers' would include the playoffs....and including the playoffs, Delcarmen's 2007 ERA was 2.60 (instead of 2.05 based on regular season stats alone) and his 2008 ERA was 3.89 (instead of 3.27). That might well impact his value.
You do realize that there were plenty of Angels fans who were happy the team didn't spend big bucks on him, right?The difference being that K-Rod was a known, all-star commodity whereas MDC is a reliever that many of the fans of his own team would like to see traded and even those who don't won't admit to wanting to see him enter with a game on the line.
You're missing, or ignoring, my point. This is a total hijack so this will be my last point on the topic. Manny Delcarmen's overall ERA last year was 3.89.The last two years, K-Rod's post-season ERAs have been 7.71 and 54.00. That really dampened his market.
No, I'm saying that all of these criticisms of Delcarmen are based on small sample sizes. That if we applied the same standards to other pitchers (like K-Rod), the market values we'd end up assigning to them would be out of whack with their real-world market values.Are you saying that if you were a GM you would prefer a smaller sample size and ignore all October statistics? That is really really really odd.
2. Roy Halladay is the best;
If you have 10 minutes to deadline and nothing written down, it must seem like a great plan.I'm still not certain why writing the first five random things that pop into your head is considered a good idea.
I had totally forgotten what a winner Peavy was when the playoffs were on the line against Colorado at the end of 2007 and he put up this totally winnerific line: 6.1 IP, 10 H, 6 ER, 4 BB, 6 K, 2 HR. I loved it when he was a winner then.Whoever winds up with Peavy will have one of the great competitors in the game. It's no secret why he and Kevin Youkilis and Dustin Pedroia hit it off so well at the World Baseball Classic. They appear to be cut from the same cloth. They're intense, they're fighters, they're winners, and they're great teammates.
Cafardo is so blatantly trying to ape Peter Gammons with these personality profile angles that only an "insider" can glean. They're intolerably saccharine when Gammons does it, but at least Gammons usually characterizes performance somewhat accurately.I'd started to miss Cafardo's random generalizations about character traits that have no basis in reality:
I had totally forgotten what a winner Peavy was when the playoffs were on the line against Colorado at the end of 2007 and he put up this totally winnerific line: 6.1 IP, 10 H, 6 ER, 4 BB, 6 K, 2 HR. I loved it when he was a winner then.
I also love his winnerific performance in the playoffs: 0-2, 12+ ERA, 19 hits in 9.2 innings, 4 BB, 5 K.
God he's such a winner. It's really hard to see how anyone could say different.
I don't get it. "Nationa" ???Apropos of nothing: ... 2. Instead of uniform manufacturer Majestic omitting the "O" on a couple of Washington jerseys last week ("Natinals"), they should have found a way to get rid of the "LS"
Get rid of the "LS" - "losing series". See, Nicky's being clever - they'd be better off if they won. The wit on that guy and the scorn he doles out...I don't get it. "Nationa" ???
NatinaI don't get it. "Nationa" ???
I just came here to post this.I don't get it. "Nationa" ???
Jesus Christ. Seriously? I know this is not in print, but this is unbelievable.Actual conversation from tonight's game:
Person: Nick, can you tell me about Saito?
Cafardo: (long pause) He gives you a different look.
Nick Cafardo, ladies and gentleman!
LinkNick Green is expected to be in the lineup instead of Lugo, but from tonight on, Terry Francona will likely diminish Green's role at shortstop and use him as a true utility man. Francona explained the situation to Green personally yesterday.
Nick meant to say "from tomorrow on." Typos happen.
One sentence he says that Nick Green is expected to be in the lineup then the next he says that Green will be used in the utility role. Why would Green be expected to be in the lineup when Lugo is your starter? Green is a fill-in who should be expected to go back to the bench when Lugo comes back.What doesn't make sense about that?