Are Sox prepared enough to deal with Wakefield what ifs?

What do the Sox do if Buchholz shines in Wakefield's absence?

Tim Wakefield went on the disabled list Tuesday afternoon in what was either the last in a series of remarkable coincidences or the final step in a meticulously plotted chain of events designed to provide the nearly 43-year-old some rest while allowing the Sox to maximize the depth of their starting pitching.

I’m going to assume it’s the latter, because even Quentin Tarantino would have trouble penning a script with this many random twists of fate. Think about all that transpired leading up to yesterday’s news:

—Wakefield made his final start prior to the All-Star Game July 8.

—Terry Francona announced on July 12, two days before the All-Star Game, that Wakefield would not pitch again until July 22, providing him 13 days of rest between starts.

—Francona also announced July 12 that the Sox—who were off on July 16, the first day of the second half, before playing six straight games—would employ a six-man rotation for that cycle of games and that Clay Buchholz would make the Sox’ first start of the second half against the Blue Jays on his regular four days rest.

—Joe Maddon said the day of the All-Star Game that he would utilize Wakefield as an emergency pitcher, one he would not call upon unless the game went deep into extra innings and he needed someone to throw multiple frames.

—Wakefield did not pitch in the All-Star Game and hurt his back in a side session in Toronto Saturday, leading the Sox to place him on the shelf and replace him with Buchholz, who starts tonight in Texas on, amazingly enough, his regular four days rest.

—Wakefield is placed on the disabled list retroactive to July 18, meaning the earliest he can return is Aug. 2—two days after the trade deadline.

If this really was all part of a grand plan, it’s further confirmation of how careful and thorough the Sox are in all matters, baseball and otherwise. If the Sox have been planning for Buchholz to take Wakefield’s spot in the rotation for the rest of July, then they’ve exhibited even more foresight than we gave them credit for last week.

It doesn’t help the Sox, from a competitive standpoint, to officially announce they plan to give Wakefield—who has been injured in each of the last four seasons—a few weeks off, even if they have in the past alluded to such plans for their pitchers. The longer a guy like Buchholz toils away at Pawtucket, the better the Sox’ depth looks to potential trading partners as the July 31 deadline approaches. And yet by bringing him up now, the Sox can see their 4-5-6 starters—John Smoltz, Brad Penny and Buchholz—pitch twice more apiece as they try to figure out what to do with the glut of starters come August.

That said, it’s also quite fair to be skeptical about the severity and location of Wakefield’s injury. During the AL Division Series two years ago, Francona admitted the Sox fudged the details of Wakefield’s “back” injury, which was first revealed to be a shoulder injury and then later a small tear of the right rotator cuff.

It’s also worth wondering if Wakefield, who authored the feel-good story of the first half, is headed for a far less satisfying second half even if he does return within a couple weeks. The last time Buchholz made a start for an ailing Wakefield, he threw a no-hitter. That probably won’t happen again tonight, but it’ll be interesting to see what happens if Buchholz strings together a couple good starts in Wakefield’s absence and the club still has five other starters when Wakefield returns.

The Sox can only reward Buchholz with trips back to Pawtucket so many times before they run the risk of damaging relations with their potential future ace. Smoltz is a future Hall of Famer whom the Sox signed with his October brilliance in mind, so he’s not likely to be dumped. If it comes down to Wakefield vs. Penny, Wakefield probably wins based on recent performance as well as organizational stature.

But still: As nice a tale as Wakefield spun the first three-plus months of the season, the fact is he was a league average pitcher outside of his inflamed win total. What if he’s clearly the Sox’ sixth-best starter when he returns? As studious as the Sox are about everything, I can’t imagine there’s any preparing for a scenario that awkward.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Wakefield and Beckett! Ready your breakfast and eat hearty!

Tim Wakefield and/or Josh Beckett will have plenty of reason to bellow if they take down enough big league batters to approach or reach 300 wins. Photo from this site.

When he signed Tim Wakefield in the spring of 1995, Dan Duquette had no idea he was plucking off the scrap heap the man who would likely someday become the Red Sox’ all-time winningest pitcher. But Wakefield should surpass both Cy Young and Roger Clemens as the top winner in franchise history at some point next season, and his success over the last 15 seasons—but particularly this year, when Wakefield earned his first trip to the All-Star Game—had Duquette in an understandably gushy mood when Joe Haggerty caught up with him this week.

Duquette recalled how Phil Niekro, the Hall of Fame knuckleballer, told Wakefield shortly after he signed with the Sox that if he could harness and master the pitch, he could pitch until he turned 50. At that point, Haggerty points out, Wakefield would have Hall of Fame-caliber numbers.

Of course, possessing the potential to pitch until 50 and actually doing so are two different things, to which Haggerty also alludes. Hall of Fame knuckleballer Hoyt Wilhelm retired weeks before his 50th birthday in 1972. Niekro retired at 48 and fellow knuckleballer Charlie Hough retired at 46 due to physical issues (Niekro felt he could no longer cover first and Hough needed a hip replacement). Wakefield, of course, has endured his own increasingly frequent ailments since he turned 40.

For the sake of this blog entry, let’s say Wakefield wins one of his two or three starts before his 43rd birthday Aug. 2. That would give him 91 wins since his 36th birthday. To maintain that pace for another seven years would mean he ages in more graceful fashion than either Niekro (78 wins after turning 43) and Hough (30 wins after turning 43), yet still leave him at “only” 283 as he turns 50.

And to win another 17 games to reach the magical, Cooperstown-worthy 300-win mark would rank as one of the most remarkable feats in baseball history, since no pitcher has ever won a single game after his 50th birthday. Jack Quinn came closest, recording his final big league victory at 49.

All of which is to say that Wakefield’s probably not going to reach 300 wins. It’s hard to say any active player has a good shot at 300 wins (though Jamie Moyer is at 255 after he one-hit the Marlins over seven innings last night), but the more I think about it, the more I think Josh Beckett has a pretty interesting shot at it.

Beckett won his 100th career game Sunday at the age of 29, which puts him three years ahead of Johnson and in the same ballpark as recent 300-game winners Greg Maddux (won his 100th game at age 27), Roger Clemens (won his 100th game at age 27) and Tom Glavine (won his 100th game at age 28).

It also means he compares quite favorably to the likes of Moyer (won his 100th game at age 35), Wakefield (won his 100th game at age 36), David Wells (won his 100th game at age 34) and Curt Schilling (won his 100th game at age 33), all of whom were far better in their 30s and 40s than in their 20s.

Beckett is in good physical condition, has avoided the surgeon’s knife—though he’s had his share of injury scares—and seems like the type of player who should remain competitive and inspired well into his 30s. It’ll be pretty fascinating if Beckett is being discussed as the next legitimate candidate to join the 300-win club seven or eight years from now—but, admittedly, not nearly as fascinating as if Wakefield is still in the discussion, too.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Wakefield's a worthy All-Star Cinderella, but a starter? That's madness

Tim Wakefield is waving hello to the All-Star Game for the first time. Photo from this site.

I’m a sucker for a good NCAA Tournament analogy, or even one that may not be all that good, so I’m figuring that when it comes to the All-Star Game, Tim Wakefield is the 17-12 BCS school to David Aardsma’s 28-4 mid-major.

Of course, this is just the All-Star Game, which provides a diversion for three days in the middle of July, and not March Madness, which allows overworked, underappreciated worker bees to stick it to the man for two glorious weeks, adds billions of illegal dollars to the American economy and generally gives us a reason to live as we count down the hours to Opening Day.

And Wakefield’s inclusion on the American League roster over the deserving likes of Aardsma (who converted 17 of his first 18 save chances with an ERA below 2.00) and others is merely fodder for barroom arguments (virtual and actual) and not borderline criminal, a la the annual screwing of the little guy to get the Big East or the Pac-10 yet another damn at-large bid.

Unlike Arizona, which has made the NCAA Tournament every year since the dawn of time, it’s impossible not to be happy for Wakefield, who earned his first All-Star Game berth in his 22nd professional season. But like Arizona, which responded to the criticism of its at-large bid in March by becoming the lowest-seeded team to reach the Sweet Sixteen, Wakefield did his part to silence any naysayers (heh, I always knew he’d make the team) last night by recording his AL-best 11th win and whiffing a season-high eight in leading the Sox past the Athletics, 5-4.

Aardsma, meanwhile, did a bang-up impersonation Wednesday of a mid-major who responds to an NCAA snub by getting smoked in the first round of the NIT: In his first appearance since the All-Star squads were announced, Aardsma was tattooed for four runs (three earned) without recording an out as he blew a three-run lead and took the defeat in the Mariners’ 5-3 loss to the Orioles.

Wakefield still wouldn’t be my choice as one of the eight best starting pitchers in the league, but he did produce a pretty impressive final kick in the weeks leading up to the All-Star selections (2-0 with a 3.04 ERA and a 14/2 K/BB ratio in his last four starts) and has improved his standing in most statistical categories. In addition to leading the league in wins, he’s tied for 24th in ERA (4.14) and tied for 25th in WHIP (1.38). He’s also increased his K/BB ratio from 1.34 to 1.65.

That said, SportsCenter grouping him in Wednesday night with Zack Greinke and Roy Halladay as candidates to start for the American League in St. Louis is lunacy. All three hurlers would be able to make the start on five or more days of rest, but Greinke and Halladay each rank among the top five in all three pitching Triple Crown categories and would be far more deserving of the start—whether in recognition of a remarkable comeback from the depression that threatened to Greinke’s career or, in Halladay’s case, as a nod to an impressive, nearly decade-long body of work.

Wakefield’s inclusion on the team is perfectly fine and a cool acknowledgment of a career defined by equal parts durability, perseverance and quiet nobility. Still, as an at-large honoree, he’s not quite the 1986 LSU Tigers, either.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Forget Mauer and Pujols, keep your eye on Ichiro this summer

I've got a feeling Ichiro has .400 in his sights. Photo from this site.

With his first pitch to Ichiro Suzuki tonight, Tim Wakefield will become the Red Sox’ all-time leader in games started, as Joel Sherman noted in this interesting piece he penned earlier this week for SI.com. As remarkable a feat as that is for someone the Sox rescued off the scrap heap 14 years ago, I was tempted to write how it pales in comparison to the history that could be set this season as Suzuki pursues the magical .400 mark.

Then I did the math, and my first thought was to no longer wonder why most people are more focused on Joe Mauer’s pursuit of .400 or Albert Pujols’ flirtation with the Triple Crown.

Then I pondered it some more, and I decided to say screw it, that Suzuki is going to make a more serious run at .400 than Mauer will at .400 and Pujols will at the Triple Crown, even if Suzuki’s path to history appears more treacherous.

Mauer, who entered Friday hitting .392, missed the first month of the season, which both lessens and boosts his chances of reaching .400. He can’t afford another stint on the disabled list nor an extended slump. And as a catcher, the chances are he’s going to incur the types of bumps and bruises that put a drain on his bat.

That said, the math doesn’t lie: A player’s chances of hitting .400 decrease with every plate appearance. George Brett believes missing a month of the 1980 season was one of the biggest reasons he made such a serious run at .400 before he finished at .390.

Pujols is once again lapping the field in the NL MVP race and leads the circuit in homers (30, six more than the Padres’ Adrian Gonzalez) and RBI (77, two more than the Brewers’ Prince Fielder) while ranking fourth in batting average (.335, .013 behind the Marlins’ Hanley Ramirez). But will the rest of the mediocre Cardinals—Pujols is the only St. Louis player with an average above .300, an on-base percentage above .355 and a slugging percentage above .455—eventually make it impossible for Pujols to fend off Fielder in RBI?

Suzuki, meanwhile, is in the midst of one of his patented red-hot midseason runs. The career .349 hitter from May through July is hitting .386 since May 1 of this season and hit a robust .407 in June. He’s batting .370 overall, easily the best in baseball (at least until Mauer qualifies for the batting crown).

The problem would seem to be that maintaining a .407 average the rest of this season would leave Suzuki “only” at .389. Assuming Suzuki gets as many at-bats (108) per month the rest of the season as he did in June, he’d have to hit an eye-popping .432 (140-for-324) to finish at .401. Actually, he could go a mere 139-for-324 and finish at .3996, which rounds up to .400, but if Ted Williams—the last .400 hitter—wasn’t willing to sit on .3995 with two games left to play, damnit, we’re not accepting it from anyone else.

Anyway, hitting .432 for more than half a season sounds impossible. Except Suzuki has already basically done it once. He hit an insane .429 after the All-Star Break in 2005, the season in which he racked up a record 262 hits.

And he’s pretty good at doing the impossible more than once. In a column today, ESPN.com’s Jayson Stark noted that, through Tuesday, Suzuki had at least one hit in 53 of his last 56 games. Only three players (including Johnny Damon in 2005, when he fashioned a 29-game hitting streak) have had such a streak since Joe DiMaggio’s record 56-game hitting streak in 1941, and Suzuki is the only one who has done it twice. TWICE.

The only other player to ever accomplish that? That’s right: DiMaggio.

So why can’t Suzuki hit .432 the rest of the season and produce another streak similar to (or better than) his 53-in-56 run? The guy is as pure a hitter as the game has ever seen. He legs out plenty of infield singles. He’s racing towards his record ninth straight 200-hit season in as many big league seasons, will surge past 2,000 hits this summer and has to be taken as a legitimate candidate to reach 3,000 hits even though he turns 36 in October.

Also aiding Suzuki’s quest is the Mariners’ surprising competitiveness as well as…hmm, how shall we put this…his intense interest in his numbers. Even if he’s not as selfish as he has been portrayed, he seems to like his stats. That’s a human reaction shared by about 98 percent of his peers, but not a politically correct one. And I bet it makes things really interesting come the middle of September, when the guess here is Suzuki is answering a whole lot more questions about an individual pursuit than either Mauer or Pujols.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Hey now, Tim Wakefield's not an All-Star

Will Tim Wakefield bag the All-Star appearance that eluded Mike Timlin? Photo from this site

I’m quite sure Terry Francona wishes the Red Sox had managed to win Game Seven of the ALCS last year, a victory which would have made him the manager of this year’s American League All-Star team. But with every win Tim Wakefield earns, I’m betting you that somewhere deep inside, Francona is glad he’s not the guy who has to decide whether or not Wakefield deserves a spot on the AL roster.

Actually, the two managers are part of a committee that determines the All-Star reserves and pitchers. But when players who aren’t selected despite worthy resumes are looking for someone to blame, they never blame the committee, only the managers. And Major League Baseball pretty much condones this: Check out how those fine folks not-so-subtly pass the buck to the managers in this press release announcing last year’s All-Star teams.

It’s especially uncomfortable when an All-Star manager has to tell qualified players on his own team that they’re not going to the Midsummer Classic, as Francona learned in 2005, when Mike Timlin and Matt Clement were none too pleased to miss out. Clement ended up going as an injury replacement, but Timlin was right: His best chance at an All-Star Game berth came and went with, well, no berth. (But here’s a consolation prize, Mike: An appearance in this weekend’s Hall of Fame Classic)

And if Francona thought Timlin’s case made for an awkward situation, imagine the ordeal that could come out of having to leave Wakefield—the very definition of a sentimental favorite—off the team.

At 42, Wakefield would likely be the oldest first-time All-Star since Satchel Paige, the Negro Leagues veteran who wasn’t allowed to reach the majors until he was 42 and who made the All-Star Game for the first time at 45.

At an age when most pitchers are winding down or retiring, Wakefield has turned into one of the game’s most consistent pitchers: He averaged 12 wins and 187 innings per season while compiling a WHIP of 1.29 from 2003 through 2008.

Wakefield is also on the verge of becoming perhaps the most decorated Sox pitcher ever. He’s made 380 starts for the Sox, two shy of Roger Clemens’ team record. He’s 112 1/3 innings away from toppling Clemens and becoming the club’s all-time leader in that category. And with 173 wins in a Sox uniform, he’s just 20 away from breaking the record shared by Clemens and Cy Young.

That’s not to say Wakefield is better than Clemens or Young, of course. But he has produced one of the most impressive careers in the history of a franchise rich with tradition, and he hasn’t been racking up meaningless wins and innings: He’s been a vital contributor to the Sox’ finest era in almost a century.

Add into the equation Wakefield’s reputation as one of the most selfless players, on and off the field, in the game and how warmly received his inclusion on the team would be by fellow players and the fans alike and what better way is there to reward Wakefield than with a well-deserved trip to the All-Star Game?

Except…he’s not among the most deserving candidates.

Wakefield is certainly having a fine season. With nine wins in 13 starts, he’s tied for second in the AL in wins with Kevin Slowey and more than halfway to setting a career high in wins. He’s thrown 82 innings, one-third of an inning less than Sox leader Josh Beckett. He’s recorded nine quality starts and has lasted at least six innings 10 times in 13 starts.

And Wakefield was the Sox’ best pitcher when the team needed him the most: He posted a 1.86 ERA and threw seven innings three times in four starts in April, during which Beckett, Jon Lester, Brad Penny and Daisuke Matsuzaka combined to post a 7.29 ERA and barely averaged five innings per outing.

But Wakefield’s peripheral statistics indicate his gaudy win total is at least partially a result of good fortune and better run support. He is 7-2 in nine starts since May 1, yet has posted a 5.77 ERA and a 1.66 WHIP while allowing opposing batters to hit .306 against him.

He ranks fourth in the AL in run support (9.66), and he’ll move up two spots after today’s games, when both the Rays’ Jeff Niemann and the Rangers’ Brandon McCarthy will no longer average an inning pitched per team game.

Overall, Wakefield is tied for 23rd in the AL in opponents’ batting average (.256), 28th in ERA (4.39) and 33rd in WHIP (1.41). There are 19 pitchers who rank ahead of Wakefield in all three categories. In addition, Wakefield’s strikeout-to-walk ratio of 1.34 (47 whiffs/35 walks) is fourth-worst among AL qualifiers.

None of this is intended to minimize the season Wakefield is having, or the contributions he continues to make to the Sox. And Wakefield is not the type to raise a ruckus if he’s not selected to the All-Star Team, which Joe Maddon should learn if he and the rest of the committee remove sentiment from the selection process next month.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Tim Wakefield still has more Opening Day starts than no-hitters

Tim Wakefield had a close shave with history Wednesday. (Booooo!!! Terrible pun!!) Thanks to this site for the photo.


Tim Wakefield, already the architect of a career as fascinating as it is unlikely, nearly authored another unexpected chapter Wednesday, when he carried a no-hitter into the eighth inning of the Red Sox’ 8-2 win over the Athletics in Oakland.

Watching it on NESN in upstate New York (bless you, Extra Innings, bless you), I couldn’t help but think after seven innings that Wakefield was going to make the history that ever-so-narrowly eluded the grasp of Curt Schilling in Oakland June 7, 2007. Wakefield threw just 54 pitches through six innings and got the Dustin Pedroia Special, albeit courtesy of Nick Green, when the journeyman shortstop made a lunging, over-the-shoulder catch in the seventh inning.

I was also impressed by how Wakefield, so often the picture of unwavering stoicism, seemed to be enjoying the hell out of his latest flirtation with a no-hitter (it was the fourth time he’s carried a no-hitter beyond the seventh inning). He flashed a huge grin after Green’s catch and mocked superstition by sitting around teammates in the dugout even as the no-hitter progressed. At 42, he seemed to realize the serendipity of the moment.

There was a certain sadness when Schilling lost his gem with two outs in the eighth. He was no longer the dominant workhorse of his youth or even of 2004, and it seemed unlikely he’d ever pitch into the ninth again, never mind carry a no-hitter that far.

It was still a bit disappointing when Travis Buck ended the no-hitter with one out in the eighth (thou shalt not root, but thou shalt not mind seeing a no-hitter, either), and sure, the odds are against Wakefield ever throwing a no-hitter, especially with the injuries beginning to pile up as he approaches his mid-40s. But he’s also a knuckleballer whose livelihood depends on the unpredictability of his signature pitch. So who knows? Maybe he’ll join the no-hitter club before he hangs up the spikes.

Wakefield’s impressive second start gives us a second chance to make a post I intended to make last Friday, before the Easter weekend and computer issues sent me to the sidelines for a few days (apologies for that, and hope you liked the segue). Wakefield, of course, is synonymous with the back end of the Sox rotation, and in 15 seasons with the Sox has never made an Opening Day start. He’s only made one Opening Day start as a big leaguer—way back in 1993 with the Pirates.

Of course, he has also been surrounded by some pretty outstanding company—Roger Clemens, Pedro Martinez and Curt Schilling have combined to make 10 of the 14 Opening Day starts since Wakefield’s first full season with the Sox in 1996—and has been a solid, dependable pitcher far more often than not in Boston: He’s thrown at least 180 frames and won at least 10 games in nine of his 10 seasons as a full-time starter.

Yet Wakefield is also making a run at the franchise record for wins shared by Cy Young, the guy for whom the award honoring pitching excellence is named, and Clemens, the guy who has won more of those awards than anyone else. So I got to thinking: Is it unusual for a guy as decorated as Wakefield to have so rarely toed the rubber on Opening Day?

Short answer: Yes. Wakefield entered the season sixth among active pitchers with 178 wins. Yet his one Opening Day start ties him for 24th among the 30 active pitchers with at least 100 wins entering the season (active defined as those in a big league organization, which disqualifies the likes of Pedro Martinez, who is not retired but is not playing).

The five guys ahead of Wakefield—Tom Glavine, Randy Johnson, Jamie Moyer, Andy Pettitte and John Smoltz—have combined for 31 Opening Day starts. The only players among the active 100-game winners to not make an Opening Day start are Jon Garland, Kelvim Escobar and Darren Oliver, the latter two of whom have spent a chunk of their careers as full-time relievers.

In one of those fun facts that’s surprising at first but not so much at a second glance, it turns out Pettitte (215 wins entering the season) is the Wakefield of the Yankees with one Opening Day start. Pettitte’s teammates over the years, of course, have included the likes of Clemens (four Opening Day starts for the Yankees), Roy Oswalt (three Opening Day starts for the Astros), Johnson (two Opening Day starts for the Yankees) and David Cone (two Opening Day starts for the Yankees).

The full list of Opening Day starts by active pitches is below. Wakefield’s spot on it is interesting, at least to me, and a pretty neat summation of his career. He’s not a Hall of Famer, but he’s proved that consistency and reliability is, in its own way, almost as valuable.

Opening Day starts by active pitchers (through 2009)
Randy Johnson 14
Tom Glavine 8
Roy Halladay 7
Roy Oswalt 7
Mark Buerhle 7
Bartolo Colon 6
CC Sabathia 6
Livan Hernandez 5
Tim Hudson 5
Kevin Millwood 5
Jamie Moyer 4
John Smoltz 4
Jeff Suppan 4
Barry Zito 4
Derek Lowe 4
Johan Santana 4
Chris Carpenter 4
Mike Hampton 3
Jason Schmidt 3
Javier Vazquez 3
Freddy Garcia 3
Chan Ho Park 2
Shawn Estes 2
Andy Pettitte 1
Tim Wakefield 1
Tom Gordon 1
Russ Ortiz 1
Jon Garland 0
Kelvim Escobar 0
Darren Oliver 0

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.

Fighting Words Q&A: Tim Wakefield

Thanks to this site for the photo.

Tim Wakefield is scheduled to make his season debut for the Red Sox tonight, so who better than Wakefield to lead off our series of Q&As that were conducted during the writing of Fighting Words?

But it’s more than just good timing that makes Wakefield a perfect choice to start us off. The interview we did—in January 2005, the afternoon of the annual BBWAA dinner in Boston—was one of the most interesting of the entire project. Wakefield was expansive, talkative and revealing throughout a 30-minute interview that went as smoothly as our first encounter months earlier went awkwardly awful.

I’d post that first interview we did in May 2004, except I don’t want to subject you to something that had me ready to curl into the fetal position and head back to college to study accounting. I was interested in doing a harmless magazine feature on Wakefield, but he eyed me with suspicion as I introduced myself and responded to almost all of my questions with abrupt one- or two-word answers. Thank goodness for Doug Mirabelli and Alan Embree, who filled in a lot of space on that feature.

Subsequent meetings with Wakefield that season went a little better, and he uttered one of my all-time favorite quotes after Game Seven of the ALCS, when I reminded him of his quote after the Sox fell behind three games to none (“We’ve been in this situation before—not in a championship series, but in a division series, and we’ve come out smelling like roses”) and asked him what a history-making comeback smelled like.

“Eleventeen thousand roses,” he said with a laugh as he held hands with his wife Stacy.

Still, I didn’t expect our interview in January to go as well as it did. Upon further reflection, I figured Wakefield was so wary at first because he’s a guy who learned quite fast and quite often how fragile a career can be for a ballplayer, particularly for someone whose livelihood relies entirely on a pitch as unpredictable as the knuckleball. Wakefield was drafted as a first baseman out of Florida Tech in 1988, but converted to a knuckleballer after hitting .189 and .235 in his first two professional seasons.

He went from Double-A to big league stardom in the blink of an eye in 1992, but then went 6-11 in 1993, spent all of 1994 in the minor leagues and was released by the Pirates in spring training 1995. He was signed by Dan Duquette, and a confidence-boosting tutorial with the knuckleballing Niekros helped turn Wakefield back into the best pitcher in the game for several months that season. The next nine seasons were a series of ups and downs for Wakefield, who bounced between the rotation and the bullpen and between periods of dominance and periods of abject hittability.

So he had plenty of reason to be perpetually serious and stoic, particularly around those whom he didn’t recognize or know all that well—which is why I found this interview to be so interesting and rewarding. I hope you agree…and I hope you come back later today for another Wakefield-themed post.


How aware of the media were you when you arrived in 1995?

I had no idea what it was like. I just learned by experience, by being around.

Given that there are so many media covering the team, is this a tough place for somebody to be reserved and to keep to himself?

No, I think it’s easy to be reserved here in Boston. I may be saying that out of the experience of the last couple of years. Being here so long, I’ve gotten to know a lot of the guys by first names and they respect my privacy and I respect their jobs. But I think the biggest thing is to be honest with people. And I’ve tried to do that my whole career. I think it’s the best philosophy to take, not only in our sport but also in life.

Has the design of the locker room changed at all while you’ve been here?

Yeah, it has, a lot. Technically speaking, probably not. But they’ve done a good job as far as using the space that we’ve had there—moving things around. I think some additions—a food room, I remember we used to have the food catered in and it sat on top of our travel trunks inside the clubhouse. That’s where we ate, just grabbed a plate of food and went to your locker and sat down and tried to eat your food. Now, you can go and have a little bit of privacy and we have a food room. The new additions that they’re making now, I can’t wait to see.

Where were you located originally in the locker room?

You know the pole that the TVs are on? On that pole directly across from Curtis [Leskanic’s] locker? There used to be a locker that sat there by itself. They actually bring one in in September when rosters expanded, put a temporary one there. But that’s where my locker used to be.

Was it hard to avoid attention sitting there?

I think the biggest thing that was hard about that locker spot was when guys would do their postgame interviews, they would happen right there in front of that pole. So I was getting media guys and camera guys trampling over me, trying to get a shot. But you learn to live with it.

What’s the player’s perspective as he observes reporters in the locker room?

[Pauses] It’s difficult at times, especially during times that are supposed to be meant for downtime. Maybe you’re trying to get up for the game, mentally, and you’ve got so many people walking in and out of the clubhouse. But for the most part, I’ve learned that you try to share space with not only your teammates but the guys like yourselves that are there to do a job too. Sometimes, it can get hectic. It’s a battle for space, but that’s part of dealing with people on an everyday basis.

In terms of media attention, did you feel like you went from zero to 60 mph during your first season here in 1994 [in which Wakefield, who was signed early in the season following his release by the Pirates, went 14-1 with a 1.65 ERA in his first 17 starts]?

It was more like zero to 100—quickly. I won my first three games, I won three in a week, My first start was against Anaheim, then they took me out early and I started two days later against Oakland and then I took my regular start back at home and won three in a row. I was kind of thrust into the limelight, so to speak.

I still even today get the questions of ‘how did you get started throwing that pitch?’ And I’ve answered that question probably a thousand times. But it’s just part of our job, you know?

Was the attention ever overwhelming during that first year?

Not really. I was just glad to be in the big leagues again after making a splash in ’92 with the Pirates and then struggling for the next two years and then getting released. I can remember getting released and driving home thinking I was done, I wasn’t going to play anymore, then I got a second opportunity and a chance to work with both Joe and Phil Niekro and kind of got my confidence back to where it needed to be. And I’ve been here ever since.

What’s the worst period of player-media relations that you can recall?

I can’t recall of it ever getting bad. I can recall just certain players and certain members of the media—maybe a relationship got bad and it might have just been the opinion of the writer that may have said something wrong. Sometimes it’s hard to stay away from the negative. We deal with it everyday. A majority of the guys are very objective as far as their writing skills. And sometimes it can get a little bit personal. But other than that, I can’t recall any other relationship really getting too bad.

A lot of writers have said things were especially tense in 2001 and Dante Bichette said the season was a very difficult one.

You’ve got to understand, too, that we’re under a lot of pressure every day to perform, especially in a market like Boston. So you add a little of that fuel to that fire sometimes and things may get out of hand once in a while. I think Dante was right: Dealing with the frustrations of the season, the way the season was going, the tragic thing that happened on Sept. 11, the change of managers. Our travel home from Florida [following the terrorist attacks], that was kind of ridiculous—we bussed and trained and flew, then bussed. It was a 36-hour trip for us to get back to Boston. The emotions run high sometimes, you get frustrated with the way things are going. It’s tough to stay on an even keel at times.

Did you ever sense there was a negative atmosphere in Boston because it had been so long since the team had won?

Like I said before, the majority of the writers are very objective when they write. But there is some negativity, a little bit, and I think a lot of that stems just from the broadness of media coverage. I think maybe 10, 15 years ago, there was only a handful of writers and it was only a couple of major publications that were out there. Talk radio wasn’t really very big. I can remember talking with a friend of mine who played football and the only thing that the football players had was Sports Illustrated. ESPN wasn’t really around. They had Sports Illustrated and I can’t remember the other sports magazine, it might have been The Sporting News. That was basically it, and your local beat writers.

Now, times have changed, to the point where there is so much information that’s out there via the Internet, via different kinds of newspaper print media, electronic media, talk shows, radio. I think it’s gotten to the point where the competition between you guys has really [pauses]…as a writer, I would think, you have to search for a different angle to try to get your story read or get people to buy the paper that you write for. I think that’s where the negative—not the negative image, but I think a lot of the lack of objectiveness has come in. But you have to understand that. I’ve understood that ever since more and more writers are coming in and there’s more and more people to talk to. It’s hard for me to know people by name. Just so many of them.

Are you wary whenever you’re approached by a writer you’ve never talked to before?

Yeah, because like I said before, there’s some writers that are trying to dig. They’re not very objective, they’re trying to do a story that really isn’t there. And if I don’t know the person, it takes a little bit for me to warm up to you, because I’m not going to volunteer a whole lot of personal information to somebody that I don’t really know. That goes in my general life skills, I would say. I’ll answer all kinds of questions about the game and about stuff like that, but some questions are hard to answer when I don’t know somebody, because I don’t know where they’re going with the questions.

Do you think a lack of space in the locker room can create some tensions between the media and the players?

I think some tension comes from that. Some of the tension may come from some of the negative that’s written about the team or about a certain player, because we’re a family in there. And when something bad is written about one of my teammates, regardless of whether it’s warranted or not, I take offense to it a little bit. And sometimes it’s hard to control that.

Did you ever worry you’d be painted as a goat, for lack of a better term, after you gave up the home run to Aaron Boone last year?

A little bit. But, you know, one thing that I’ve learned over my career is, one, to be honest. Two is to stand up and take responsibility for your actions. And I think sometimes that can be a good thing. And it can be a bad thing sometimes. I see too many players—I don’t want to say make excuses, but you know what I mean? [They] talk around it. I don’t know where I learned to do that, but I was always taught, if something good happens, to give credit to your teammates. Something bad happens, stand up and be accountable for your actions.

Do you think being the longest-tenured member of the Sox helped?

I think from a fan’s perspective, yeah, I think so.

How about from the media’s perspective?

I did get some tough questions that night, even from our local media. But I think, for the most part, the fact that I stood there and answered questions—I think [it] helped. I think a lot of the guys know what my character was about and they understand that I was giving 110 percent out there.

I wasn’t worried about being portrayed as a bad guy from the media, from that standpoint I was more worried about the fans’ reactions to me.

You got a stirring standing ovation at the BBWAA dinner a few months later. Did you know then that the fans weren’t going to punish you for the home run, or did you realize it before that?

Before that. Like a week afterwards, I think. I stuck around for a little while, my wife and I were trying to get things packed up and go home to Florida. I was out to dinner or the grocery store or something and people would pat me on the back [and] say ‘Don’t worry about it.’ So I knew before that.

Are you surprised to hear so many stars have had rough relationships with the press?

Am I surprised? No, because like I said before, for the core of guys that are in our clubhouse everyday, the core of our team, all it takes is one guy—I’m talking from a teammates’ perspective—[to] ruin the chemistry of a team. And I think for you guys, it might be one guy that’s not very objective, that’s very negative in his writing that may ruin it for the rest of you.

Did you have some empathy for how Nomar Garciaparra in terms of how uncomfortable he was with the press?

I felt particularly bad for Nomar because he was thrust into the limelight so quickly. It’s that superstar status—sometimes you just want some quiet downtime in your locker. That’s like our office, you know? And sometimes it can get too crowded in there and sometimes you have to answer the same question over and over again and it gets frustrating after a while. And I think that’s why he tried to establish a routine, to where he would talk to you guys at one time [so] he wouldn’t have to answer the same questions from the previous days.

How do you think current ownership has helped to change the relationship between the team and the press?

I think since the new regime has taken over, we’ve tried—and it’s an effort not only from the organization’s standpoint but also from the player’s standpoint—we’ve gotten together and tried to create a more friendly atmosphere to work in for both of us. Because we both understand that everyone has a job to do that’s in there. And I think if we open u the communication—were you around when Tony [Massarotti] came in and we talked [during] the first team meeting [in 2002]? I thought whoever thought of that idea was pretty good, for us as players and for him representing the rest of you guys, to be able to start a communication thing there, to understand what we as players were looking for and also what the media’s looking for at the same time.

I think it’s just a relationship that’s built on time. I’ve known Tony for a long time and Sean McAdam. I’ve been here for enough time to build those types of relationships with those guys, to talk off the record about life. They obviously look at me as, OK, baseball’s my job, but I’m also a person and you guys are writers, but you’re also people too. So why can’t we set aside our jobs and talk as men or talk as friends or whatever about life, about our kids, other sports, or whatever?

Have you seen more guys have those type of relationships with writers over the last few years?

It’s tough to say for guys that haven’t been here as long as I have. I don’t know if they’ve really established relationships with anybody.

Did you hear a lot about “The Curse?”

That’s been said for a long time—ever since I’ve been here. You take it with a grain of salt: ‘Yeah, OK, whatever.’ I never really gave it much thought. I just think it was a nice cliché to be able to write about for such a long period of time.

Do you think things will change now that the Sox have won it all?

[Laughs] I think it’ll be a little bit easier for everybody involved.

Email Jerry at jbeach73@gmail.com.