Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread

[Spacemans Bong]

The noise thing is self-perpetuating. Perhaps people would be surprised and bored if there was no more music in the park because they just wouldn't be used to it, but there's not a lot of people dancing to the latest Rihanna durge for 25 seconds.

Boston fans don't seem less engaged than Yankees fans, in fact probably the opposite. The Yanks are the world leaders in bells and whistles while the Red Sox are comfortably in the bottom third of the majors in noise.

 

[Oogies Loogies]

Cafardo is sitting in with Castig for a couple of innings for today's broadcast and Castig brings up some text message question or something that dopey fans respond to for some reason.

The question was (paraphrasing): If you could have the Red Sox acquire any player past or present, who would it be?"

Cafardo's answer --- Adam Kennedy.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Cafardo is sitting in with Castig for a couple of innings for today's broadcast and Castig brings up some text message question or something that dopey fans respond to for some reason.

The question was (paraphrasing): If you could have the Red Sox acquire any player past or present, who would it be?"

Cafardo's answer --- Adam Kennedy.

Love to hear the reasoning for that one.

 

[Oogies Loogies]

Love to hear the reasoning for that one.

He based it on Kennedy having the highest Fenway average for an opposing player. He said he always thought the Red Sox would acquire him just for that reason.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

He based it on Kennedy having the highest Fenway average for an opposing player. He said he always thought the Red Sox would acquire him just for that reason.

Huh.

1.000 OPS in Fenway over 165 PA in his career. I suppose I've heard dumber reasoning.

 

[Jeff Van GULLY]

Cafardo is sitting in with Castig for a couple of innings for today's broadcast and Castig brings up some text message question or something that dopey fans respond to for some reason.

The question was (paraphrasing): If you could have the Red Sox acquire any player past or present, who would it be?"

Cafardo's answer --- Adam Kennedy.

Yeah, I didn't find that egregious at all. I actually learned something.

 

[weeba]

Huh.

1.000 OPS in Fenway over 165 PA in his career. I suppose I've heard dumber reasoning.

Well, except it's against Red Sox pitching, which he no longer would have access to.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Well, except it's against Red Sox pitching, which he no longer would have access to.

Agreed, but Sox pitching has generally been very good over the course of Kennedy's career.

I'm not about to defend the idea that Kennedy should be the guy on the Sox instead of, say, Walter Johnson, but it's not the worst answer in the world either.

 

[Oogies Loogies]

Yeah, I didn't find that egregious at all. I actually learned something.

So you can have any player who ever played the game and Cafardo's first choice would be Adam Kennedy?

I'm fine with him giving it some thought and not stating the knee-jerk answer like Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Gibson, Pujols, Bonds, or Koufax. But taking a guy who has proven to be a mediocre player because he's raked at Fenway in less than 1/3 of a season's worth of plate appearances is still silly.

Then again, getting myself worked up over Nick Cafardo's response to a drop during a radio broadcast is even sillier.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Huh.

1.000 OPS in Fenway over 165 PA in his career. I suppose I've heard dumber reasoning.

I'm sure that number factored into Cafardo's thinking.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

Agreed, but Sox pitching has generally been very good over the course of Kennedy's career.

I'm not about to defend the idea that Kennedy should be the guy on the Sox instead of, say, Walter Johnson, but it's not the worst answer in the world either.

No, actually it is.

Any player, past or present. He said Adam Kennedy.

 

[tims4wins]

No, actually it is.

Any player, past or present. He said Adam Kennedy.

C'mon, he could have said

Edit: or

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Really, it's a stupid question that most folks would answer with Williams or Mays or another easy blowoff HOF answer. This answer makes you think, and, as we learned, taught us all something new.

 

[URI]

Mostly that Nick Cafardo can say that 1/4th worth of a season's of plate appearances is greater than Willie Mays and fools will talk themselves into thinking Cafardo isn't some hypertard for 20 seconds.

That's right, SJH...I'm talking to you fool. Want a piece?

 

[4 6 3 DP]

"Many talent evaluators — one of whom is Rays assistant general manager Gerry Hunsicker — believe that talent eventually comes out in big-time prospects. The theory is that the talent has been restrained for a variety of reasons, but a player will reach his level as he enters his prime years."

This is singularly the stupidest thing I have read in probably forever. I am trying to figure out where to even start.

1. Do I need Gerry Hunsicker, an assistant GM, who isn't quoted in the section, to validate this?
2. Is there even a theory here - cream eventually rises? He thinks this is profound?
3. Does he dig into this a little bit? Of course not.

Funny thing is you have some American Leaguers (Alex Gordon, Matt Wieters come to mind) who are the top prospect guys who've had their major struggles coming in. It would be interesting to address what the "variety of reasons" are. Even for Nick, this paragraph is unusually lazy, pointless, and a waste of ink.

 

[bosockboy]

Huh.

1.000 OPS in Fenway over 165 PA in his career. I suppose I've heard dumber reasoning.

I've heard dumber, too. However, I was excited for this exact same reason when we traded for Kotchman. He had a 985 Fenway OPS and was a complete stinkeroo. I'm not sure it means anything.

 

[joyofsox]

Worst Cafardo column ever? If not, it's a strong contender. Total garbage space-filler:

If you want passion, start with this roster

With Ozzie Guillen in town recently, we started to think about other passionate baseball people. Who are they? Passion is something you see, hear, or feel. There’s no number to measure it by.

So here is a look at 25 very passionate baseball people, based on this reporter’s observations, plus consultations with other writers, coaches, managers, scouts, and players: ...

8. Buck Showalter, manager, Orioles — Sees things no one else sees. Studies the game constantly. Goes home from games and will watch college or pro baseball on TV. ...

12. Hunter Pence, OF, Astros — The little engine who could. Never stops. Plays "angry," but the word should be "passionate." As a rookie, he dived for a warmup throw between innings. ...

19. Jim Thome, DH, Twins — Plays the game with a smile. Every day seems to be a joy for him. ...

24. Jose Bautista, RF, Blue Jays — The home run leader loves the life, takes care of his teammates, and loves stepping to the plate.

 

[Rudy's Curve]

12. Hunter Pence, OF, Astros — The little engine who could.

Hunter Pence is listed at 6'4 and 220 pounds.

 

[JohntheBaptist]

Jesus that's like reading copy from TWIB or SI for Kids.

 

[Van Everyman]

Time for a thread title change?

"The Passion of Nick Cafardo"

 

[E5 Yaz]

You guys missed the best one:

7. Jeff Cox, third base coach, White Sox — The game is his life. Never married and still living at home with his mother, he is one of the more upbeat people you’ll ever see.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Did anyone count up who on that list is white, who is black, hispanic, etc. and compare that to overall MLB demographics?

Because that'd be interesting.

 

[mt8thsw9th]

4. Dustin Pedroia, 2B, Red Sox — “I’ve played for a lot of teams and with a lot of players,’’ said Mike Cameron. “Never seen anything like him.’’ I think we know what he means.

And that is...

 

[mabrowndog]

I can't wait for pbsoxfan or whatever the fuck her name is to traipse in here and defend her favorite Red Sox writer. What a bucket of worthless tripe.

A little further down is this gem:

3. Jason Marquis, RHP, Nationals — The Nationals would make him available, but only if they get good young talent back. Would they take Josh Reddick for him? Probably, but the Sox seem content right now going with Tim Wakefield in the No. 5 spot, with Alfredo Aceves there for depth.

Yeah, Nick. The Sox are going to give up a guy who has a great shot at being their cost-controlled starting right fielder for the next several seasons.

And they'll do this to acquire an overrated piece of shit pitcher...

* Whose 6-2 record this season has been built on getting an NL-leading 9.82 runs of support per 9 IP.
* Whose 4.13 ERA derives largely from Nationals Park having the 7th-lowest run scoring park factor in the majors (.801), compared to Fenway having the 5th highest (1.212).
* Whose home/road splits are .257/.281/.367/.648 and .317/.367/.472/.839 respectively.
* Who even in a year where offense is down, and in a league with no DH, is getting killed by LHH at a .300/.348/.446/.794 clip in 142 PA.
* Who non-pitchers, regardless of what side of the plate they're hitting from, are batting .302/.344/.437/.781 against this year.
* Whose changeup, which Jonah Keri drooled over after 5 starts ("worth 4.4 runs"), now carries negative value through 11 starts.
* Who, in the absence of cash from the Nationals, the Sox would owe $5M of his $7.5M salary for 2011 if they acquired him today.
* Who would be a free agent at season's end.
* Who, if he declined an incredibly risky arbitration offer from Boston, would likely net the club at best a sandwich pick in the 2012 draft.
* Who, if he accepted said arbitration offer, would likely ask for (and stand a good chance of being awarded) at least $8 million for 2012.

Nice research, Nick.


.

 

[Van Everyman]

Edit: never mind

 

[JohntheBaptist]

Nice research, Nick.


.

Great post dog. I'd argue though it isn't even necessarily a research thing. It's more just an overwhelming lack of awareness of what he's covering. I know that ship sailed years ago, but Reddick for Marquis, and the Nats wouldn't be interested? Getting to the point of even entertaining that idea for a column is amazing to me--its dumb enough that the possibility shouldn't even be occurring to him realistically in the first place.

But you're still right--he obviously concocted the idea, so instead of just farting it out into the world maybe look into whether printing it will brand you further a moron for all the world to see.

Whatever, its useless at this point, but the guy just does not give a fuck. Fuck him.

 

[E5 Yaz]

And that is...

There's a lot wrong with this column, but Cafardo is right when he says we all know about Pedroia's intensity

 

[backpeddling]

Shocking that Nick would side with fellow dinosaur Bud Selig. Passion!

 

[The Gray Eagle]

Is there anyone with less passion for his job than ol' Nick "apropos of nothing" Cafardo?

 

[E5 Yaz]

Is there anyone with less passion for his job than ol' Nick "apropos of nothing" Cafardo?

JD Drew

 

[MHead81]

I can't wait for pbsoxfan or whatever the fuck her name is to traipse in here and defend her favorite Red Sox writer. What a bucket of worthless tripe.

A little further down is this gem:


Yeah, Nick. The Sox are going to give up a guy who has a great shot at being their cost-controlled starting right fielder for the next several seasons.

And they'll do this to acquire an overrated piece of shit pitcher...

[edit: snip]

Nice research, Nick.


.

I specifically came to this thread to comment on this AWESOME trade idea. Seriously, I wouldn't trade Daniel Nava for Marquis.

What can we do to get this fucking guy out of this town once and for all? Between him and those 2 idiots Felger & Mazz it's no wonder the majority of Red Sox fans in this town are so ignorant and think we could trade Scutaro for Lincecum cause they need a SS and we need a SP.

 

[MHead81]

Has anyone ever emailed Cafardo the link to this thread?

 

[Van Everyman]

Would he bother reading it?

 

[Foulkey Reese]

I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere, but does anybody have any idea what kind of money Cafardo makes?

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Googled "Nick Cafardo" and passion hoping against hope I could kill 10 minutes reading someone light up that ridiculous Sunday column. No luck. We need more snarky douchebags on the web, apparently, not less.

Regardless, the search turned up this gem: the link to Nick's son Ben's bio page on ESPN.com. He's a PR flack for the worldwide leader and, you'll be glad to know, "a passionate consumer of all things ESPN!"

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere, but does anybody have any idea what kind of money Cafardo makes?

I would guess given how long he's been at the paper that he's pulling in north of 100K.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

When I read the lede to yesterday's Baseball Notebook, I just began laughing. This is a piece that you write at the end of January/beginning of February (or between Christmas and New Year's Day) when there is absolutely nothing going on in MLB. Not in the middle of the season where there are a lot of pretty interesting things happening.

I know that we say it week in and week out, but Cafardo doesn't have to be able to write well. He just has to recognize the pulse of his beat and he simply can't (or won't) do that anymore. It's absolutely laughable that the one part of a dying industry that people want to read (and have good memories of reading) is so embarrassing. I mean, the White Sox were in town for three days and the only thing that Nick Cafardo can report on is that Ozzie Guillen is passionate? Really? The guy is God's gift to reporters, he says crazy shit and doesn't give a fuck. And aside from kicking the Red Sox' ass, they're in a bit of a malaise.

And I'm surprised that David Eckstein wasn't on that list 25 times.

 

[Van Everyman]

This week's insight: the Cubs problem is that they haven't hired the entire Red Sox organization.

http://mobile.boston.com/art/52/sports/baseball/articles/2011/06/12/in_an_overhaul_cubs_should_try_to_put_sox_on/

 

[4 6 3 DP]

Not exactly about Nick, but as a parent of a severe peanut allergy case whose Dr suggested he not go to Fenway Park as a result, the article on Boston.com about the peanut free sections of Fenway really touched me. First class organization. Too bad they have an a-hole as the lead writer in the newspaper covering them.

 

[TheoShmeo]

This week's insight: the Cubs problem is that they haven't hired the entire Red Sox organization.

http://mobile.boston.com/art/52/sports/baseball/articles/2011/06/12/in_an_overhaul_cubs_should_try_to_put_sox_on/

And let's not overlook that the Cubbies weren't giving it their all in Boston, per Nicky.

Putting aside that it's virtually impossible to know such things (notwithstanding what the Drew haters tell us), they won the middle game with a late comeback and a very crooked number on the scoreboard. To the extent we can play carnac, the Cubs looked reasonably engaged while they were feasting on too much Bad Matt Albers.

 

[Kevin Jewkilis]

So basically do the front-office version of what McCourt tried to do on the field? Granted, his "assemble as many former Sox players as possible" teams did make the playoffs three times, but they didn't exactly look inspired getting swept by the Mets in the LDS and losing to the Phillies in 5 games in the NLCS twice.

 

[Yelling At Clouds]

The record will show that Cafardo does reference UZR in the column this week, which I'm guessing is a first.

 

[tims4wins]

From today's blog post

The Red Sox would love a 75 percent success rate on steals, but understand that may be unrealistic and not necessary.

Huh?!?! Ellsbury career coming into this year had a career 85% success rate. Crawford coming into this year had a career 82% success rate. So how the hell would a 75% success rate be "unrealistic"?? I for one wouldn't "love" a 75% success rate, especially with this offense. They need to be more successful than that to justify running a lot.

 

[Omar's Wacky Neighbor]

Huh?!?! Ellsbury career coming into this year had a career 85% success rate. Crawford coming into this year had a career 82% success rate. So how the hell would a 75% success rate be "unrealistic"?? I for one wouldn't "love" a 75% success rate, especially with this offense. They need to be more successful than that to justify running a lot.

Could Nick have meant from a defensive standpoint, and just forgotten to break it out?

 

[mt8thsw9th]

[quote name='Omar's Wacky Neighbor' timestamp='1308319954' post='3594898']
Could Nick have meant from a defensive standpoint, and just forgotten to break it out?
[/quote]

Is that you, Orsillo?

 

[tims4wins]

[quote name='Omar's Wacky Neighbor' timestamp='1308319954' post='3594898']
Could Nick have meant from a defensive standpoint, and just forgotten to break it out?
[/quote]
Uh, no. The entire section is about Ellsbury and running. Has nothing to do with catchers or defense.

 

[mt8thsw9th]

My favorite part of that blog post was this:

Ellsbury had an 11-game hitting streak snapped last night when he went 0-for-3 for which he was named AL Player of the Week.

I understand the 11 game hitting streak is part of the reason he was named AL Player of the Week, but it reads like he was named PotW for going 0-3 (or for having a hitting streak snapped).

 

[mt8thsw9th]

Heading into the 9th, Nick still hasn't updated the Globe's "live" since the 6th. Seriously, they can't get a college intern to do what he does? You can't find a smart baseball who can be ghost written for about $40,000 a year?

 

[Marciano490]

Heading into the 9th, Nick still hasn't updated the Globe's "live" since the 6th. Seriously, they can't get a college intern to do what he does? You can't find a smart baseball who can be ghost written for about $40,000 a year?

I mean this in good humor - but it looks like you've been reading too much Cafardo, and have begun writing like him. Of course, you're not being paid to write and this blog doesn't quite have the Globe's readership.

 

[tims4wins]

Nick with an article today about why the Sox should not play Gonzalez in the outfield. The main argument is that it puts Gonzalez in danger of injury.

Of course, Nick being Nick, he couldn't help but completely contradict himself with this passage:

baseball players can get injured at any time, doing anything. Gonzalez could get hurt while playing the outfield, just as he could get spiked by a runner at first base or pull a hamstring trying to leg out a triple

So, ummm, is it risky or not to play him in the outfield? I'm confused, Nick.