I don’t care if players speak to the media or not, but I must add this personal observation….

The whole Erik Bedard thing….I just think the guy is extremely creepy….

When he does speak, he’s such a jerk about the whole thing that I’ve gotten to wondering. I just find it hard to believe that somebody so dour could be a good teammate. A guy like Jack Morris, sure he was a jerk, but at least he showed some inclination to battle on the mound.

And a guy like Mark Langston, yes he was more interested in his stats and his big contract than anything else.

But at least they seemed like real people.

Bedard’s behavior is condescending and creepy. I’m a huge Mariner fan, and usually I could care less about a player’s behavior so long as he played hard.

This Bedard guy, I just can’t get behind him. He really, really gives me the creeps.

…which makes me wonder what the question was that sparked Carl Everett’s “I dont believe in dinosaurs” rant.

Whose fault is that? Reporters. Because they’re not really reporters at all. Their job is to present the illusion that you’re in the clubhouse with the guys getting the straight dope. But it’s all bullshit, 100% of it. It’s pure, undistilled cliche, rote formulas that were first written in the 1920s. It has nothing to do with the players and nothing to do with baseball and how it is actually played.

I’m sorry, but anyone who wants to know how Player X felt after hitting the homer is a moron.

It’s a boring and stupid ritual. I could go on about how it plays into exactly the kinds of problems this team has — questions about chemistry and grit and trying harder and slumps and streaks and all the other bullcrap that gets in the way of seeing how to win baseball games.

Everything you need to know about baseball reportage and player responses is in “Bull Durham”. Everything.

There is also a completely bogus assumption that it’s “inside baseball”, that talking to the guy who hit the home run gets you closer to the truth than, say, looking at the pitch data. Most fans aren’t interested in pitch data; they want fake drama — because a constant diet of fake drama increases the appetite for it. Insider baseball? There is in fact usually an inverse relationship between inside access and valuable baseball writing. Roger Angell was great when he wrote about being a fan in his car on lonely New England roads; since he’s become a grand old man who gets to wander around the clubhouse he’s the most boring writer on earth. He cares what players think. But players don’t think — they play baseball. You can’t know what that’s like.

Now, if you REALLY want to see mindless repetition of identical cliches, watch the interviews with Premier League managers after English soccer games. Absolutely mind-numbing; makes someone like Edgar Martinez (the dullest baseball interviewee ever) seem like James Brown at the Apollo.

It’s a difficult job on both sides — there’s no doubt about that. Both parties are constantly judging each other, and neither wants to come off looking stupid. That’s why there can frequently be a combative atmosphere.

The key, on my side anyway, is to develop a working rapport with players and coaches. You don’t want to burn them unless you don’t have a choice, i.e. talking to Bedard in a friendly way only to turn around and slash him for a bad outing wouldn’t be a good idea. Players and press are vindictive. They’ll almost always hold a grudge.

Does anyone think the USSM writer/commentor reaction would be different if it was Carl Everett or Richie Sexson ducking interviews, rather than one of the ‘approved’ players?

No.

Wow, that one’s pretty warm and fuzzy.