If you're a regular listener of 98.5 (like I am), you've no doubt heard Michael Felger's recent anti-Josh Beckett tirades. Pejoratively calling Beckett "the Texas tough guy," Felger fingers Josh as emblematic of the 2011 Red Sox team -- full of talent but arrogant, entitled, and lacking in character. In short, he says Beckett's a fraud.
Felger points mostly to two things: Beckett's (lack of) conditioning and his poor September. There's really no disputing either point. Beckett has had a noticeable paunch the last two years. And his September was disappointing, particularly in his final two starts, when we really needed him. He finished the month with a 5.48 ERA over 23 IP (26 Ks) in four starts, and missed a game due to injury.
Here's the problem: this doesn't make him a fraud.
Beckett simply has too good a track record. He's a fierce competitor who reached ace heights in 2003 and 2007. His 2009 is often forgotten (career highs with 199 strikeouts and 212 innings) because he didn't perform as well in the playoffs as he did in his two World Series wins. He reached these same heights again in 2011. He posted career bests in ERA (2.89) and WHIP (1.02). He was good for 6.1 wins above replacement, tying him with James Shields with the 5th most among pitchers and 10th most among all players in the American League.
Were he a fraud, lacking in character and going through the motions, what sense does this season make? He signed his lucrative $68 million deal in April 2010 (to kick in in 2011) and went on to have a lousy 2010. Last year, seemingly every game he would pitch poorly and then lambaste himself in the subsequent press conference. This was no John Lackey -- he didn't claim he pitched well and had a couple of tough breaks that led to eight runs. He'd say he sucked (usually in pretty colorful language) and prepare for his next start.
He came back in 2011 with nothing to prove professionally, in a career sense. His $68 million was coming his way, success or not. He had two rings, both of which were won due in large part to his performance. And were he a fraud, that would have been good enough. But it wasn't. The belly was still there, sure -- but so was the talent. After a subpar debut, Beckett turned it on and was an ace for four and a half months. He disappeared in September, and I don't have a defense for it. He wasn't good.
But that doesn't mean that he's a fraud, it doesn't mean he's what's wrong with the clubhouse, and it certainly doesn't mean you get rid of him in an effort to turn things around. Felger argues that Beckett's attitude is summed up in his September disappearance and that this lack of accountability and big-game performance spreads to the rest of the team. Well, maybe I'm biased (as I wrote a column extolling Beckett's virtues as my first Ted's Army post), but I argue the opposite.
His 2011 performance showed character. He could have slacked if he wanted, having already cashed in and having reached the pinnacle of his profession. Instead, he found his past talent and used it to great success for the vast majority of the season.
This is a guy you want on a winning team. Maybe he didn't deliver this September, but I'll take my chances with him next September -- and October.
Original Story:
