Sure, the teams seem close, but look at the number of injuries that Yank's have suffered though so far this season. If Matsui and Shef are out all year, then the teams are close. If Shef can come back, the Yanks are better. Plus, if Dotel shows up soon, that will give a huge boost to the bullpen. And if Torre ever learns how to USE his bullpen, we'll be unstoppable.

While the Yankees may indeed be better, record against the "best" teams in the AL ins't necessarily a good indication of that. Small sample size and all that. Put it this way: Against the worst teams in the AL, the Yankees are clearly worse than the Red Sox.

"Sure, the teams seem close, but look at the number of injuries that Yank's have suffered though so far this season."

Boston injuries: timlin, coco (out for a most of the season so far), lowell (hamstring), loretta, nixon (earlier in year), clement (ankle), wells...

do I need to go on? Shef looks to be on the downside of his career. Matsui is a nice player, but doesn't make the yankees that much better. Boston has two great minor league pitchers they still haven't brought up.

You're being a homer. Quit complaining about the injuries. Everyone has them. The whole "if we get so and so back we'll be better" is nonsense. You're a half game back, second place. Exactly where you should be.

A favorite baseball fantasy of mine: the Blue Jays knock both Boston and New York out of the postseason.

Could happen. Toronto's +40 run diff is a shade better than Boston's and not hopelessly behind New York's. If the Tigers and White Sox both keep on keeping on, the wild card could go to the Central (where it lives right now - by a half-game).

Naw, won't happen. But I can dream. And it's at least a realistic possibility that Toronto could knock one of the Big Media Twosome out of the postseason.

2-year OPS+ of 143 and 132 for Sheff. I hope my downside looks that good.

The Sox got Crisp back already. And Lowell and Loretta could be back in the lineup TONIGHT! Sheff and Matsui might not be back until 2007, lol. A wee difference there.

Record against the better teams? Talk about a selective argument. Between Tor, Det and Tex, I think Tor is the best team -- Det is a paper "tiger" :-). Boston has played 11 games against Tor and is 4-7 (poor). NY has only played 5 games against Tor and is 3-2. I'm not saying they'll go 1-5 against them, but records against Det & Tex don't impress me. Oh, and how many games has Boston played against creampuff KC? 0. NY? 6 so far.

Good 'ol sports newspaper columnists---always looking for the catchy/controversial headline and selective use of statistics to "support" their claim. If you want to evaluate Sox/Yankees record so far, evaluate the whole schedule, not just vs. hand-selected teams. E.g. weight opponents' records by number of games played. Do this and you get .509 for Boston and .492 for NY. I.e. Boston has actually had the (slightly) more difficult schedule so far.

Dan wrote: "Matsui is a nice player but doesn't make the yankees that much better."

WTF? Have you looked at the guy's stats the last couple years? You don't think it makes the Yankees better to have Matsui than washed-up Bernie? Or Terrence Long. Take off the Yankee-hater glasses for a minute and you'll see what a stupid sentence that was.

I believe the Matsui thing was more a reference to the recent performances by Andy Phillips and Melky Cabrera then him selling Matsui short. They've filled in admirably so far...though with any young players you have to wonder whether they can keep it up all season...just look at the Brewers.

I'm also sort of curious about luck...the only way to calculate it that I know of has to do with run differential and one run games, but I really don't think that tells the whole story. I wish there was an objective way to factor in "clutch" hitting, which some have already shown to be nothing but luck. New York's 2-out average with runners on base seems like it should be much higher then Boston's...which may even out a bit over the course of the year. Of course, this is just a feeling, not based on any real logic. And I don't have time to check the numbers...though if someone else does, it might be interesting.

"The whole "if we get so and so back we'll be better" is nonsense."

Agreed, its like saying if I had the winning numbers of the lottery then I'd be super rich!