AJ: Rays Race Past Struggling Red Sox

It’s hard to find a bright spot about the Red Sox in this young season.  

Let’s see:  Dustin Pedroia is hitting great – at a .367 clip – and already has five home runs.  John Lackey, has pitched well in his first two starts.  That’s about it.

The Sox are 4-8.  They’ve lost three games in a row to the Tampa Bay Rays, and looked outclassed in every phase of the game.  Their hitting is as bad as many fans feared.  Their bullpen is very shaky.  Their best starter, Jon Lester, has pitched poorly in his first three outings.  Even their much-vaunted defense – supposed to bring the “run-prevention” that GM Theo Epstein promised, has been absent.  In fact, newcomer Mike Cameron, normally an outstanding glove man, made a critical error last night that rattled his pitcher, Clay Buchholz, and became a turning point in the game.  Catcher Victor Martinez and backup catcher Jason Varitek cannot throw out anyone attempting to steal a base.  (The Rays, typically, have stolen bases effortlessly) I could go on…….

Just how bad are the 2010 Red Sox?  It’s way too early, of course, but, I fear that in this particular season, the early signs might be indicative of what to expect for much of this season.   This team seems to have too many weaknesses to overcome in order to compete with the NY Yankees or the Rays, who both seem far superior to the Sox right now.

This team, as I feared, has such a mediocre hitting lineup that its pitching must be superb if it is to win many games.  Once a pitcher gets past Pedroia, Kevin Youkilis and Victor Hernandez, there is no one who is that “threatening” at the plate.  So, far, David Ortiz, now hitting .171, and J.D. Drew, hitting .132, have been a piece of cake for opposing pitchers.  The Red Sox, suddenly, seem to have a National League hitting cast.  It won’t cut it in the American League East, or, against other good AL teams.

I heard today the Red Sox had not has this bad a start since the late 1990s.  With each passing game, I appreciate what Manny Ramirez and David Ortiz achieved here in their heyday even more.  Last year, Jason Bay was so on fire for a chunk of the season that it distracted fans from the loss of Ramirez & Big Papi.  Now, with Bay gone, Ortiz looking “done” so far and no other slugger, the Red Sox look so embarrasingly bad that, if the trend continues, GM Theo Epstein, CEO Larry Lucchino and owner John Henry might have to make some very tough decisions earlier than anticipated.  Will they have to “sacrifice” this year while waiting for their young talent to mature by 2011?  How will they respond to fan pressure to make a deal for a big bat?  After all, they have a terrific pitching staff — Are they going to let it go to waste?

Then, there is the matter of Clay Buccholz and if he, finally, can overcome mental lapses to become the pitcher so many believe he can.  On Saturday night, Buccholz was his typical self – After Cameron made a bad error instead of recording the third out of the first inning, Buchholz became rattled and gave up a double to Pat Burrell with the bases loaded.  Buchholz looked increasingly shaky as he got into trouble — which is his pattern.  When he gives up hits or walks, Buchholz still struggles with a rookie-type loss of confidence.  Often, one senses that if he could maintain his composure and believe in his pitches, he’d endure these moments much easier.  Peter Gammons, now a commentator for NESN, which televises the Sox games, said he still thinks Buchholz has first-rate “stuff” that could make him an elite pitcher.  But, I think time is running out a bit for Buchholz in Boston.  If he cannot improve his focus this year, I think he may not even remain on the team.  On the other hand, after the first inning Saturday, he calmed down, and was displaying his excellent stuff until leaving after five innings.  So, which Buchholz will emerge in 2010?

A final point:  I heard a caller on a sports radio show a day or two ago who spoke for many when he blurted out:  “This team is so boring…..”

Like I said, these first 12 games of mediocrity have made me realize – again – how spoiled we Red Sox fans have become in the past ten years or so.  We’ve always had someone exciting to cheer on – whether Pedro, Manny, or Big Papi.  Suddenly, just the thought of an uneventful season feels unbearable.

At least, it’s still early……I can’t imagine the Red Sox out of contention!!! 

  

 

 

 

 

 

AJ: A Toast to Peter Gammons

As 2009 winds down, I want to pay tribute to my favorite baseball reporter, Peter Gammons, who has made a unique contribution to baseball over the past 40 years.  

Gammons, a Hall of Fame member,  just left ESPN after 20 years, and will start in new part-time jobs in 2010 with MLB Network and New England Sports Network (NESN), the cable station that covers the Red Sox.

It’s rare to be able to single out one reporter who has influenced you in a significant way, but, I feel I can say that about Peter Gammons. 

Gammons has had a tremendous influence on my own appreciation of baseball.  I’ve always found his enthusiasm infectious.  In fact, sometimes, he cannot contain his own enthusiasm and intrigue as he’s reporting on some baseball development.   He spontaneously, excitedly adds nuggets of information as he updates his television audience. 

Like many New Englanders, I was lucky enough to read Gammons’  Sunday notes column in the Sunday edition of the Boston Globe years ago.  I would pounce on that section eager to learn of any news tidbits or developments impacting the Red Sox.    Red Sox fans grew accustomed to Gammons’ strengths, which, to this day, stand out in a world of sportswriting that may be technologically advanced, but is often lacking a thoroughness or originality.

First, Gammons has always been a damned good reporter on baseball.   He always found out FAR more than other reporters.  To say he “got more scoops” would be the understatement of the century.  I don’t think I can identify any other reporter who has covered one of the major sports who has so consistently out-reported his peers by such a large margin.

For Gammons, that superlative reporting has always applied to the Red Sox.  Because Gammons got his start on the Boston Globe and is from this area, he always has made it his business to keep his first-hand knowledge of the Sox at the highest level.   He used to share his insights and updates about the struggles of Red Sox management, the players and their farm system.   

 What’s remarkable is that while at ESPN reporting on all of baseball, Gammons OFTEN – and, I mean, a countless number of occasions  - has reported original material on the Red Sox, routinely  ”scooping” the baseball writers from the Globe, Boston Herald and all other Boston media.

 One example, in recent years, illustrates this:  Gammons once reported that Sox’ Japanese pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka had found it difficult to grip and throw the baseball in the US because it was a bit larger than the baseball in Japan.   This was fascinating, important news to any Red Sox fan, but, I didn’t find anyone but Gammons providing this information.   Another time, Gammons quoted Sox pitching coach John Farrell as saying that he and Dice-K had decided he should use less of his many different pitches in order to be more effective.  

This typifies Gammons’ contributions.  He ventures into areas that no other reporters even attempt to go.  He’s the one who doesn’t let important ground go uncovered while others sit back and add nothing. 

As the years have passed, I’ve realized the extent to which Gammons has built and maintained such a rich array of sources.  I think he’s been able to maintain those sources partly because of the kind of person he is.  People like and respect him.  They know he loves baseball, and, they enjoy opening up to him.  Gammons has sources at every level — whether it’s GMs, pitching coaches, scouts or guys familiar with who’s coming up at the Cape Cod League.

Of course, I’ve noticed Gammons’ flaws and mistakes over time, also.  I think he’s chosen to be a bit easy on some of the steroid abusers, for example.  On occasion, he wrote endlessly about a few hot Red Sox prospects, who eventually didn’t make it in the big leagues.  (Frank Rodriguez comes to mind)  Sometimes, I think Gammons has gotten so close to a few players that it distorted his capacity to report objectively on them.  (Alex Rodriguez, for example, who chose to speak to Gammons first to admit his use of steroids)  Sometimes Gammons has seemed to reverse himself rather dramatically on certain people in baseball.  (Dan Duquette, for example)

Sometimes, I’ve wondered how Gammons can avoid being overly influenced by his apparent close relationships with Sox GM Theo Epstein or Yanks GM Brian Cashman.  How can he report objectively on the Sox and Yanks?  I’ve wondered.  Yet, in the end, when I consider Gammons’ contributions, his flaws or mistakes are ridiculously overshadowed. 

Once in the late 1980s, as my brother and I were leaving Fenway Park after the Red Sox had lost a close game, by chance, we found ourselves walking in proximity to Gammons, who was heading out himself – probably on his way to interview a ball player.  My brother spontaneously asked him what he thought about how the game ended.   Gammons, without a moment’s hesitation, made a spontaneous, specific remark about closer Lee Smith’s inability to throw inside.   Then, he disappeared into the crowd.  I recalled thinking:  “Gammons was just as intense and enthusiastic then as he is on television.”

Gammons has always pursued the details about baseball.   Often, unsurprisingly, Gammons has shared his expertise about pitchers, commenting on how or why a pitcher was effective or ineffective in a big playoff game, for instance.   It’s the details, after all, that make baseball so fun to follow.

I can think of times I’ve waited in my car, in the parking lot at the grocery store before going in just so I could hear Gammons’ guest spot on a radio sports talk show.  “I’ve got to hear Gammons,” I’d tell my daughter, who eventually realized that the “Gammons” name had special meaning

Now, Gammons is so respected that his colleagues openly defer to him whenever a major development unfolds in baseball.   Everyone wants to know:   “What does Peter think?”

Gammons has reached that status through a lot of hard work, and, he’s someone who deserves it.

I am fortunate that I’ll see Gammons frequently on NESN in 2010.  We need more sportswriters like him.

AJ: Team’s Handling of Media Is Indicator Too

Now, I’m really curious how media coverage of the Cubs compares to coverage of the Red Sox.    I’m sure that if we compared how the two teams handle the media, we’d get a glimpse of their overall approach to managing their respective organizations.

Big Mike, you observed that even though Jim Hendry enjoys talking to reporters, that you doubt he describes aspects of the team’s off-season plans.   I get that, but, don’t you agree that a GM can find ways to share some good, real information with the press?  I’m curious how Hendry describes the Cubs’ outlook and actions that are real — things that he can share.  Do the Cubs use the press to enhance the team and help it meet its objectives?

I raise this because I’ve seen the Red Sox successfully use the media in a variety of ways to advance their agenda and meet their objectives.   Even during the off-season. 

I’ve observed that the Red Sox,  during the Henry/Lucchino/Epstein era,  handle the media about a hundred times better than past management groups  during the rest of my life.  This is hardly a coincidence, but, instead, another sign that this group knows what they’re doing.

First, the Red Sox just excell at PR – across the board – beyond the 2004 and 2007 championships.  Second, the Sox have consistently been accessible to reporters.  They discuss what they’re doing whenever they can and seem to “get” that it’s their job to “feed” the insatiable appetites of Red Sox nation and the area (& national) media who cover the team.

Part of that has meant distributing “tidbits” of information to baseball writers even during this time of year.  So, the Sox find ways to keep talking to the top baseball writers – whether Peter Gammons or Buster Olney of ESPN or a few of the Boston Globe and Boston Herald‘s veteran baseball writers.  Often, in the fall and early winter, that means discussing things in the zone between on-the-record and off-the-record — such as having facts or remarks attributed to ”sources” close to the team.   So, every off-season, we see the Red Sox surface in speculative stories or items about their talks regarding any quality player – such as the current examples of Blue Jays’ ace Roy Halliday or the Tigers’ Miguel Cabrera.  It makes the Red Sox appear to be involved in everything.  How does that hurt the team?

Larry Lucchino, Theo Epstein, (Manager) Terry Francona, Pitching Coach John Farrell and other Sox officials are, routinely, available to the press and willing to discuss most topics.  On occasion, they predictably “duck” sensitive topics such as the state of Josh Beckett’s arm.   New England Cable Sports Network (NESN), which covers every Sox game, has a lengthy pre-game and post-game show for every single Sox game — which is another vehicle the team uses to promote itself constantly.

The Red Sox and Cubs face very different circumstances, but, they’re both in very large media markets with loyal, enthusiastic fans.

I think if a team is “on-the-ball” generally, they’re often good at interacting with the media covering the team.  So, my question is whether we can draw any conclusions from examining how the Red Sox treat of the baseball media compared to the Cubs’ approach. 

I’ll be surprised, Big Mike, if you tell me that the Cubs are terrific with the media.   Am I right?