Nick Cafardo is the national baseball writer for The Boston Globe.

Cafardo begin his career in Brockton in 1975 before moving to the Quincy Patriot Ledger in 1981. In 1989 he joined The Boston Globe sports staff.

Cafardo has covered both the Red Sox and Patriots during his tenure at the Globe, but his heart is clearly with baseball. During his time on the Patriots beat he was clearly frustrated with the working environment and it reflected in his coverage of the team. Having moved back to baseball, he is noticeably more confortable and in his element.

He is a frequent presence on the various NESN programs, and in the past was in demand on WWZN radio, ESPN Radio and WBZ-TV’s Sports Final.

He is the author of several books, including The Impossible Team: The Worst to First Patriot’s Super Bowl Season, 100 Things Red Sox Fans Should Know and Do Before They Die and Boston Red Sox: Yesterday and Today

Nick’s son, Ben Cafardo works at ESPN in the communications department.




30 thoughts on “2011 Approval Ratings – Nick Cafardo

  1. I approve of Cafardo…mostly. I think his Red Sox work is generally well informed and informative. He uses the access he has to let all of us know something new. I don't think his radio work is that great but he is not a radio "whore" and usually is asked to be an expert more than an analysis. His TV work is better than average because he is always well informed. My only real knock on him was his uninspired Patriots work and the fact that he bought into the globe side of the Vendetta against the Pats never sat well with me. He was certainly part of the McDonough, Borges, Shaughnessey Globe gang.

      1. that is an easy question to ask, and a very difficult one to answer. Who–anyone–can respond factually to that soert of thing, pro or con?


        1. Well, it wasn't an opinion it was a statement of fact by the original commenter so I'd imagine he has some, you know, facts to speak of.

      2. Sure…his pregame notes tonight told me about jenks and buckholds injuries in pretty good detail. Look I am not saying he is Peter Gammons or Sean McAdam but I am saying he has consistently been better than most as a baseball beat writer. As a football writer…he had issues …but as a baseball writer he doesn't suck….at least I don't think so.

    1. Approve Cafardo but disapprove of so many others? You sir are like Newman, an Enigma or "mystery wrapped in a riddle."

    2. latetodinner, are you joking? The next time Cafardo lets all of us "know something new" will be the first. He's a lazy hack who speed-dials anyone who will talk to him in order to float their agendas.

  2. One of the laziest writers out there. I can't remember reading a column of his and coming away more informed. Also has carried water for Roger Clemens for about 10 years too long. Strong disapprove.

  3. Makes a huge mess of the Baseball Notes columns each week. Has a massive rolodex of contacts yet does absolutely nothing interesting with the access. He lacks insight and energy. Knows nothing of modern baseball analysis (I'm not looking for WAR here, I'm looking for a bare level of knowledge).

    Disapprove. This is a baseball-crazed town with an excellent team. You would think the Globe could do better than Nick as lead baseball writer.

  4. Completely ignorant of any changes that baseball has made since about 1995 or so, which also happens to be the same time he last updated his rolodex. Has multiple weekly WTF? moments in the Baseball Notes column. Is scared of anything that has to do with sabermetrics, and probably still thinks that Eddie Andelman is witty. Likes Russian hats. Heartily disapprove.

  5. Both in print and on the airwaves, Cafardo strikes me as an earnest, semi-loveable dolt who you don't want to get mad at but eventually, you're forced to. I truly think he believes his "working sources" and giving readers inside information with his Sunday Player Placement Suggestions. (Repeat after me: "_____" would look good in a "____" uniform.) But it's really only a print version of mouth-breather radio show callers' trade suggestions. The only difference is that Scott Boras' assistants call Nick directly to churn up some action. The Analysis features are worse. His "Should the Sox pursue Reyes?" dump last Sunday served only to (1.) hide the fact that the paper had extra space and (2.) give a straw man for the Sunday latenight sports shout shows and the next few days of EEI/98.5 to gnaw on. That's typical Nick.

    On the plus side, he seems a genuinely humble man and doesn't indulge is any of the rabid image building that many do. He also did not continue the Sunday baseball column's tic of pairing ppop music and baseball events that was begun by Gammons and which Shank, in his stint, turned into the Crustaceous Curse. Thank heaven for small favors. I'm pretty sure Nick is a Connie Francis kind of guy, anyway.

    So, on balance. (1.) has never (to my knowledge) broken a story in his Boston career (2.) writing style as exciting as tapioca; probably thinks "Apropos of nothing" is dazzlingly clever and endearingly self-effacing (3.) cannot bring any worthwhile talent observation or strategy analysis to any piece (4.) sadly, seems a creature of a bygone era, where the doughy shlump sportswriter didn't need to know much about the business of the game or the social dynamics at work. Peter-Principled out when he was promoted off game stories.
    A no-harm-intended Disapprove.

  6. The epitome of lazy.

    Rolodex consists of Rob Konrad, JP Ricciardi, Terry Glenn and the Hendrix Brothers.


  7. Makes a huge mess of the Baseball Notes columns each week. Has a massive rolodex of contacts yet does absolutely nothing interesting with the access. He lacks insight and energy. Knows nothing of modern baseball analysis (I'm not looking for WAR here, I'm looking for a bare level of knowledge).

  8. Disapprove! Once upon a time Nick was an OK Red Sox beat writer who was a horrible radio show guest. Eddie had Nick in his regular rotation for years, and all Nick ever said was "sure" or "you're right". Then Nick decided that the travel in baseball was too much for him, so he switched over to the Patriot's beat, where his true colors came through. The coach didn't want to assist Nick with his job, and Nick couldn't handle it. His lack of professionalism was visible in every column he wrote about the team. He did everything short of wearing Buffalo Bill footy pajamas when Bledsoe was traded. His hackishness refused to be suppressed. A beaten man he has returned to covering the baseball, although for years you'd think the Blue Jays were based out of Boston for all the love Nick showered on them. Bottom line is, you feed Nick quotes and he'll polish your knob in the Sunday notes column. He's a tired old hack who would retire if he had any self-respect and any discernible skills, unfortunately for us he is entrenched in the Globe.

    He's not on radio much any more because he is worse on radio than in print. When Eddie had him in heavy rotation his grunts of approval made for riveting radio.

    Please go away Nick, you gave up year's ago.

      1. I sympathize. I continually find typos in my own rants that I could have sworn weren't there when I hit "submit."

  9. Listening to him talk about baseball is like listening to one of your uncles who you know watches about 3 or 4 games a year. Huge disapprove.

  10. He's so harmless I can't really disapprove, but he's really not relevant or interesting anymore.

    Dear Mr. Cafardo: The world has passed you by.

  11. Nice guy. Very poor football writer. My God, how many times did he interview that ex-Bills GM, Tom Donahoe, for his Sunday Football Notes column in the Globe back in the day? Didn't he have any other NFL sources?

    Decent baseball writer, and I think that's because baseball is the sport he enjoys the most.

    I agree with etak–Carfado is harmless, so I can't really disapprove, though he really doesn't do anything to make me vote "approve" either.

    Can Bruce add an "abstain" option to these polls? 🙂

    1. Good luck with the "apathy" option…been fighting that battle for a while now 🙂 Still love you Bruce!

  12. …speaking of old friend Rob Konrad, I understand he's been quietly working out with an eye on a return to the NFL. Konrad would dearly love to make his comeback in a Patriots uniform and has made some calls, but so far, no acknowledgement from Pats brass. Not surprising, given how they've treated their own players…they don't even use fullbacks, the height of arrogance…speaking of the NFL, I can't help but wonder how personnel wizard Tom Donohoe would handle the kind of free agent frenzy that's expected once the negotiations for the new CBA have been completed….knowing Donohoe, who built those greatly successful Steeler teams in the 90's, he'd either sign all the best players, or sign none and develop even better players on his own….they're still trying to replace you in Buffalo, Tom….speaking of Donohoe, I'm told by mutual friends that he is, in fact, getting younger.

  13. When I think of Nick Carfado I think of the terms 'kissing your sister', mezza mezza, or
    comme ci comme ça. Meh!

  14. Where do I begin:

    * Refers to his binkies on a weekly basis. This year it has been Mike Cameron. Started by saying it wasn't fair to Cameron not to play full time and that they should deal him. Right until he was released. Immediately follows it last week with an update from him at the Marlins.
    * How many times can he say DeMarlo Hale should be a manager.
    * Continues to push for junior Red Sox executives to be given a GM job. The puff piece about the Cubs and Cherrington were a joke.
    * Led the charge to sway public opinion that Roger Clemens was being screwed by the government. Must have been elated by the mistrial. It's not true.
    * Should have been fired for his unprofessional notes about Jacoby's injury last year. Anyone remember one of his "Apropos" notes about "Ode to Jacoby's Rib". On par with another personality calling Jacoby a pussy.
    * Others are correct about JP Ricciardi and now John Farrell. Also uses Mills in Houston (probably calls him Millsie too just like Tito). Now that Mills is in trouble is trying to back track on that source.

  15. I cannot believe that Cafardo has a positive rating. I understand that he is not a douche ala Borges, Shank, etc, but he is absolutely clueless about the sports he covers. He is the print version of Butch Sterns or Steve Burton – a nice guy, but totally out of his league when it comes to covering sports. All he does is regurgitate what is given to him by his "sources", or by the Red Sox pr department. Like he really did some investigative journalism and uncovered the treatment received by Jenks, or that Buchholz 's status.

  16. I can't remember one great piece written by Cafardo or one piece of news he broke. Irrelevant in my opinion.

  17. Not much more to say about a guy who once suggested the Sox keep Carlos Quintana and trade Mo Vaughn.

Comments are closed.