• August 25th @ The Tigers

    Posted by on August 26th, 2007 · Comments (6)

    Don’t get me wrong, it’s always good when the Yankees win. I’ll take a Yankees win over a Yankees loss, any time, any day, any season – no matter what the standings, situation, etc.

    And, it’s beyond good – nearing awesome – to see Worm Killer Wang on top of his game. When he’s on, he’s an absolute pleasure to watch on the mound – like in the case of this game.

    Also, while I respect a pitcher who uses the inside corner of the plate and who is willing to make batters move in the box once in while, I thought that the Tigers’ Jeremy Bonderman came up and in to Yankees batters too many times in this game. Below the belt is fine – a pitcher should make a batter move his feet once in a while. However, Bonderman was coming up and in every time – above the belt and too close to heads. So, it was great to see the Yankees tag Bonderman for seven runs in less than six innings – as payback of sorts for his brushbacks.

    Good to see, awesome to see, great to see…yet, because of where the recent losses to the Angels and the loss in the game before this one (to the Tigers) have put the Yankees in the chase for a post-season berth, it’s hard to get overly excited about this game – at least to me. It just feels like a win – but, one that’s too little too late.

    Maybe some more wins in the next five games or so will change the way I feel about all this? And, I wonder if any other Yankees fans will the same way today?

    Comments on August 25th @ The Tigers

    1. antone
      August 26th, 2007 | 10:50 am

      Steve you are freakin’ out way too much…this is the toughest part of the schedule left, and so far besides the Angels they’ve done fine. Plus, Seattle still has most of their tough games left and they are only 1 game behind the Angels. So if they Yankees get through this stretch and either LA or SEA starts to struggle they should have a real good chance to make the playoffs.

    2. August 26th, 2007 | 12:01 pm

      ~~~So if they Yankees get through this stretch and either LA or SEA starts to struggle they should have a real good chance to make the playoffs.~~~

      That’s alotta “if’s”

    3. JeremyM
      August 26th, 2007 | 12:33 pm

      I’m at the point where I’m happy that I can wake up in the morning and see 15 or so box scores in the newspaper, because the season will soon be over and football and basketball just don’t do it for me. If the Yankees are the victors in one of those box scores, all the better. Personally, I still feel they have a great shot at catching Seattle, but if they don’t, Seattle must deserve it, because they shouldn’t be that good.

      As far as the division, that ship has sank (barring two head-to-head sweeps or winning 5 of 6) and I don’t think it matters one bit. As long as you get your ticket punched for the playoffs, there’s always that puncher’s chance. I’d argue that only Boston in 2004 and maybe Chicago in 2005 truly were the best teams of their championship year since 2001.

    4. August 26th, 2007 | 12:41 pm

      ~~~I’d argue that only Boston in 2004 and maybe Chicago in 2005 truly were the best teams of their championship year since 2001. ~~~

      Last year, agreed. But, I thought the Angels were pretty good in 2002.

      Hey, the Yankees still might make the wildcard this year, I agree. It’s just that I thought they would have taken it by now, or at least been within a game, in the LC, by now. It just seems like 3 in the LC is a lot to make up, just to pull even…with the clock continuing to tick.

    5. baileywalk
      August 26th, 2007 | 1:01 pm

      I know the general thought is that Seattle’s schedule becomes difficult, but I don’t really see it. They only have two truly tough teams to play — the Yankees and the Angels (I don’t think much of the Indians or Detroit).

      What is interesting is that Seattle has a three-game series coming up with the Angels starting tomorrow. When that series ends, L.A. could find itself in second place. They have another four-game series after that. Neither team has a particularly tough schedule going down the stretch (mostly Oakland and Texas, with a few Tampa Bay games for L.A.). Those games will be huge for both teams.

      The reason I don’t believe in Seattle is that it’s hard to believe in a team that has two lousy starters (Miguel Batista isn’t very good and Jeff Weaver is historically bad). If Seattle makes it to the playoffs with Weaver in their rotation, then my hat is off to them.

    6. JeremyM
      August 26th, 2007 | 1:48 pm

      The Angels were good in 2002, but I think the Giants should’ve won that series, and would have if that idiot Dusty Baker didn’t spoil it for them.

    Leave a reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.