As I read this Jeff Passan article, the thought that went through my mind was, “The press doesn’t like Josh Beckett. I bet he’s been tough on them through the years.”
Joe Posnanski then confirms my thoughts:
Beckett was not one of those players who was easy to admire or enjoy. Whenever he gave an interview, he seemed a little bit less likable. Scouts grumbled about him all the time. “He should be better,” they said. Sometimes, he was better. In 2007, he might have been the best pitcher in the American League. In 2010, he had some back issues and was basically unpitchable. In between, he seemed good but not great, mixing brilliant starts with stunningly bad ones. He was electrifying to watch when he was good, painful to watch when he was bad, and it was hard to get close to him the way fans like to get close to the stars. The Boston fans I know always seemed to view Beckett as a necessary evil, kind of like Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men.” They wanted him on that wall. They needed him on that wall. But that didn’t mean that they talked about him at parties.
It pays for a player to have good relations with reporters, and from what I can tell, all it takes is answering questions when you do poorly with a bit of humility. It’s not fair, but if Josh had been a bit better with reporters, the chicken and beer incident might have caused less of a stir.
To those who follow the Red Sox closely: Has Beckett had an unusual amount of influence on the other starters, in particular, Lester and Buccholz? Are they also showing the same sort of defiant arrogance that Beckett can’t seem to help himself from putting on display in every press encounter? Thanks for further info from those more knowledgable about the Sox.
Of course, if you’re as arrogant and self-absorbed as Jeff Passan says you are, does any of this matter? If your team cuts you and still pays your contract, what do you care?
Also, I don’t get Passan’s statement the Red Sox are stuck with Beckett. Who cares if he’s good sometimes or has a huge contract? If he’s such a poison, cut him or trade him for a bag of (golf) balls.
“The rot in the Boston Red Sox organization runs too deep for cosmetic upgrades, and nobody better personifies it than Josh Beckett, the clueless, defiant egomaniac who’s poisoning another Red Sox season.”
Clueless, defiant egomania are easy to overlook if you’re winning. But if you’re in last place, you get extra scrutiny.
I think reporters have been pretty lenient on Beckett. He gained a ton of weight during the last season, went down in September with an ankle injury (the ankle probably had trouble holding up all that added weight, I imagine) — which was the most critical part of the Sox season, so he completely let the team down. This season, spring training pictures showed that he showed up to camp completely out of shape but reporters said he looked “strong”. Now his fastball velocity is down, he’s out of shape and getting hammered on the mound. And I think everyone is sick of his attitude, because if fans are willing to pay some of the highest ticket prices in baseball to pay for your salary, at least have the courtesy to pretend to give a s**t. If Beckett wants to pour gasoline over his own pyre, that’s his own decision.
Two thoughts:
–yeah, Beckett is kind of a tool;
–seventy-two years ago, a brilliant young, admittedly difficult to dealt with, superstar playing for the Red Sox decided that he had been treated so badly by the fans and the Boston baseball media that he would refuse from then on in to tip his cap to the locals. . .a decision that he stuck to until long after he retired. With a few exceptions, it’s hard to see how either baseball fans or media in Boston have improved much since then.
I remember back when reporters prided themselves on being unbiased. Those were the days.