Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    Nick Cafardo is a gasbag

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from djcbuffum. Show djcbuffum's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    This particular mailbag was not so bad, but he often dodges questions which I find frustrating.  If you don't want to answer a question, why publish it in the first place?  He also tends to give off-the-cuff answers based on conventional wisdom, instead of researching players or stats, or talking to management, and giving hard facts.  

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    Nothing sugar-coated, that's for sure. I think the sentiment he has applies to 90% of the fans. The other 10% are on this forum.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Nothing sugar-coated, that's for sure. I think the sentiment he has applies to 90% of the fans. The other 10% are on this forum.

    [/QUOTE]

    Um, maybe we read different mailbags.  Can you link me to the one you read?  The one I read basically said "lets reserve judgement until we see this team play".  Which is exactly what i think, though I know you would put me in the 10% of Georom's bootlickers.  

    Very true.  He didn't sugar-coat anything.  However, he falls well short of the sort of ludicrous one-dimensional trashing you have given Cherrington.   

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    Space..Cherry is badnews, laughable incomptent bad...your sense of loyalty simply refuses to say it aloud

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to georom4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Space..Cherry is badnews, laughable incomptent bad...your sense of loyalty simply refuses to say it aloud

    [/QUOTE]

    No.  My loyalty has nothing to do with it.  Though it is an aspect of my thinking, admittedly, that does keep me pointed toward the possible positives.  I do not like the Drew signing one bit.  But, I can see very clearly what Cherrington is trying to do.  And i think it is the correct path.  We are all just gambling with ideas.  but, i am not putting my idea chips in on Grienke.  Sorry, i just think he is going to be about CJ Wilson class with the odd gem start.  I just do not see the point in taking all the freed up capital in the Dodger trade and throwing it right back into long term very expensive contracts, especially ones that come with such inherent risks.  Grienke is a good pitcher.  But the only reason he got that fat of a pay-day is that this particular free agent pitching market is weeeeak.  And Hamilton.  never mind the substance abuse.  I just doubt he can stay on the field.  And for 5 years at 25 mil a year i want a guy who is a good bet for 150+ games.  Cherrington is abviously of this mind too.  So he gives you what you have been crying for:  non-diva, good soldiers with short deals so the blue chips have a chance to shine.  Not only that, but he is holding the chips for a year or two down the line when there is actually reason to blow ridiculous money on the FA market.  

    Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Lester and Buchholz will find their good form again.  Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Ellsbury, Victorino, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli (assuming he is on the club), Middlebrooks, Salty, Drew, Gomes/Kalish is actually a pretty darn solid lineup.  Yes, my loyalty loves the way the pen is shaping up.  

    But my loyalty has nothing to do with agreeing with the way Cherrington has approached this off-season, if not his player evaluations.  This is the way that I wanted him to do it.  I just wanted McCarthy instead of Dempster.  I agree with his patient, non-reactionary apporach.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    all that he has done is "reactionary"

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    all that he has done is "reactionary"

    [/QUOTE]


    hardly. hes had since august to plan what he wanted to do. after that its just a matter of waiting for the pieces to fall and the market to be defined and adjusting from there.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    all that he has done is "reactionary"

    [/QUOTE]

    Well, I stand corrected.  But, not in my stance.  Only my verbiage.  Reactionary is the wrong word.  How about his "patient, non-reckless" approach.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    Yes it sounds like Napoli is going to be a big assett on the field. Can't wait to see how mobile he is.

    Napoli was  a name that fans and media and some in the FO have been clamoring for for years.... so Ben ran out and got him with complete disregard for the obviouse, he isn't any good.  Never healthy, never.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to EnchiladaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yes it sounds like Napoli is going to be a big assett on the field. Can't wait to see how mobile he is.

    [/QUOTE]

    Fair enough.  Napoli was going to be pretty bad at first, even with a good hip.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    No.  My loyalty has nothing to do with it.  Though it is an aspect of my thinking, admittedly, that does keep me pointed toward the possible positives.  I do not like the Drew signing one bit.  But, I can see very clearly what Cherrington is trying to do.  And i think it is the correct path.  We are all just gambling with ideas.  but, i am not putting my idea chips in on Grienke.  Sorry, i just think he is going to be about CJ Wilson class with the odd gem start.  I just do not see the point in taking all the freed up capital in the Dodger trade and throwing it right back into long term very expensive contracts, especially ones that come with such inherent risks.  Grienke is a good pitcher.  But the only reason he got that fat of a pay-day is that this particular free agent pitching market is weeeeak.  And Hamilton.  never mind the substance abuse.  I just doubt he can stay on the field.  And for 5 years at 25 mil a year i want a guy who is a good bet for 150+ games.  Cherrington is abviously of this mind too.  So he gives you what you have been crying for:  non-diva, good soldiers with short deals so the blue chips have a chance to shine.  Not only that, but he is holding the chips for a year or two down the line when there is actually reason to blow ridiculous money on the FA market.  

    Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Lester and Buchholz will find their good form again.  Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Ellsbury, Victorino, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli (assuming he is on the club), Middlebrooks, Salty, Drew, Gomes/Kalish is actually a pretty darn solid lineup.  Yes, my loyalty loves the way the pen is shaping up.  

    But my loyalty has nothing to do with agreeing with the way Cherrington has approached this off-season, if not his player evaluations.  This is the way that I wanted him to do it.  I just wanted McCarthy instead of Dempster.  I agree with his patient, non-reactionary apporach.

    [/QUOTE]

    I only disgree with your view of the Drew signing.  Last winter, dumping $6m of Scutaro's salary made sense, enabling them to play a better SS and to add a few small pieces that all worked out well.  This year?  It seems very unlikely that there is the available talent out there to be a concern vis a vis the threshhold, so why is his salary an issue?  One year and out, with luck a year in excess of his salary and a draft pick to boot.  If he can't come back, what's the issue?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No.  My loyalty has nothing to do with it.  Though it is an aspect of my thinking, admittedly, that does keep me pointed toward the possible positives.  I do not like the Drew signing one bit.  But, I can see very clearly what Cherrington is trying to do.  And i think it is the correct path.  We are all just gambling with ideas.  but, i am not putting my idea chips in on Grienke.  Sorry, i just think he is going to be about CJ Wilson class with the odd gem start.  I just do not see the point in taking all the freed up capital in the Dodger trade and throwing it right back into long term very expensive contracts, especially ones that come with such inherent risks.  Grienke is a good pitcher.  But the only reason he got that fat of a pay-day is that this particular free agent pitching market is weeeeak.  And Hamilton.  never mind the substance abuse.  I just doubt he can stay on the field.  And for 5 years at 25 mil a year i want a guy who is a good bet for 150+ games.  Cherrington is abviously of this mind too.  So he gives you what you have been crying for:  non-diva, good soldiers with short deals so the blue chips have a chance to shine.  Not only that, but he is holding the chips for a year or two down the line when there is actually reason to blow ridiculous money on the FA market.  

    Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Lester and Buchholz will find their good form again.  Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Ellsbury, Victorino, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli (assuming he is on the club), Middlebrooks, Salty, Drew, Gomes/Kalish is actually a pretty darn solid lineup.  Yes, my loyalty loves the way the pen is shaping up.  

    But my loyalty has nothing to do with agreeing with the way Cherrington has approached this off-season, if not his player evaluations.  This is the way that I wanted him to do it.  I just wanted McCarthy instead of Dempster.  I agree with his patient, non-reactionary apporach.

    [/QUOTE]

    I only disgree with your view of the Drew signing.  Last winter, dumping $6m of Scutaro's salary made sense, enabling them to play a better SS and to add a few small pieces that all worked out well.  This year?  It seems very unlikely that there is the available talent out there to be a concern vis a vis the threshhold, so why is his salary an issue?  One year and out, with luck a year in excess of his salary and a draft pick to boot.  If he can't come back, what's the issue?

    [/QUOTE]

    True enough Sonics.  I have no problem with the contract.  I guess my Sox-heart just has a huge place for Yankee-killer Ciriaco, so I didn't see the need.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    No.  My loyalty has nothing to do with it.  Though it is an aspect of my thinking, admittedly, that does keep me pointed toward the possible positives.  I do not like the Drew signing one bit.  But, I can see very clearly what Cherrington is trying to do.  And i think it is the correct path.  We are all just gambling with ideas.  but, i am not putting my idea chips in on Grienke.  Sorry, i just think he is going to be about CJ Wilson class with the odd gem start.  I just do not see the point in taking all the freed up capital in the Dodger trade and throwing it right back into long term very expensive contracts, especially ones that come with such inherent risks.  Grienke is a good pitcher.  But the only reason he got that fat of a pay-day is that this particular free agent pitching market is weeeeak.  And Hamilton.  never mind the substance abuse.  I just doubt he can stay on the field.  And for 5 years at 25 mil a year i want a guy who is a good bet for 150+ games.  Cherrington is abviously of this mind too.  So he gives you what you have been crying for:  non-diva, good soldiers with short deals so the blue chips have a chance to shine.  Not only that, but he is holding the chips for a year or two down the line when there is actually reason to blow ridiculous money on the FA market.  

    Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Lester and Buchholz will find their good form again.  Yes, my loyalty has me thinking that Ellsbury, Victorino, Pedroia, Ortiz, Napoli (assuming he is on the club), Middlebrooks, Salty, Drew, Gomes/Kalish is actually a pretty darn solid lineup.  Yes, my loyalty loves the way the pen is shaping up.  

    But my loyalty has nothing to do with agreeing with the way Cherrington has approached this off-season, if not his player evaluations.  This is the way that I wanted him to do it.  I just wanted McCarthy instead of Dempster.  I agree with his patient, non-reactionary apporach.

    [/QUOTE]

    I only disgree with your view of the Drew signing.  Last winter, dumping $6m of Scutaro's salary made sense, enabling them to play a better SS and to add a few small pieces that all worked out well.  This year?  It seems very unlikely that there is the available talent out there to be a concern vis a vis the threshhold, so why is his salary an issue?  One year and out, with luck a year in excess of his salary and a draft pick to boot.  If he can't come back, what's the issue?

    [/QUOTE]

    True enough Sonics.  I have no problem with the contract.  I guess my Sox-heart just has a huge place for Yankee-killer Ciriaco, so I didn't see the need.

    [/QUOTE]


    while i like ciriaco and was one of his biggest supporters last season i worry at what numbers he would post in a full season. when i really sit and think about him i feel he is better off suited in a UIF role. and regardless, if we did not sign Drew Iggy would be getting the starting nod over ciriaco. so he's in the same boat as he was prior to the Drew signing

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag


    True enough Sonics.  I have no problem with the contract.  I guess my Sox-heart just has a huge place for Yankee-killer Ciriaco, so I didn't see the need.

    [/QUOTE]


    I am 100% behind Ciriaco.  I love his speed, versatility, the way he moves, hustles, even looks (that neck!  ;-)  )...but I just can't believe he's suddenly going to learn to take a walk after 8 MiLB years of hacking away like a drunken lumberjack.  5-1 K/BB rate with no power?

     

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is there a link to this Cafardo mailbag?

    [/QUOTE]


    you posted it you tool... then you got banned.... do you not remember any of this fool?

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from mef429. Show mef429's posts

    Re: Cafardo responds to his Mailbag

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to mef429's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is there a link to this Cafardo mailbag?

    [/QUOTE]


    you posted it you tool... then you got banned.... do you not remember any of this fool?

    [/QUOTE]


    Why did I poster get banned? Did I violate any forum rules. Did I insult anyone in my time here? Did I spam, troll, or irritate anyone. What exactly was my crime?

    [/QUOTE]

    you know damn well what you did McPike.. quit playing the part of forum newcomer. everyone is aware of your ruse. Stop posting under so many aliases and you won't get banned. simple really. stop acting like an 8 year old.

     

Share