Dan Gould

Interesting clarification about magic numbers in the Globe this morning: Normally, after a Red Sox win and a Rangers loss, the magic number would drop two, from 16 to 14. Turns out it drops to 13, via the following logic: If the Rangers somehow got hot and won every game left, they'd finish 98-64. But to win everything would include 7 against the Angels. The Angels would then end up competing for the Wild Card, and with a presumption of seven losses to the Rangers, the best the Angels could do would be 97-65. So the Red Sox would have to finish 98-64, which they would accomplish by going 13-7. So the magic number for clinching the wild card ought to be 13. I know that's not the way they calculate it and it will all be moot since the Rangers won't win out.

Well you couldn't script that one any better, from Bard retiring Vladi in the eighth to Ortiz icing it in the ninth with the blast into the CF bleachers. A perfect preview of the ALDS as far as I am concerned particularly beating Lackey and Lackey getting seriously p.o.'d.

Hard not to like what Dice-K has done so far; 70 pitches or so through five shutout innings, two walks, he didn't allow a hit until the fifth when he worked around two singles and a stolen base, 2nd and 3rd 1 out, with two strikeouts. If he had done this in his second or third September start, I'd have been happy. This gives us a real hope of having four starters that can match up with any playoff team.

Hi Charles, I'd kill to hear this one, even though Harris is on organ instead of piano but its been reliably reported by those "in the know" that Cuscuna regards this not as unreleased but as "rejected".

"Win, there is still a chance". The only defensible thing you've said. Let's put it in football terms, which is where the phrase is heard more often. Last weekend of the season, and there is a logjam of playoff "contenders". One team is in position where all they have to do is win: "win and they're in." That's the team in charge of their destiny. As the games run out, it ain't the Giants. Then there are the bunch of teams that have to win, but also need the right series of other results to make it into the playoffs. That's the Giants. Not in charge of their destiny, except in a negative way: if they lose, they'll have no chance at all. If they win, they still need help.

All credit to Del Potro for not folding like a cheap suit in his first Slam final, I think he gets about 40% credit, and 60% blame goes to Federer. Everyone's entitled to a bad day, even if we never expect them from R-Fed but I've never seen his serve misfire so much and I think after the tie-breaker he just gave up.

Thanks to all; not the greatest birthday due to our financial state but I got a nice dinner with my wife, I've got MLB.TV for the rest of the season so I can watch the Sox cruise into the playoffs (yeah right!) and I've still got some requested CDs en route, including that Leo's Five Ace reissue that Sangrey talked up a while back. Oh, and I still have a Coldstone Creamery birthday ice cream coming to me sometime this week.

Yeah, with Dice-K on the hill tomorrow. If he goes six innings, two runs, four or fewer walks, I'll be ecstatic, because that can work as a number four starter in the playoffs. And fortunately, the Rangers lost badly to the A's, so an October date with the Angels looks more and more likely.

I'm sending healing vibes your way, James. Good luck and godspeed.

That's the most insane thing you've said that's not steroid-related, Goodie. Let's see: You want to point to historic collapses and claim that the beneficiaries were somehow in charge of their fate? You have got to be kidding me. Why don't you ask J.H. if he thought the Phillies were in charge of their fate when the Mets collapsed two years ago. They weren't. They got in because the team in front of them started losing, and losing, and losing. Iirc, in 1978 the Red Sox were six games out with eight to play. They won eight straight, the Yankees lost six of eight and the Red Sox forced a one game playoff. THE RED SOX DID NOT CONTROL THEIR DESTINY! They got that chance because the Yankees hit a bad patch and started losing. If they had won just one more of those last eight games, Bucky Dent is a forgotten shortstop because there is no one game playoff. I never said you were out of the running, but you are not in control of anything, as the Phillies weren't in control nor the Red Sox. That's what baseball fans mean when they talk about "in charge of your destiny". The Giants can win every game left on the schedule, and if the Rockies go 17-3, and the Dodgers go 14-6, the Rockies and Dodgers are in and the Giants stay home. See? You aren't in charge of your fate, because even if you go 20-0, it depends on the performance of the Rockies. Historic collapses only proves my point!

OK, does anyone else think that the Giants, by common understanding of this term by baseball fans everywhere, "control their own fate" or is it understood among everyone not named Goodspeak that unless you A. have more games against the team you are chasing than number of games you are behind OR B. are in the lead for a playoff spot that you don't control your fate?

James Brown, Showtime (Smash) in glorious mono. Found over the weekend, a birthday gift to myself. Only drawback: it wasn't "showtime" it was "studio time" but Smash decided to dub in applause. Recorded when he was in contractual limbo with King, he had to stick with other composer's work. Did JB record "Caledonia" or "Ain't Nobody Here But us Chickens" elsewhere? Cool takes on some straight blues, too, including "Somebody Changed The Lock on My Door" "Things I Used To Do".

I didn't say they are out of it, I said that they do not hold their fate in their hands. Its undeniable. Yes, they have a chance, and a slightly better one than the Rangers do because the Rangers don't have head to head chances with the Red Sox. But that is not the same as saying they have their fate in their hands. They do not, because there are plenty more games. Try it this way: If you were two games out with three to play against Colorado, then you would have your fate in your hands. 4 1/2 games out with twenty to play, only three against the team you are desperate to catch, means you do not control your destiny. The only thing you control is whether or not you have a shot at it, or are out of it completely, after the next series. That's all. Win all three, and you have a chance to overtake them down the stretch. That's controlling your fate? Not on this planet, not anywhere.

Win all of them, still go home because you aren't in the lead for a playoff spot.

Don't forget the harmonizing with David Bowie on Little Drummer Boy.

Newsflash: If you don't at this moment qualify for a playoff spot, you don't hold your fate in your own hands. Doesn't matter how many games you have against the competition. If they win against everyone else, chances are your games against them won't matter at all. The Rockies just need to win. The Giants need help.

Actually, Lester's ERA is now lower than Sabathia. From MLB.com: Over almost 2/3 of the season, pitching in the AL East to an ERA barely over 2. And to think, people were worried about the Verducci Effect after his innings jumped by about 70 last year including the post-season. No two ways around it, Lester is a stud.

Oh, I've been noticing A.J.'s troubles, and Chamberlain is almost completely out of sorts and has been ever since that run of three good starts out of the ASB came to an end. What's interesting to consider is this whole debate about which schedule the Yankees should choose as the highest winning percentage in the lead (I don't see how the Angels make up the gap even though they do have some games head to head): the shorter series with fewer days off that requires a fourth starter, or the longer series that could be handled with just three. It seems to me you go with the longer series and use all four starters. Why? Because you'll be facing the top four for Detroit. You're going to see Verlander twice anyway, why would you want to see Edwin Jackson, whose ERA is lower than Verlander, twice, too? With four starters, the Tigers run out Washburn, who has been terrible since he came over from Seattle and I believe has a terrible track record against NY. In the meantime, I am just beginning to get a tiny bit of hope - Lester has pitched great for several months now - did you know his ERA is no different from Sabathia, and in twenty fewer innings (two fewer starts) he has 25 more strikeouts and the same number of walks - and Beckett is showing signs that his stretch of ugly performances is coming to an end. Buchholz actually looks like the hype wasn't misplaced (he's got two terrible starts since the beginning of August but seven or eight excellent ones otherwise) and if he keeps it up, I am actually OK with him as the number three starter. Now if somehow or another Dice-K pitches with the same results as last year, suddenly I think there is potential here for a playoff run.

Already saw it, thanks. The Globe is reporting that Theo is denying the report out of Toronto, hardly surprising. I also find it telling that the guy's source is a Toronto scout. I don't think scouts are always privy to the exact offers, and the much more likely scenario is that the scout was told that these six are on the table - not being told that they can choose three, or whatever. Far more likely that he was asked to give his opinion on the best of those six, and not told that all six are being offered for Halladay - or maybe he assumed. But there's just no way Theo strips all of the pitching from the system. He might offer four of those guys for a Lincecum or Grienke, someone controlled for a period of time. No way he does that for a guy who is a year from free agency.

An astounding claim out of Toronto - the Jays refused a six-pitcher-offer for Halladay in July: Clay Buchholz, Justin Masterson, Daniel Bard, Michael Bowden, Felix Doubront, and Nick Hagadone. http://www.torontosun.com/sports/columnist...853286-sun.html Personally I think its completely bogus - Theo would not empty the system for one year of Doc Halladay, and I would lead the parade of pitchforks to Fenway if he had, but if this is true, the Toronto GM is even more stupid than previously believed.

I was glad fat ass was heading toward defeat, going down in this manner makes it all the more sweet. Clijsters is my new favorite player. I just wish she looked more like Sharapova. Or that Sharapova had her game. :wub:

And I was there. Hope you finally get to come back again.

Up 5 1/2 games with 22 to play? Who do you think they are, the Mets? :rolleyes:

Not if you're on Comcast.

Here's the current BFT signup thread, whose discussion is going pretty strong: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=54196 Here's the signup thread: http://www.organissimo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=5509 January 2010 and beyond is open.