Protecting the Shields -- The Nick Cafardo Thread

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

He has simply become irrelevant. I don't even follow him on Twitter anymore. I guess this is a semi-serious question: has he legitimately broken any trade deadline news or offered significant insight this year? His not even ever mentioning the Royals as a team vying for Cueto was particularly telling

 
I'm not sure exactly where he gets his scoops from, but I can't remember him breaking anything this year. He may have, but I don't recall it. 
 
He usually clucks his tongue at the Sox for something inconsequential (like not getting Cole Hamels) or tilts at windmills (WTF is up with defensive shifts?) or is a mouthpiece for assholes like Scott Boras. Say what you want about Peter Abraham or Alex Speier or even John Tomase, but at least they *try* at their jobs. Cafardo waddles around, talks to his friends and then writes it as fact in the next day's newspaper. Or exactly what I used to do when I worked for my high school newspaper. 
 
I wouldn't be surprised to read "Homework stinks!" as Nick's next story lede. 

 

[LeoCarrillo]

As long as he's been around, Cafardo is obviously in the Globe newspaper guild and thus pretty much fire-proof. His editors know he sucks, I'm sure.

 

[Corsi]

 
I'm not sure exactly where he gets his scoops from 

Baskin-Robins

 

[Humphrey]

As long as he's been around, Cafardo is obviously in the Globe newspaper guild and thus pretty much fire-proof. His editors know he sucks, I'm sure.

There is another Globe buyout in the coming months.   We can only hope Nick takes advantage of the offer.

 

[RedSox040713]

Cafardo on NESN complaining about how the Red Sox didn't get Hamels. Shocking I know

 

[timlinin8th]

Cafardo on NESN complaining about how the Red Sox didn't get Hamels. Shocking I know

Because that would have been the difference-maker on this season.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Cafardo on NESN complaining about how the Red Sox didn't get Hamels. Shocking I know

 
Past performance is no guarantee of future results, but Nick's exactly the type of guy to glom on to Hamels' 8-15, 4.73 ERA record versus the American League and hammer him for that, so it all depends on whether Nick likes the player.
 
If Hamels stinks it up for Texas, will Nick then revert to the "Well we know he would have pitched better here" argument? Can't wait to find out!

 

[timlinin8th]

If Hamels stinks it up for Texas, will Nick then revert to the "Well we know he would have pitched better here" argument? Can't wait to find out!

"File this one under 'what could have been'- the Red Sox clearly missed in not picking up Cole Hamels, but could Hamels have also benefitted more had he been traded to a veteran team like Boston?"

 

[yecul]

I would say this is a case of chasing the White Whale, but I don't want to be accused of attacking him.

 

[Laser Show]

"File this one under 'what could have been'- the Red Sox clearly missed in not picking up Cole Hamels, but could Hamels have also benefitted more had he been traded to a veteran team like Boston?"

This is so well done that I thought this was an actual quote from him since I first read it like half an hour ago. God he's awful.

 

[nattysez]

Cafardo today is special.  Let's see for whom he's carrying water:
 

The Red Sox also seemed to run better when Theo Epstein and Cherington were truly under Larry Lucchino as opposed to the last two years when Cherington had free reign. The Red Sox ran best when Lucchino empowered the late Bill Lajoie and Jeremy Kapstein to make the deal to acquire Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell for Hanley Ramirez, Anibal Sanchez, and two relievers a deal that led to the 2007 World Series championship.
 

 
So the Sox were best-run when they had interim co-GMs?  This is pretty clear water-carrying for Kapstein.
 
Nick then lists 8 guys who could Director of Baseball Ops.  You get one guess to name number 8 on the list.  Your hint is that it's shocking he's so low.
 
 
8. J.P Ricciardi, assistant GM, Mets He has run the Blue Jays and put a lot of draft picks in the major leagues. Been part of the Mets success on pitcher evaluations. Local guy (Worcester).

He also thinks Jim Bowden is a viable candidate.  Wow.

 

[Snoop Soxy Dogg]

Pretty easy to surmise who are Cafardo's industry sources from his silly lists. The funniest thing with Bowden is the reason given - "His ESPN columns offer outstanding commentary on player personnel matters."
 
Also funny the emphasis on local roots; so and so is from Worcester, or from Wellesley, etc. That's like a major differential in Cafardo's mind.

 

[Corsi]

"Will the Red Sox hire a Director of Baseball Ops from the New England area? Or will they hire someone from outside the region to give them a different look?"

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

"Perhaps now is the time to bring back Bobby Valentine in a more senior role. The Sox need someone with the foresight to hire a forward-thinking pitching coach like Rick Peterson, who would have this staff in shape in no time. Would Ben Cherington bristle under the leadership of someone he so recently oversaw? With two more last-place finishes on his resume, it's fair to wonder if it wasn't Cherington who was the problem in 2012, not Valentine."

 

[martybarrettoverdrive]

"Perhaps now is the time to bring back Bobby Valentine in a more senior role. The Sox need someone with the foresight to hire a forward-thinking pitching coach like Rick Peterson, who would have this staff in shape in no time. Would Ben Cherington bristle under the leadership of someone he so recently oversaw? With two more last-place finishes on his resume, it's fair to wonder if it wasn't Cherington who was the problem in 2012, not Valentine."

 
Wait, is this well-done satire or an actual quote? My respect for Cafardo is so low that I'm honestly asking for this clarification.

 

[ifmanis5]

Today Cafardo has been officially replaced by trolling code written by Corsi. Tomorrow we will see a call for the return of all around good guy Jason Bay in some capacity. Sure, he's not a local boy, but he's a nice guy who talks to Nick so he's got what it takes.

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

Made it up. But I wouldn't put it past him. 

 

[tomdeplonty]

Made it up.

 
Bravo, sir.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Nick asks today, in the wake of the Napoli trade, why the Red Sox didn't try to keep the 2013 World Champs together.
 
They did, you nimrod, except for your precious binky Stephen Drew, and they brought him back anyway, and they all got old and injured and less effective and finished last in 2014 because of that.
 
He's like my 5 year old, who asks the same questions over and over even though the answer is obvious and has already been given. Christ what a stupid man he is.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Nick asks today, in the wake of the Napoli trade, why the Red Sox didn't try to keep the 2013 World Champs together.
 
They did, you nimrod, except for your precious binky Stephen Drew, and they brought him back anyway, and they all got old and injured and less effective and finished last in 2014 because of that.
 
He's like my 5 year old, who asks the same questions over and over even though the answer is obvious and has already been given. Christ what a stupid man he is.

 
I'm not going to seek out the article to find out, but did he harp on them letting Ellsbury and Salty walk too, because those were the most significant changes from 2013 to 2014.  If he's making his case on just Drew, wow.  Just wow.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

No, he was talking about the free agents signed heading into the 2013 season (Vic, Ross, Napoli, Drew, Dempster, Koji, Gomes). He was noting that of that group, only Koji is left, and he then says, in a one sentence paragraph:
 

Why the 2013 gang didn't stay together is anyone's guess.
 

 
 
I mean, really? The answer is obvious, and he goes on to note right away that Dempster immediately retired.
 
The rest is a paean to the likes of Drew and Ross and Napoli.
 
He's a fuckwit.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

No, he was talking about the free agents signed heading into the 2013 season (Vic, Ross, Napoli, Drew, Dempster, Koji, Gomes). He was noting that of that group, only Koji is left, and he then says, in a one sentence paragraph:
 
 
 
I mean, really? The answer is obvious, and he goes on to note right away that Dempster immediately retired.
 
The rest is a paean to the likes of Drew and Ross and Napoli.
 
He's a fuckwit.

He didn't really write that did he? Holy shit. That's bad. Even for him.

 

[ifmanis5]

I refuse to Google for examples but I'm nearly positive that Nick said the same things in 2006 about the 2004 team and in 2010 about the 2007 team. He just doesn't get it that time moves on and good players get worse as they age (and demand more money), so keeping the band together isn't necessarily the best option. However, it's not surprising that he's missing this fact since Nick probably thinks that he's still the same good reporter that he was in 1989.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

The worst is that he seems to be surprised that all those 2013 signees are gone, when ALL of them were on short-term deals in 2013 in the first place.  If they hadn't re-signed Nap after the 2013 season and Koji this past winter, Victorino would have been the last man standing from that "class" this year anyway.
 
Maybe Nick still longs for the days of the reserve clause and indentured servitude.

 

[Humphrey]

I refuse to Google for examples but I'm nearly positive that Nick said the same things in 2006 about the 2004 team and in 2010 about the 2007 team. He just doesn't get it that time moves on and good players get worse as they age (and demand more money), so keeping the band together isn't necessarily the best option. However, it's not surprising that he's missing this fact since Nick probably thinks that he's still the same good reporter that he was in 1989.

He definitely said that about the 2004 team.   Didn't matter to him that Foulke was toast, Pedro wasn't Pedro much longer; Mueller had to retire after 32 games in 2006...just to name a few off the top of my head.    Remember him saying it on tv, made my blood boil.
 
Today's Ortiz remark pissed me off too.  
 
"David Ortiz is performing well in garbage time after vanishing when it mattered most."

 

[Granite Sox]

Nick is big on building teams and retaining talent based on past performance as opposed to future performance.

 

[RedOctober3829]

I don't have access to the Globe but the redsoxstats Twitter account tweeted this as being in the Sunday Notes.
 
Sure, let's trade for Matt Harvey, sign David Price, acquire Chapman.  What a tool.
 
https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/630265610824470528

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

I haven't commented on his Notes column in awhile because it's not worth it anymore. But this week's was a new level in idiocy.

Lee Mazzilli tells great stories, if the nerds weren't in charge of baseball, he'd be hired.

Tommy Harper is a great coach. Don't believe me? Ask Jacoby Ellsbury. You know because everyone can do that.

Trade Xander Bogaerts for Matt Harvey. Win-wi for everyone!

This was like a complete troll job by Cafardo.

 

[Dummy Hoy]

Those off season plans are amazing. The "acquire" Chapman (or some other guys that aren't half the reliever he isn't) is awesome enough, but the last one is my favorite.

"Hey, Artie, how are you? Listen, I have a 32 year old second baseman with injury issues...maybe I could exchange him for your young, cost controlled starter who show some legit upside?"

"Click"

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Plus there are about 12 notes on Yankees players or their org today. "Wouldn't it be great if Trump owned the Yankees? He'd be just like Steinbrenner!" Christ Nick, keep it in your pants.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

Plus there are about 12 notes on Yankees players or their org today. "Wouldn't it be great if Trump owned the Yankees? He'd be just like Steinbrenner!" Christ Nick, keep it in your pants.

Seriously, that's exactly what baseball needs another George Steinbrenner. Only this one is louder and dumber.

Furthermore I'm sure MLB would be pumped to give its signature franchise to Trump.

 

[jacklamabe65]

Seriously, that's exactly what baseball needs another George Steinbrenner. Only this one is louder and dumber.

Furthermore I'm sure MLB would be pumped to give its signature franchise to Trump.

See Trump in Four Days in October. Mind-numbingly dumb.

 

[Corsi]

Cafardo is the type of oaf that would trade Xander for a pitcher and then bitch that the front office hasn't been able to develop a long-term shortstop.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Nick Cafardo ‏@nickcafardo  4h4 hours ago
The minimum-salaried John Lackey goes for his 11th straight quality start today.

 

[E5 Yaz]

Okay, I've now read the column and it's not as bad as portrayed. By that I mean these are not all Cafardo's ideas -- they're presented as what others around baseball have suggested on ways to improve the Red Sox. None as written as point blank as in the tweet that started this discussion.
 
For instance, Cafardo points out the downside of trading X, and says he would be against the idea of trading Pedroia. He recognizes that Price might not want to sign with the Red Sox, and says about Chapman that his sources say the Red Sox have the pieces for a deal.
 
In short, the tweet misrepresented how he column was written.
 
Not that Cafardo has clean hands in this -- he did write the thing -- but it's not as black and white as presented. And, meanwhile, he did take this cheap shot:
 
"David Ortiz is performing well in garbage time after vanishing when it mattered most."

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

But the problem of just saying "Well those aren't Nick's ideas" is that Nick does zero critical thinking on any of those idea. Trade X for Harvey? Why would either team do that? He got a lot of stuff that was just flinging shit against a wall and presented it to us in that form instead of trying to provide context/insight/clarification on any of it.
 
In short and as usual, it was completely useless garbage.

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

But the problem of just saying "Well those aren't Nick's ideas" is that Ncik does zero critical thinking on any of those idea. Trade X for Harvey? Why would either team do that? He got a lot of stuff that was just flinging shit against a wall and presented it to us in that form instead of trying to provide context/insight/clarification on any of it.
 
In short and as usual, it was completely useless garbage.

 
SJH is correct. People give reporters shitty ideas all of the time, a big part of their job is to separate the crap from the good stuff (which I know you know, E5). I mean if Cafardo is going to just publish a bunch of things his friends say, what's the point of having him write? Skip the middle man, title the column "Shit Scouts Say" and be done with it. 
 
Cafardo is supposed to be their national baseball writer and if a scout says, "Hey maybe the Sox should trade Xander to the Mets for Matt Harvey" and not really investigate what that would mean to Boston AND the Mets is just lazy writing. And to couch it with a "A scout friend of mine says" or "Just an idea!" is worthless. Because you know what, if you go down that road it might be an interesting story. How many position players are traded straight up for pitchers? How many young position players are traded straight up for young pitchers? We know the Mets have a pretty good rotation and might be able to withstand the loss of Harvey, but how about the Sox are the guys in the minors ready to take Xander's spot? Would they be as good or better? Does it matter? Maybe it doesn't, the Red Sox have won three World Series with three different shortstops who have been good but no one would say they were elite. The last elite shortstop was Garciaparra and they didn't win shit with him (though not his fault). 
 
Like most Cafardo thoughts, there is a kernel of a good story there but he never brings it out.
 
Same thing with the Chapman thing. Are the Sox looking for a closer? What would they give up for him? It's probably going to be a lot, is it worth it? And the Price thing, holy shit you can write 20 inches on him potentially signing here and why he won't: him and David Ortiz apparently hate each other. You don't even have to use new fangled numbers, just write about intangibles and clubhouse bullshit and crap like that. I mean, it would be a terrible story, but at least it's an effort. 
 
But the Lee Mazzilli thing was useless. Fuck that dude. 

 

[soxfan121]

If we can't shit on Nick for repeating the stupid things others tell him, we might as well shut this down and tell JP Riccardi and Jim Bowden we no longer value their insight.

 

[JayMags71]

But the Lee Mazzilli thing was useless. Fuck that dude.

Seriously. Lee Mazzilli could be the greatest thing Connie Mack (evidence obviously suggests otherwise), and I still wouldn't watch a single game were the Sox to hire him.

 

[E5 Yaz]

But the problem of just saying "Well those aren't Nick's ideas" is that Nick does zero critical thinking on any of those idea. Trade X for Harvey? Why would either team do that? He got a lot of stuff that was just flinging shit against a wall and presented it to us in that form instead of trying to provide context/insight/clarification on any of it.
 
In short and as usual, it was completely useless garbage.

 
That's not what I wrote.
 
I wrote that Cafardo collected these thoughts from others. I even pointed out examples where he disagreed with what those sources suggested. And I wrote that he bares some responsibility for bringing these to light ("Not that Cafardo has clean hands in this -- he did write the thing").
 
You took one aspect of my post -- that these weren't solely Cafardo's ideas -- as if I failed to put it into any context ... which I had. ("By that I mean these are not all Cafardo's ideas -- they're presented as what others around baseball have suggested on ways to improve the Red Sox. None as written as point blank as in the tweet that started this discussion.")
 
I don't mind being called out, but to simplify what I was saying without the context in which I had written it isn't the way to do it.
 
edit: The intial point still stands. The tweet that launched this discussion read "The Globe's plan to fix the Boston Red Sox," which was misleading. This wasn't Cafardo's or the Globe's plan, and it listed all those bullet points as though they were all part of a single plan. They weren't.

 

[Don Buddin's GS]

See Trump in Four Days in October. Mind-numbingly dumb.

"The Yankees are the Yankees and George is a winner."

How'd that work out for SiaS, eh Donnie boy?

Fuck the both of you toolbags.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

 
That's not what I wrote.
 
I wrote that Cafardo collected these thoughts from others. I even pointed out examples where he disagreed with what those sources suggested. And I wrote that he bares some responsibility for bringing these to light ("Not that Cafardo has clean hands in this -- he did write the thing").
 
You took one aspect of my post -- that these weren't solely Cafardo's ideas -- as if I failed to put it into any context ... which I had. ("By that I mean these are not all Cafardo's ideas -- they're presented as what others around baseball have suggested on ways to improve the Red Sox. None as written as point blank as in the tweet that started this discussion.")
 
I don't mind being called out, but to simplify what I was saying without the context in which I had written it isn't the way to do it.

 
You didn't mention the most important thing about Cafardo's column: HE DOESN'T PROCESS THE THOUGHTS HE GATHERS INTO ANY TYPE OF CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS.

 

[E5 Yaz]

 
You didn't mention the most important thing about Cafardo's column: HE DOESN'T PROCESS THE THOUGHTS HE GATHERS INTO ANY TYPE OF CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS.

 
Of course he doesn't. He's Nick Cafardo. That's a given. But it's like saying "Elephants can't fly" every time we see an elephant.
 
But my initial response was to separate what was in Cafardo's column from the way it was presented in the tweet that started the discussion. The lack of value in the column is a given.

 

[Humphrey]

JP was only third on Nick's list of GM candidates.  

 

[soxhop411]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/08/27/ask-nick-what-will-red-sox-outfield-look-like/xqgDF0ymQqMskIIrlR2OML/story.html?event=event25

That was a question to NICK

 

[John Marzano Olympic Hero]

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/08/27/ask-nick-what-will-red-sox-outfield-look-like/xqgDF0ymQqMskIIrlR2OML/story.html?event=event25

That was a question to NICK

People are idiots. Speaking of, what did Cafardo say?

 

[soxhop411]

People are idiots. Speaking of, what did Cafardo say?

Would definitely like to see restrictions on the jewelry and Hanley’s dreadlocks. It is distracting. When Hanley’s helmet falls off after each swing, c’mon, someone needs to say something. The Yankees do it right and always have. Very professional organization. Red Sox need to have a dress code on the field. Maybe that will change with Dombrowski in charge.

 

[Hendu for Kutch]

Would definitely like to see restrictions on the jewelry and Hanley’s dreadlocks. It is distracting. When Hanley’s helmet falls off after each swing, c’mon, someone needs to say something. The Yankees do it right and always have. Very professional organization. Red Sox need to have a dress code on the field. Maybe that will change with Dombrowski in charge.

 
Yep Nick, that was why we finally beat them in 2004.  At long last we finally had a well-dressed respectful group of young men that could out-professional the Yankees.
 
You all remember that, right?  2013...now that was a snazzy bunch too.

 

[tomdeplonty]

But they're losing, so presumably they should be playing in their funeral suits, wearing appropriately somber expressions at all times.

 

[HriniakPosterChild]

And they should start the games with "work ball," not "play ball."