Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread
- Thread starter MyDaughterLovesTomGordon
- Start date
- Status
Nick is such a lazy sack of crap. Christina Kahrl wrote about 500 words on her choice.
http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/42166/my-al-manager-of-the-year-ballot-explained
Its easy to disagree with (especially the Showalter vote), but his passive-aggressive-sarcastic "we're sure they had a reason" should just get him kicked in the teeth, considering that about 80% of his writing this season seemed to have no reason at all behind it.
I'm guessing Nick's ballot was something like...
1. Bobby Valentine
2. Joe Girardi
3. Jason Bay
1. Bobby Valentine
2. Joe Girardi
3. Jason Bay
Nick on instant replay. Nick is sad.
If there were editors at the Globe they would say, "Nick, before we allow you to say something so fucking stupid in our newspaper as 'we will miss the mistakes that umpires make,' can you please go 'outside' and find one person -- just one, and by 'person' I mean someone breathing -- who will 'miss the mistakes.'"
have they really been around since the "game was invented"? My guess -- simply because Cafardo says they have been -- is that they have not been.
But "where does it end?" OHMYGOD, next thing you know, they're going to make batters wear helmets! And then, after that, they're going to add padding to the concrete outfield walls. And .... and ..... and ..... doctors!
And, FWIW (and I certainly may have missed it) has ANYONE seen ANYWHERE the mention of "lawyers threatening litigation" in the context of catchers, collisions and concussions. Once again, I'm going to assume that Nick pulled this out of his ample ass until proven otherwise.
Ironically, I dont think this last graf was actually written by a human.
If there were editors at the Globe they would say, "Nick, before we allow you to say something so fucking stupid in our newspaper as 'we will miss the mistakes that umpires make,' can you please go 'outside' and find one person -- just one, and by 'person' I mean someone breathing -- who will 'miss the mistakes.'"
Is it really that historic? Does the game really become "far less human?" is there anything MORE human than trying to get "it" (whatever "it" is) right?
have they really been around since the "game was invented"? My guess -- simply because Cafardo says they have been -- is that they have not been.
But "where does it end?" OHMYGOD, next thing you know, they're going to make batters wear helmets! And then, after that, they're going to add padding to the concrete outfield walls. And .... and ..... and ..... doctors!
And, FWIW (and I certainly may have missed it) has ANYONE seen ANYWHERE the mention of "lawyers threatening litigation" in the context of catchers, collisions and concussions. Once again, I'm going to assume that Nick pulled this out of his ample ass until proven otherwise.
Ironically, I dont think this last graf was actually written by a human.
Did he mean "devoid" of the technology?
And I've got to echo your point about "human mistakes" - is there anything more annoying than people whining about the umpires? Is that really what made the game real for Cafardo?
And I've got to echo your point about "human mistakes" - is there anything more annoying than people whining about the umpires? Is that really what made the game real for Cafardo?
I don't know about you guys, but I walked away from Game 6 of the World Series just a little bit disappointed that Jim Joyce didn't blow a single huge call in the entire game. It all felt sorta empty, you know?
joe dokes said:
I'm eternally grateful for the Fisk/Armbrister fuckup. Reminded me of the human element of the game, you know.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
And Knoblauch's "tag" on Offerman was a reaffirmation that all was right in the world.
The "we will long for the nostalgia of blown calls" premise is the single dumbest thing I have ever read from a sportswriter in my entire life.
joe dokes said:
Actually, Olney mention this the other day. In essence, he said that because baseball has acknowledged the correlation between collisions and concussions, he (Olney) had been told by a couple of lawyers with client-players that it sets MLB up for a potential lawsuit should they do nothing about the potential danger.
It's insider, but you get the gist. ... http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/buster-olney/post/_/id/3814
Has Nick now checked all the grumpy old lazy baseball sportswriter items in the list?
Human Element
Tradition
Loyalty to sources over facts
Conventional 'wisdom' over research
Irrational Yankees worship
Human Element
Tradition
Loyalty to sources over facts
Conventional 'wisdom' over research
Irrational Yankees worship
ifmanis5 said:
Not to mention lines like:
"Never thought so many of us who consider ourselves baseball purists"
"Those of us who have resisted change"
Who is this "us" exactly?
You must have missed all the articles after 2004 where sportswriters tried to argue that Red Sox fans will regret winning the World Series because now, "they are like every other team" and "don't have an identity".
It wouldn't surprise me if Cafardo was on that train.
I will say one thing about Cafardo's point and that's I really hate how over-officiated the NFL has become. It seems as if every single play is analyzed and reanalyzed and the game seems to go on a lot longer than it should. I also think that it sucks that there is now a space between the joy of a touchdown and the minute or so it has to be reviewed. It all seems very, I don't know the word here, antiseptic, like you can't be happy unless you are told by an official to be happy. I like spontaneity in my sports. I want instant replay in baseball very much, I think it sucks when something is so obvious (like Joyce's blown Galaraga call from a few years back) can easily be overturned. I just don't want it to turn into football.
Does anyone have access to the Globe archives from the 30s when Nick wrote about how much night baseball was going to suck?
Ahh, OK. This lawyer doesn't agree, but it *is* "out there."
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
But aren't you pretty sure that the touchdown you just saw *was* a touchdown about 99% of the time, leaving the review as a formality? Or, in the converse, I think most football fans know a close, potentially reversible, play when they see one.
JMOH,
I hear you on replay at times annoyingly taking a play to a microscopic degree. A guy gets rocked diving for a first down and fumbles, but it's ruled a non-fumble because one knee had juuuuuust barely touched the ground. I mean, that's an in-essence fumble for a century of football only now disallowed by the technology of a zoom lens and slow-mo.
And FWIW, football refs use replay to rule incomplete a sideline catch in which a receiver's toe is barely on the white but at the same time estimate the spot, leading to the difference between 4th- and-1 or a first down? Pretty silly.
But I hope the 2 wrong challenges limit will hold it down. They may largely be inclined to keep one in their pocket, which means they'll only waste our time about once a game fighting a correct call. Plus it may be faster than arguing with an ump anyway.
I hear you on replay at times annoyingly taking a play to a microscopic degree. A guy gets rocked diving for a first down and fumbles, but it's ruled a non-fumble because one knee had juuuuuust barely touched the ground. I mean, that's an in-essence fumble for a century of football only now disallowed by the technology of a zoom lens and slow-mo.
And FWIW, football refs use replay to rule incomplete a sideline catch in which a receiver's toe is barely on the white but at the same time estimate the spot, leading to the difference between 4th- and-1 or a first down? Pretty silly.
But I hope the 2 wrong challenges limit will hold it down. They may largely be inclined to keep one in their pocket, which means they'll only waste our time about once a game fighting a correct call. Plus it may be faster than arguing with an ump anyway.
"One hundred thousand years ago, a caveman was out hunting on the frozen wastes when he slipped and fell into a crevasse. In 1988, he was discovered by some scientists and thawed out. He then went to journalism school and became...Unfrozen Caveman Cafardo."
Yeah, I see where you're coming from and you're right that most of the time a TD is a TD is a TD. But it seems like overkill and it slows the game down. The last two seasons, NFL football games seem to have gotten longer and longer. There are more time outs, there are more review times, like I said the spontaneity is gone (I kinda liked when the Pats got away with a questionable TD and they'd hurry to get their field goal team out there to boot a kick before the other coach knew what to do). Maybe LeoCarillo said it better than I did for other plays. Joe Posnanski wrote a really good piece on the NFL and replays awhile ago and I can't seem to find it, but he put it even better -- maybe you might recall it.
Like I said, I agree very much with replay in MLB. It's been a long time coming and I'm glad it's here -- I'm not a fan of watching people make mistakes on a big stage and shrugging our shoulders and saying, "Human element!". But while we want everything to be as perfect as possible, there does come a point of diminishing returns where games are too long and something from our games is ultimately lost. Exactly what that is, I am not a good enough writer to say, but I think that football is losing it and I just hope that baseball doesn't too.
Whoops, fixed.E5 Yaz said:
Although, if I was Nick, I would say the spelling error is part of the human element and something we all will miss.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
NFL games take so long because they go to commercial after seemingly every fucking play. Touchdown -> go to commercial -> extra point -> go to commercial -> kickoff -> go to commercial*. The entire sequence feels like it takes 10 minutes and is an absolute fucking bore. To me, that's why football has become "antiseptic," because the game loses all sense of flow when that happens. It feels like it's become a game of fits and starts. That's also why going to the game is no longer worth it - you're just sitting there with your thumb up your ass, watching for the dude with the orange oven mitt throughout half the game.
Replay plays a part in it, to be sure (not all reviews need to take as long as they sometimes do). Maybe I'm in the minority, but the period in which they review a play doesn't take any enjoyment of the game. I just use it as an opportunity to take a leak and/or grab another beer, anyway.
Back on topic, Nick Cafardo is an idiot. On that, we can all agree.
Bosoxen said:
I agree with all of this. Replay isn't the problem in football. Another example, aside from the ones you mentioned about multiple commercials after every score, is that they'll go to commercial if there's a timeout even if it's like 30 seconds before the 2 minute warning or the end of the half. So you'll sit through 5 or 6 minutes of commercials to get 30 seconds of game time.
But yes, the more important issue here is that Cafardo is a moron.
glennhoffmania said:
Dont want to derail some good old Cafardo-analysis........but Some of that is a function of how many "natural" breaks there have already been in the half. Somewhere I read a breakdown of how many commercials the network is guaranteed to run -- and there's the local spots at :55 also -- each half; if they haven't got then in after scores and kickoffs, they start going to every change of possession and every timeout.
joe dokes said:
Ok but isn't this still an issue of how many commercials they decide to run? If they reduced the number there would be fewer instances when they have to squeeze more in if there aren't enough natural breaks. I know that will never happen because of the bottome line, but to me that's still a much bigger factor than how much time replays waste.
glennhoffmania said:
Yes. We are in heated agreement. Its been many years since I've been to an NFL game, but even 15-20 yrs ago I was stunned at the amount of sitting (me) and standing (players) around there was. And I'm sure its worse now as rights fees have multiplied.
(I was responding to the point about seemingly endless runs of commercials sometimes piling up after injury & timeout & change of possession & kickoff & TD & XPT & FG, etc. instead of just after some of them. )
A grown man who has been on the professional sports beat for 20+ years wrote this sentence without a trace of irony:
"If you could measure heart in dollars, Pedroia would be incredibly rich and Cano would pale in comparison."
Read that again. And once more. I don't know what else to say.
Basically, the first quarter of Cafardo's Baseball Notes piece is a hissy fit that Cano had the absolute gall to leave Scott Boras and go to Jay-Z. If there is any question where Cafardo is getting his scoops, it has been answered today. I wouldn't be shocked if Cafardo is on Boras' payroll, this whole piece was disgusting. Every week Cafardo sinks to a new level.
"If you could measure heart in dollars, Pedroia would be incredibly rich and Cano would pale in comparison."
Read that again. And once more. I don't know what else to say.
Basically, the first quarter of Cafardo's Baseball Notes piece is a hissy fit that Cano had the absolute gall to leave Scott Boras and go to Jay-Z. If there is any question where Cafardo is getting his scoops, it has been answered today. I wouldn't be shocked if Cafardo is on Boras' payroll, this whole piece was disgusting. Every week Cafardo sinks to a new level.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
And nowhere does he say the only thing that might be relevant....that Cano will end up with less money than he would have if Boras was his agent. He writes like it matters that he "asked for " 300M. Two guys walk into a GM's room. One says, "I wan't 200 million. The G says, "great, we have a deal." The other says, "I want a milllion billion dollars." The GM sys, "we only have 200M." The player says, "OK, we have a deal." In the high-school cafeteria that is Nick Cafardo's mind, the first player is "better off" because Nick's friends aren't sying bad things about him.
John Marzano Olympic Hero said:
And I know I'm probably preaching to the choir, but ... short, "scrappy", white guy versus taller, more athletic-looking black guy.
I'm also not sure what world we are living in where Dustin Pedroia isn't considered "incredibly rich".
I'm also not sure what world we are living in where Dustin Pedroia isn't considered "incredibly rich".
Maybe in the Land of Rich, Tiny Famous Dudes, in which case Pedroia's $30-odd million in career earnings trails well behind Tom Cruise, DeVito, Dustin Hoffman, Prince and Flea.
He's still gotta be ahead of Dinklage though.
Maybe in the Land of Rich, Tiny Famous Dudes, in which case Pedroia's $30-odd million in career earnings trails well behind Tom Cruise, DeVito, Dustin Hoffman, Prince and Flea.
He's still gotta be ahead of Dinklage though.
I love this:
STORM BREWING?
David Ortiz’s comments may be the first signal
David Ortiz looks like he could easily play another two years, given the way he’s hitting. But you wonder if his comments at a news conference in the Dominican Republic last week might escalate into something the Red Sox dearly want to avoid — a contract dispute.
When Ortiz signed a two-year contract last winter, there was mutual agreement not to open up talks until the end of that deal, according to a major league source. Of course, Ortiz overcame heel issues to have one of the best offensive seasons in baseball. And he topped it off with an amazing postseason, being named World Series MVP.
Ortiz has become a better pure hitter as he’s gotten older. He rarely gets fooled and is one of the best guess hitters in the game because he can think along with the pitcher. It hasn’t reached the point of Barry Bonds, who was the greatest hitter in the game with the Giants, seeing perhaps one good pitch per at-bat and driving it out of the ballpark.
“He’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Bonds in a long time,” said one National League GM. “And I don’t mean steroids or PEDs or anything like that. I mean from a pure hitter and being the imposing figure he is. He’s an imposing guy. He’s scary at the plate in big situations. Right there with Miguel Cabrera. When you have a guy like this who excels in that role and is a devastating middle-of-the-order hitter still at his age, that’s quite an asset for the Red Sox.”
So, is Ortiz underpaid?
He may be. Any agreement not to reopen talks can be broken, but it doesn’t appear the Sox want to do that. Ortiz is feeling good about himself and he understands that at age 38, he’s going to have to agree to shorter contracts.
“You always think of Big Papi as a Red Sox and that he’ll always re-sign with them,” said the GM. “If he has another great season in 2014 and he’s out there as a free agent, teams will take their shot.’’
Uhhh...care to tell us what Ortiz said in the DR last week, Nick? Or was Alta Vista just down when you were on deadline?
STORM BREWING?
David Ortiz’s comments may be the first signal
David Ortiz looks like he could easily play another two years, given the way he’s hitting. But you wonder if his comments at a news conference in the Dominican Republic last week might escalate into something the Red Sox dearly want to avoid — a contract dispute.
When Ortiz signed a two-year contract last winter, there was mutual agreement not to open up talks until the end of that deal, according to a major league source. Of course, Ortiz overcame heel issues to have one of the best offensive seasons in baseball. And he topped it off with an amazing postseason, being named World Series MVP.
Ortiz has become a better pure hitter as he’s gotten older. He rarely gets fooled and is one of the best guess hitters in the game because he can think along with the pitcher. It hasn’t reached the point of Barry Bonds, who was the greatest hitter in the game with the Giants, seeing perhaps one good pitch per at-bat and driving it out of the ballpark.
“He’s the closest thing I’ve seen to Bonds in a long time,” said one National League GM. “And I don’t mean steroids or PEDs or anything like that. I mean from a pure hitter and being the imposing figure he is. He’s an imposing guy. He’s scary at the plate in big situations. Right there with Miguel Cabrera. When you have a guy like this who excels in that role and is a devastating middle-of-the-order hitter still at his age, that’s quite an asset for the Red Sox.”
So, is Ortiz underpaid?
He may be. Any agreement not to reopen talks can be broken, but it doesn’t appear the Sox want to do that. Ortiz is feeling good about himself and he understands that at age 38, he’s going to have to agree to shorter contracts.
“You always think of Big Papi as a Red Sox and that he’ll always re-sign with them,” said the GM. “If he has another great season in 2014 and he’s out there as a free agent, teams will take their shot.’’
Uhhh...care to tell us what Ortiz said in the DR last week, Nick? Or was Alta Vista just down when you were on deadline?
As far as I can tell, this is the entirety of the AP report on which that is based:
"SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic (AP) Slugger David Ortiz says he hopes to renew his contract with the Boston Red Sox for another year.
The 38-year-old said in a news conference Wednesday in the Dominican Republic that he will keep playing as long as he feels physically healthy."
"SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic (AP) Slugger David Ortiz says he hopes to renew his contract with the Boston Red Sox for another year.
The 38-year-old said in a news conference Wednesday in the Dominican Republic that he will keep playing as long as he feels physically healthy."
Seriously, what the hell kind of reporting is that? I've tried not to pile on the guy here, but a report like that is so pathetically amateur, it almost boggles the mind.
And here is that same story on the Globe's website with this at the bottom
"Nick Cafardo of the Globe Staff contributed"
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/11/21/david-ortiz-wants-contract-extended/Lc2SkiMY9ms8cRw29z1KnL/story.html
"Nick Cafardo of the Globe Staff contributed"
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/11/21/david-ortiz-wants-contract-extended/Lc2SkiMY9ms8cRw29z1KnL/story.html
I can only imagine Cafardo's response to finding out Deadspin has covertly acquired a Hall of Fame vote. I don't know why that was my first thought, but I thought it.
http://deadspin.com/deadspin-buys-hall-of-fame-vote-will-turn-it-over-to-d-1467003665?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
http://deadspin.com/deadspin-buys-hall-of-fame-vote-will-turn-it-over-to-d-1467003665?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
He uses this ploy often; it's a way of building future content for his Sunday rumor column without actually having to do any work. Ortiz's "comment" this week will be bonafied tension between Ortiz and the front office in coming columns. Just like a few weeks ago where he said that Trumbo could be a fit in Boston to his latest column where he says "The Sox, who have an interest in first baseman Mike Trumbo".
In fact that whole blurb is asinine:
The Red Sox, who have an interest in Trumbo, which could mean anything from they want to trade the farm for him to Larry Lucchino likes the was his butt looks in jeans, will now forgo trading for him because, clearly, the Angels won't trade Trumbo unless they get a 3B back. And, what's that?!??! Out of left field comes power reliever Kevin Jepsen who MIGHT just might have the same seductive power of Mark Trumbo in a pair of Wranglers. However, the cost is steep. If the Red Sox do end up becoming tempted by Jepsen prepare to have to give up a starting pitcher, Ben Cherington.
Thanks, Nick!
In fact that whole blurb is asinine:
The Red Sox, who have an interest in Trumbo, which could mean anything from they want to trade the farm for him to Larry Lucchino likes the was his butt looks in jeans, will now forgo trading for him because, clearly, the Angels won't trade Trumbo unless they get a 3B back. And, what's that?!??! Out of left field comes power reliever Kevin Jepsen who MIGHT just might have the same seductive power of Mark Trumbo in a pair of Wranglers. However, the cost is steep. If the Red Sox do end up becoming tempted by Jepsen prepare to have to give up a starting pitcher, Ben Cherington.
Thanks, Nick!
On MLBN he just said Ellsbury was "by far Boston's most popular player, even more so than David Ortiz."
- Status