He probably shouldn't mention that Edro has 47 pitches thru 2 inningsTimlin may get a full time gig
He probably shouldn't mention that Edro has 47 pitches thru 2 inningsTimlin may get a full time gig
Sorry, no. I have not written them down ever, but I've been consistently surprised at the level to which he is both overly laudatory and severely critical. It's not the play-by-play guy's job to tame an color commentator, but the amount of awkward silences I perceive between O'Brien and Eck is jarring, to my ears and eyes, at least.Do you have any examples of Eck being unfair to Red Sox players in his commentary?
Hopefully you've cooled your jets by now. I didn't say anything to that effect. I said, "When did getting inducted mean you can be a pompous jerk and get away with it? When did it make you an expert on the game?" and "being a first ballot HOFer didn't bestow upon him some great knowledge." I stand by both - Eck is a decent commentator on certain aspects of the game, terrible on others (he's an inverse Remy when it comes to pitching/batting). There's a huge difference between playing the game and commentating on it, and there are MANY insights only a former player, at any level, could provide. My point is that I constantly see people bringing up the HoF as if it's a pass to enlightenment and otherworldliness. It's an award for your playing, not for your mind. If your mind helped you get there, more power to you, but IQ's (even baseball ones) aren't on plaques.You are right. Playing the game at the highest level and performing at an ultra-elite level gives you no insight and credibility beyond your average commentator. Once you step off that mound you lose all your knowledge of the game and you should recognize that all you are good for is blowing smoke up the ass of the home town team.
I don't recall saying that... I want a commentator who can say why they said "yuck" and why a pitcher rehabbing from an injury elicits "yuck," as opposed to, say, "he didn't pitch well, that line is bad, you have to be concerned, but he's a rehabbing pitcher and you hope it's a step in the right direction."So, what you want is a commentator who will do nothing but blow smoke up the players asses ... regardless of how they perform or what we, as fans, can see.
That really doesn't seem to be the problem here. This isn't a fact check. It's not unfair to say "yuck" when looking at a AAA-rehabHe's either saying things that are unfair about Red Sox players or he isn't.
My point has never been that Eck is especially problematic. I'm saying there's an enormous double standard that Shaughnessy and many on this board are holding him to compared to Price, who is certainly pitching with the same "intense fear and anxiety" Eck did plus an immeasurable amount of additional, difficult-to-qualify scrutiny from a Boston media, fan base, and institutional history that treats black and brown athletes as "other."How is Eck's behavior on the mound relevant to his demeanor as a color commentator. The guy's been quite honest that he put on a bit of a front while pitching to get past his intense fear and anxiety. To use the phrasing that came up in the first article about this, he was acutely aware of how hard it is to play the game and how easily he might fail. And having problems with Tony LaRussa isn't a black mark on anyone's record. It confirms that they're a human being. But really, it's irrelevant. He's either saying things that are unfair about Red Sox players or he isn't. It's true or not irrespective of whether or not he had issues with Tony LaRussa or anyone else as a pitcher.
Could you please cite some examples of things he said about Sox players that were untrue or unfair?
I'm not one of them. But are you seriously saying that posters here are racist for expressing a desire to taunt Price a bit over all this?plus an immeasurable amount of additional, difficult-to-qualify scrutiny from a Boston media, fan base, and institutional history that treats black and brown athletes as "other." Nobody did or said any single thing that was "racist" — that's not how it works. But the entire scenario has roots in Boston's racism. Which is why you have posters on this board fantasizing about a stadium of fans bringing in signs that read YUCK in order to publicly humiliate a hometown player.
This was the thing that immediately jumped out to me about the article. He calls Price thin-skinned one minute, but then says Eck quit traveling with the team because of a sarcastic JBJ tweet two years ago like it's a perfectly reasonable thing to do.My point has never been that Eck is especially problematic. I'm saying there's an enormous double standard that Shaughnessy and many on this board are holding him to compared to Price, who is certainly pitching with the same "intense fear and anxiety" Eck did plus an immeasurable amount of additional, difficult-to-qualify scrutiny from a Boston media, fan base, and institutional history that treats black and brown athletes as "other." Nobody did or said any single thing that was "racist" — that's not how it works. But the entire scenario has roots in Boston's racism. Which is why you have posters on this board fantasizing about a stadium of fans bringing in signs that read YUCK in order to publicly humiliate a hometown player. Who, again, is one of the best pitchers in baseball.
For example, would anybody think to suggest that Eck was "thin-skinned" because he self-medicated with alcohol? No. (I wouldn't either, because it's shitty.) But I'd argue that it doesn't happen here because the vast majority of this board, and New England, sees ourselves in him.
Fruity? We do not allow the use of terms such as that here. This is your only warning.I think this whole atmosphere is directly related to ownerships need to have a PR spokesman in the dugout and not a baseball manager. Farrell is just as sensitive as these fruity players. Need a grown up like Tito.
To me, this is more an issue of the status of commentators with respect to the team than anything else. They want to travel with the team and be one of the guys, but also be able to be able to honestly assess the players' performance; I just think that's a tightrope that's far too thin to walk in the long-term.any player who is concerned or even aware of what a color commentator is saying during a broadcast has some major personality flaws. I'm not sure how they even know what is being said.
As for Eck, I really don't remember him being highly critical of any Sox player. If saying something like player X has to be able to hit a curve ball to stay in this league after player X continually flails away at curves in the dirt is being overly critical..then so be it.
Edit..and I will take Eck's style all day long over Remy's 10000th explanation on the difference between a suicide and safety squeeze.
..and Yuck was the perfect term for that outing..
I'm of the opinion that there isn't anyone else who would have written the article at all, except maybe Bob Hohler-style in an excuse-making (inventing?) article after a disappointing end to the season. So I find it hard to separate the author from the piece. And FWIW, I don't question the validity of it. I question the level of importance/newsworthiness of it.If someone else wrote the article, would people be questioning the validity of it?
For something you're so sure of you should be able to remember something despite, like everyone else, not taking notes. I can remember one Eck description that absolutely amazed me. It was 2003 and a worn out, no good any more Glendon Rusch, was pitching for the Brewers against the Sox in an interleague game and Eck said (quoting from memory) "He's got nuthin'! They're gonna kill him." It stuck with me because it was so honest. Rusch didn't have anything. He was having a terrible year and getting tattooed by everyone but especially by the 2003 Sox. The thing is, I think most of Eck's unusual statements are expressions of honest wonder at how terrific a play a guy made or how very far a guy hit a homer or things like that. Eck's calls have a sense of genuine wonder and appreciation in them that most announcers have lost or suppressed as part of their striving for their idea of professionalism. But I think Eck gears it back when considering criticism of Sox players. I don't recall him ever saying that Doug Pfister's or any other Sox hurler's "got nuthin'!" or some other Sox pitcher had better get out of there before the opposition kills him or anything close to that. But maybe I've forgotten. If anyone is so certain that he's been unfairly harsh in regard to Sox players they should be able to remember something.Sorry, no. I have not written them down ever, but I've been consistently surprised at the level to which he is both overly laudatory and severely critical. It's not the play-by-play guy's job to tame an color commentator, but the amount of awkward silences I perceive between O'Brien and Eck is jarring, to my ears and eyes, at least.
.
You don't get to choose my words!Really an attack??? He tweeted a pic thanking him for not believing in him. Essentially the Patriots Mantra for the last 16yrs.
Calling that an attack is so overblown I don't know where to begin.
Eck also kind of sucks at this job, how come no one calls him out on it. His word salad is so tired and he fucks up more than Farrell on a game by game basis.
You're right. I said that because of Price's skin color. Not because I thought it would be an amusing (although merely hypothetical) response to a grown man's childish behavior.Nobody did or said any single thing that was "racist" — that's not how it works. But the entire scenario has roots in Boston's racism. Which is why you have posters on this board fantasizing about a stadium of fans bringing in signs that read YUCK in order to publicly humiliate a hometown player. Who, again, is one of the best pitchers in baseball.
You just did. And we weren't talking about Eck's alcoholism (which he has been open about in the past, if I recall correctly). We're talking about a specific situation in which Eck said a specific not-particularly-inappropriate-nor-innacurate word to describe a player's performance (which is his job) and then a Red Sox player staged a dramatic scene in which to chastise, mock, and embarrass Eck in front of the entire team.For example, would anybody think to suggest that Eck was "thin-skinned" because he self-medicated with alcohol? No. (I wouldn't either, because it's shitty.) But I'd argue that it doesn't happen here because the vast majority of this board, and New England, sees themselves in him.
The team isn't dredging this up four weeks after the fact. Shaughnessy is. If this article is a distraction then blame the guy who sat on it waiting for a lousy Price start in order to maximize the effect.Considering that the Sox are 6-11 in their last 17 games, they might want to stop worrying about stupid crap like what Eck says on the broadcasts, and might want to concentrate more on winning some goddamn games. They're playing very poorly, the offense is non-existant, and yet these guys are all worked up about broadcast commentary.
To bring back a classic line from SoSH past, this team needs an enema.
You're confusing two separate issues here. Issue #1 is the event itself. Issue #2 is Shaughnessy's account of it.You're right. I said that because of Price's skin color. Not because I thought it would be an amusing (although merely hypothetical) response to a grown man's childish behavior.
You just did. And we weren't talking about Eck's alcoholism (which he has been open about in the past, if I recall correctly). We're talking about a specific situation in which Eck said a specific not-particularly-inappropriate-nor-innacurate word to describe a player's performance (which is his job) and then a Red Sox player staged a dramatic scene in which to chastise, mock, and embarrass Eck in front of the entire team.
But you're probably right that it's about Price's skin color. That's great perspective.
If that's true.I agree with your overall take but I don't think the CHB gets to have it both ways when he writes what is essentially an investigative piece. Yes, he has a column, but that was much less of an opinion piece than an investigative report. When he writes such a column, I think he needs to play it straight.
I'm not saying that he did not and this is a side point.
For me, the take away is that Price is a poser and his teammates who cheered for him when he gutlessly dissed Eck for doing his job are insipid assholes.
There are a number of reasons why a first place Red Sox team is not really resonating with Boston fans like such a team would have in the past. They are really not playing all that well. Ortiz is gone. Everyone pales next to the Patriots. We have a lot of other entertainment options. John Farrell is always a step away from blowing a game with that vacuum between his ears.
But add the overall sense around this team to the list. It's probably the most intangible thing on the list but ever sine Pedey did the "it's not me" thing and Price whined about the fans and Boston, I think it became a little tougher to embrace these guys. I'm a world class homer and if they rip off ten in a row and are headed for big things, I will put all of this aside very quickly. But for now, these guys don't evoke the feelings of other winning Sox teams, and even some lovable losing teams, and that a sizable group of Price's teammates could cheer that assholery is likely a part of it.
really?..don't see how anyone gets there from that column..You're confusing two separate issues here. Issue #1 is the event itself. Issue #2 is Shaughnessy's account of it.
Is anyone saying that this confrontation happened because Eck is white and Price is black? If so, I'd disagree.
What certain people, including me, are arguing is that
1) Shaughnessy thought that the episode signified something and was therefore worth writing about; and
2) that he thought it was important to characterize Eck in a particular way and Price and JBJ in a particular way.
I'm curious what people are taking away from this story. What was the point, for Shaughnessy, of publishing it in the first place? Remember: He's not a reporter; he's a columnist.
To me--and I know that many people on this board don't agree--it's pretty clear that this article, whether consciously or not, reinforces certain stereotypes Shaughnessy seems to have about black Red Sox players (and maybe black people in general): specifically, that they're sullen, untrustworthy, and emotionally unstable. They're all Carl Everett to him. Speaking of which, anyone here who wants to defend Shaughnessy against charges of witting or unwitting racism should take a look at his stories about Everett. They're shameful.
Incidentally, I interviewed Carl Everett some years after he had left the Red Sox. Totally approachable, funny, generous guy. Nothing but friendly to a white reporter he'd never laid eyes on before. Makes you wonder.
Umm yeah. I guess. The problem is, none of the behaviors in the story actually matter much. So the story doesn't actually matter much. And that is why your words about it don't much matter, either, actually.You don't get to choose my words!
[snip]
The story is the 'behavior.'
I think you're looking for some threshold that of course will not be found. Eck may spew a lot of word-salad, but he's not dumb enough to get on air and say anything other than his guttural musings - he's not gonna out-and-out attack someone. I'm suggesting this isn't about an instance of "unfair" harshness, it's about a pretty-consistent level of sniveling, pompousness, and passive-degradation that some of us constantly sense in Eck's commentary. Sure it plays well to the TV crowd, and sure, much of it is, at its emotional base, correct, but he's not Skip Bayless or some yammering head. He gets on the same plane, has to look a guy in the eye many days a year, and he's played the game at it's "elite level" as well as stunk a few times.If anyone is so certain that he's been unfairly harsh in regard to Sox players they should be able to remember something.
If you look at it that way, that should make the Sox more likely to intervene. I know every place where I've worked, if an employee got into a verbal altercation with another employee anywhere near that intense, they'd be dragged into HR in a second.The fact the NESN guys are on the same plane puts them apart from other media. So CHB's anecdote about Brooks Robinson has little relevance. So Eck works for the Sox, not NBC or Ap. Maybe it would be best if didn't piss off the players. Of course I can't see what he does that pissed them off.
See. CHB should have just written that. Save a lot of time.David Price is a complete loser who deserves to pitch for the Padres. David Price has started 15 post season games in his career. His team's have won a grand total of 4 of those games. And of of their last 11 games. Why is he a loser? Because his team is in the hunt for a division title and he's concerned with what a NESN commentator is saying. This team sucks if they're backing Price. If they make the playoffs they won't go anywhere.
Was about to ask this. He's Shank, not Shag.OT: when did "Shag" offically replace "CHB"?
(I liked the latter, cos I always read it as "Curly Haired Bastard"...)
Fair enough. Fwiw, I meant soft or spoiled. I'll edit.Fruity? We do not allow the use of terms such as that here. This is your only warning.
Thanks.Fair enough. Fwiw, I meant soft or spoiled. I'll edit.
My takeaways are that both Price/Bradley have their moments of immaturity, this story gets written about any perceived under-performing $217m player in Boston regardless of race, and apparently nobody outside of this thread likes Eck.I'm curious what people are taking away from this story. What was the point, for Shaughnessy, of publishing it in the first place? Remember: He's not a reporter; he's a columnist.
There's a difference between "having an issue" and pulling a total, tough-guy bully move putting Eckersley in a tough situation there was literally no way out of because they were on a plane.(1) It's funny that people are calling out Price for having an issue with Eckersley when he's obviously not the only player who feels this way. I mean it's been mentioned in passing that Pedroia has an issue with Eckersley too. Does that mean Pedroia is thin-skinned? And no matter what any of us know or don't know, there are clearly multiple Sox who have an issue with things that Eckersley has said and so this can't be a one-time thing.
(2) "Yuck" is hardly going to win broadcast commentary awards.
(3) Maybe people don't like David Price for whatever reason. I hear that Ubaldo Jimenez is the nicest, most respectful baseball player that most reporters have ever met. Maybe we should get him instead.
Thanks for this thoughtful long post. I didn't want to quote it all, but I agree with every word.. . . .
As for some of the comments that "yuck" is bad commentary, I guess, but geez. This guy is filling in for a sick broadcaster and these are long games with a partner in DOB that is a bit formulaic and not easy to riff off in the first place. Eck isn't as good as Remy, especially Remy since 2015. But all this over "yuck"?
don't mess with Eck's hair...Merloni did mention yesterday that he had heard the same stuff that Shank had reported, though he threw in that there was also a hair comment directed at Eck, and that also some players were uncomfortable about the incident.
Thinking about this some more -- Price didn't stand up for Rodriguez at all, at least as far as what has been reported. He made a sarcastic comment to Eck and when Eck tried to reply, Price told him to F Off. (Twice.)I think that Price's conduct was childish. Taking a little criticism is part of the deal. Him saying that he's sticking up for a team mate is baloney.
except that Remy is better partThanks for this thoughtful long post. I didn't want to quote it all, but I agree with every word.
This.His "Yuck" wasn't necessarily meaning that the pitcher is the worst. He was just reacting to the numbers that popped up. They were not good numbers, so he said "yuck".
I can't imagine there was any more thought or intent than that. Just like that time he read Youk's lips on national TV. He's just up there riffing.
If the team is sitting there stewing over any of this, then they need to refocus on baseball.
Apparently......maybe .....Caught most of Farrell's weekly appearance on D,H,& K. Didn't deny, or even clarify, or have an issue with Shank's story. Which is troubling on 2 levels: That repugnant troll actually did some reporting and got this story right. Yuck. And apparently Farrell has no problem with this kind of childish, thin skinned, focused on the wrong things behavior by Price and others on this ball club. Maybe even actively supports it. And while none of this rises to level of crime against humanity that many in talk radio and on these imbecilic CSNNE talk shows act like it does. And if the club gets hot again, this will all be quickly forgotten. It does, I think, speak to Farrell's lack of leadership, and to this club a having a weird, immature, hyper sensitive locker room culture.
Pretty terrible article, and that's coming from someone who would have loved to agree with it.Buckley wrote an article today that adds more details and places the blame on JF. If this has already been posted, accept my apologies.
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/red_sox/2017/07/buckley_fake_tough_guy_john_farrell_to_blame_for_david_price_s_tirade#.WXenmYdnOE1.facebook
Interesting--I went the opposite direction. Basically, I feel like this whole thing could have been quashed with a well timed, "Hey, knock it off." That that didn't and hasn't happened suggests a bad vibe to me, and quashing bad vibes might well be the manager's most important job.Pretty terrible article, and that's coming from someone who would have loved to agree with it.
This reporter sounds like he thinks JF has the same obligation to be "tough" in defense of Eck as he would in defense of his players. Tons of false equicalencies throughout.