Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians 3

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Casey Blake says: be positive!

GO TRIBE!

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Aug 12, 2007 11:12 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Yeah, that one sucked, but I'm ok again. I'm pretty grateful the Tigers are on-deck. In a strange way now is the perfect time to match up and find out what we're made of. In other words, we can really put the hurt on them, repairing our confidence and thrusting them into a panic.

And I'm delighted that CC has the next start, and that it's against the recently languid Bonderman of all people. In baseball nothing is a foregone conclusion, but I like the way we're positioned for this series.

by homelytourist on Aug 12, 2007 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

i am "positive" that casey blake is part of the problem. while blake has certainly filled the bill as far as being a stop-gap for the failed andy marte experiment, he is just not a long-term solution and has proven that over his years here in cleveland. watching him just take so many fat pitches down the heart of the strike zone only to flail helplessly at curveballs in the dirt is the mark of a true journeyman, which is exactly what casey "blank" is, he's nothing, he's nobody, he's nada, zilch, zero, he's a blank. he is at best a "aaaa" player who is too good for the minors, but not good enough for the majors. his role is best suited as a utility player and when he is counted on to be a full-time vital piece to the puzzle, he is often found to be nothing more than a square peg in a round hole. his inability to hit in clutch situations, especially with runners on base is a microcosm of what ails this entire team. unfortunately, casey is not the least of our worries, especially when they have eric "the genius" wedge as a manager. 'nuff said, dave . . .

by davemanddd on Aug 13, 2007 2:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

This is the first post I read after Andrew's essay in the "Diversity of opinion" diary. Very apt.

by nickjs21 on Aug 13, 2007 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Whoa Dave - get back on your medication dude.

Brother Blake's stats so far this year: .265 .339 .443

I was gonna give you the league average for third baseman but then I realized it wouldn't make any difference. You just wanna vent or argue or some other time wasting conflict.

Casey Blake is a decent third baseman. Enough said.

LeBron must GO!

by mauichuck on Aug 13, 2007 2:20 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

yeah. not great, pretty average. nice that he could fill the role, wish he could on-base better. for some reason, the guy manages perennially to be a lightning-rod.

by emil minty on Aug 13, 2007 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

I'm guessing it's one of those things where people had such low expectations for him that when he's doing poorly, they can point at him & cry "he's a AAAA player, that's what I've been saying all along!"

by zempf on Aug 13, 2007 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Seriously, how can anyone justify that Blake is a AAAA player?

by Ryan on Aug 13, 2007 3:00 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Don't worry...after A-Rod opts out of his contract he's coming to Cleveland. Dolan has 30 mil. just burning a hole in his pocket, right? Anyway, I only have problems with how Blake is being used. His RISP is terrible yet he remains batting second. He plays good D, has a strong arm, and can hit when the pressures off. Of course you'd like to have better, but the fact is that he is the best a team with the payroll we have can get. Marte is struggling, but the book is not yet closed on him. He may be useful in a trade or he may get one more chance. He's out of options at the end of this year, so we have to do something.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 13, 2007 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions

3

Not much to say, except if we can take 4 out of 5 from Detroit and then take the series from Tampa Bay, this past weekend will just be a bad memory with little bearing to our playoff hopes.

If we let Detroit walk all over us and let Tampa Bay off the hook .. I don't see how we can recover going forward.

Looking at how the Yanks are playing and how favorable the Mariners schedule is ..I'm not sure if the wildcard is a realistic goal at this point. Winning the division seems much easier.

by Toxicadam on Aug 12, 2007 11:18 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

What's the consensus? Do we expect this is something which can be "turned around" or do we expect more of the same?

I keep expecting them to turn it around, but it's been about a month of just really bad production.

by rog on Aug 12, 2007 11:21 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

The "turn around" involves the offense scoring runs like they're capable of. It has to start with approach:

1st Half: 655 SO, 333 BB
2nd Half: 235 SO, 86 BB

Don't swing at pitches outside the strike zone, you get to swing at pitches inside the strike zone.

by Ryan on Aug 12, 2007 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Both games are coin flips to me. Bonderman is much better than his recent production, but than so are we. The spot starter could be downright terrible (if our hitters are patient) or can dominate us (if they don't). I don't know, I guess a split would be ok, and is probably the most likely outcome the way both teams have been playing.

I hope someone starts getting hot, because I think Garko might be coming back down to Earth soon and he's been one of the only productive bats in the lineup.

by hans on Aug 12, 2007 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Like all tribe fans, I found this a disgusting weekend. Rolling over for the Yankees. Ridiculous. Where is the fire? I miss Riske. He would have made sure some juiced Yankee would have to hit the dirt.

by oxforddave on Aug 12, 2007 11:21 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Never thought I'd hear the words, "I miss Riske."

Part of me is grateful for the season they have had thus far. I never would have predicted them being in the race this far into the season. But the other side of me is pissed at the lackadaisical (sp?) attitude. "It's tough" says Casey. That to me sounds like depression as opposed to aggravation. I would rather hear "We suck, a lot of us in here need to stop playing like a bunch of p***ies and pick it up, now."

by BoDiaz1974 on Aug 12, 2007 11:57 PM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Not sure where you are seeing a complacent attitude. It appears that these guys are giving every effort and, in most cases, trying too hard. We don't have a team of idiots that rant and rave and froth when we lose. There is nothing wrong with that. So we act like adults and not a bunch of children, how does that make us "lackadaisical?"

Cleveland: It's like punching yourself in the face.

by Brad D on Aug 13, 2007 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

I was referring to Blake's comment more than the play of the team.(And mostly in jest). Although Jhonny getting picked off of first with the bases loaded isn't a sign of intensity in my book.

by BoDiaz1974 on Aug 13, 2007 2:38 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Maybe we need one of our pitchers to get into a fist fight with Shoppach.

by Toxicadam on Aug 13, 2007 7:40 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Mental mistakes are terrible when a team is struggling like this. Part of me wanted Wedge to bench him for the rest of the game to make a statement. It's time that we go out there and grind out a few wins. It's not going to be easy, but if we want to make the playoffs it has to be done.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 13, 2007 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

I would have had Jhonny riding the pine for the rest of the game after that.

Sometimes, you need to set an example that mental errors such as his will have consequences.

Turf Toe -- Sports skewered weakly (and weekly.)

by emd2k3 on Aug 13, 2007 4:47 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Now if Woody woulda been coaching the Tribe he woulda bitch-slapped Jhonny til his teeth rattled. Thatta fired up the team!

LeBron must GO!

by mauichuck on Aug 13, 2007 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Confidence might not be something that can be restored to a team whose strategy is based on non-confidence in its hitters ability. I'm speaking, of course, about the "Work the pitch-count, we must depend on the opposing pitcher beating himself." strategy.

by Bill Glynn on Aug 13, 2007 8:29 AM EDT reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

Which could also be read as "We have confidence in our hitters' ability to recognize good pitches."

by zempf on Aug 13, 2007 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

This might be the worst interpretation of the Indians' hitting strategy that I've ever heard.

by nickjs21 on Aug 13, 2007 11:24 AM EDT up reply actions

Re: Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians

i logged on just so i could say: oh, bill glynn, you simply have it all wrong. oh, sweet, sweet bill glynn, my boy.

it reminds me of '05, last game, at the jake. you know, the one against the sox, no W/C, wickman tossing balls into the crowd, his fat ass off to retirement.

i'm standing behind this lady who, after a tribe hitter walked, said, oh, good grief, enough with the walks.

oh, sweet, sweet, bill glynn, my boy.

by thetravishalffull on Aug 13, 2007 9:18 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I think when Peralta got picked off at first with the bases loaded and no outs pretty much sums up where our heads are right now. This team swells up when there are men on base. The only time Nixon can hit is when there are two outs and no one on....etc, etc, etc...

by tborish on Aug 13, 2007 9:22 AM EDT reply actions

Re:

I know, right? What we need on this team is CLUTCHINESS and the ability to HIT WHEN IT COUNTS. I don't understand why Shapiro has never made the slightest effort to try to acquire Derek Jeter and/or David Ortiz.

Now the Lord can make you tumble, and the Lord can make you turn, and the Lord can make you overflow... but the Lord can't make you burn

by Turkmenbashi on Aug 13, 2007 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Yeah, but Jeter is a TRUE YANKEE™... we'd have to spend a fortune for him. Maybe we can get A-Rod or something... he has a low PLAYS THE GAME THE RIGHT WAY™ rating, and I hear he can be had for pretty cheap.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 13, 2007 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions

Re:

people who outright deny the existence of clutch get under my thin skin.

it's such i'm-a-baseball-know-it-all snobbery, and it wouldn't be your opinion if it didn't happen to be billy bean's in moneyball.

clutch exists. it's simply blown out of proportion by baseball-media douches.

by thetravishalffull on Aug 13, 2007 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

This officially becomes Exhibit A in my argument today to have posting priveleges delayed at least a week after people first up for the site.

by supermarioelia on Aug 13, 2007 9:32 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

i've been a letsgotriber since it was cleveland indians compendium.

by thetravishalffull on Aug 13, 2007 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Congrats. It was more an example of the type of post we see from first timers. Articulated it perfectly.

by supermarioelia on Aug 13, 2007 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

a clutch player may not exist, but a clutch hit certainly does. let me define it for everyone: getting a hit in a key moment in the game. this says nothing about whether certain players can do better in these situations or not

by Roger Dorn on Aug 13, 2007 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

First of all, I'm told all my opinions from Baseball Between the Numbers. So there.

Second, clutch only exists (to me, anyway--from here on out this is all opining) in the opposite way people think it does. Baseball players buy into the media just like baseball fans do, and can therefore psych themselves out/think too much/distract themselves/whatever during these tight game-on-the-line situations. To be clutch is to not be psyching yourself out.

But I do not, for one second, believe that a major league baseball player can somehow raise his standard of play for one at-bat when he wasn't already doing that for every at-bat over the course of his entire career. I do not believe that any player's chance of getting a hit increases outside of his normal abilities. To that matter we will have to agree to disagree.

by nickjs21 on Aug 13, 2007 9:35 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

+1

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 13, 2007 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

agreed.

well stated, and i can't say it doesn't nudge me toward your side.

whether it exists, i just find it kind of funny that the haughtiness (oh, sp) surrounding the issue didn't pop until moneyball hit the shelves.

by thetravishalffull on Aug 13, 2007 9:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Well there's always something that brings light to an issue. That doesn't mean the issue didn't exist previously. I'm sure a lot of people complained about working conditions before The Jungle was published, and I'm sure a lot more people learned about those conditions after reading The Jungle.

by nickjs21 on Aug 13, 2007 9:43 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

true, but the people who deny "clutch" are more often than not total dick schofields about it, and i'm sure that stems from bean's total disdain for clutch believers in moneyball.

bean's personality in the book comes off as very persuasive. he's opinionated and readers, at least i had this experience, want to be on his side for fear of suffering his wrath. (i'm not a baseball ignoramus, billy.)

i'm sure if he was more measured in his anti-clutch stance, the anti-clutchers in LGT and elsewhere wouldn't act like such dick schofields about it.

of this, i'm confident.

by thetravishalffull on Aug 13, 2007 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

A lot of "statheads" are looking down on Baseball Prospectus recently, but I really think they've done an excellent job in showing the stat world that we need both statistical analysis and scouting to form the best opinion about a given baseball topic. Relying too much on one is a fallacy. I think this is the measured stance you're looking for.

by nickjs21 on Aug 14, 2007 1:31 AM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Here's my favorite article on clutchiness from the FJM gents.

Highlights:

(about Jeter) "Mr. Clutch is actually Mr. Exactly the Same No Matter What Month You Are Talking About. He is Mr. Equally Excellent Hitting SS Every Month from April to November. He is Mr. Outrageously Similar Statistics Every 30 Days."

(on Jason Bay's mysterious dip in AVG with RISP over the past three years) "How is that the conclusion?! The conclusion should be: in small numbers of data points, there is bound to be enormous fluctuation. This is like saying: yesterday it was sunny, today it poured. Surely, some Fertility God disapproved of our elk sacrifice."

(about the AVG with RISP statistic) "So what does that teach us? It teaches us that it's not that crucial a stat, relatively speaking, because if the team isn't getting anyone on base, you can hit .300 with RISP and you won't score as many runs as other teams with lower BA and SLG with RISP. See?"

(on pitching around Eckstein to get to Pujols) "Well. I'm not "inside the game," which invalidates my opinion in the eyes of some. But isn't this quality merely one aspect of what determines a "good" player? And thus, isn't it sort of making our argument for us? In other words, the players one thinks of as "clutch" are just always good. Or, in Eckstein's case, "clutch" is simply a false notion, since very basic statistics show that he is no better in "clutch" situations than in regular situations. The end."

Brilliant stuff.

"We've talked about it so many times," Wedge said, "but this is a special group."

by CarnegieAndOntario on Aug 13, 2007 10:06 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

You mean choking? I believe the mind affects the body. Rick Ankiel being an exaggerated example.

by rog on Aug 14, 2007 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

And Chuck Knobloch and Steve Sax and .........

LeBron must GO!

by mauichuck on Aug 14, 2007 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Essentially, yes. I believe a player can be profiled as someone incapable of coming up big in important situations for whatever mental reason. I do not believe that a player can be profiled as someone who will come up big.

by nickjs21 on Aug 14, 2007 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Re-posting this for nickjs21, after booting it out of the other thread.

Freddy Sanchez:

"To me, it's pretty simple," Sanchez said. "If you're hot going into that clutch situation, you have a good chance. You're already feeling good. Obviously, there are times when a hitter can tense up, and there are some better mentally prepared than others. All I can say is that, for me, when I go up to the plate, it's not about the men on base. It's about how I'm feeling."

He rolled his eyes, remembering those four consecutive strikeouts in a game last week in Milwaukee.

"Trust me: If I'm feeling lousy at the plate like that, I'm not just going to walk up there with bases loaded and get a hit because I'm some great clutch hitter."

Jason Bay:

"It's not so much a matter of raising your level in a clutch situation. It's a matter of keeping your level the same," Bay said. "Baseball is predicated on the idea that the people who are the most successful are the ones who do things the same way most consistently. It's not an emotion game like football or hockey, where you can go bust some skulls."

I'm not trying to be snide, but I disagree with your claim that anyone who plays at a high level believes in clutch hitters.

I would like to add that I 100% agree with Jason Bay.

(Oh, yeah, the link.)

by Jay on Aug 14, 2007 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Much obliged.

by nickjs21 on Aug 14, 2007 6:42 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

The problem I have with that is in how many clutch situations have Jason Bay and Freddy Sanchez been in. They play for the Pirates and Bay had a stint in SD when they finished 5th in 2003. However, the biggest problem with arguments about clutch is the definition of clutch. Clutch is just not getting a game winning hit. To me it is performing consistently well when you can't afford to fail.

We could argue all day about clutch, but the fact is that some players don't let the pressure affect them. They feed off of it. I think that the reason that people don't like clutch is that it messes up their numbers. Clutch isn't some stat. It's feeling you can and will accomplish what you need to do. Don't get me wrong I'm all for stats, but the Game is about more than just stats.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 14, 2007 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Responding to gahnki's comment in the other thread:

I think that anyone who has played baseball at a reasonable level would agree that there are clutch hitters. I'd like to ask what's the highest level you've played at? Not trying to sound arrogant, I'm just wondering.

This is possibly a long tangent, but I actually think it works the opposite of the way you think it does. Reasonably good college players probably would like to think of themselves as more similar to major leaguers than to little leaguers, but that doesn't make it so.

A key factor in all of this, I believe, is professionalism. And by that I mean, it's your job, and you get up every day and do your job -- playing baseball in this case. And there is a consistency that goes along with that, and common sense tells us that the consistency of approach and mechanics of any professional ballplayer must vastly, vastly exceed that of a college player, purely based on days and hours and reps alone.

So my guess is that the higher up you go, the less that "clutch" matters, because there's far less variability between your good moments and bad moments -- that is professionalism. You raise your skills to the point where you still give a good performance on a bad day, and you're still one of the best in the world. That certainly is the case in the performing arts, which has its own athletic and mechanical and mental aspects, and I don't know why it would be different in pro sports.

by Jay on Aug 14, 2007 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I see what you mean. I have to disagree, however. While it is repetition and the like, there is a huge difference between the performing arts where you are going off a set routine, and baseball where you are reacting to different situations. Clutch isn't some physical thing. It is all mental. That's why some players can't handle it and some thrive off of it. Anyway, I was just using the "players at a reasonable level" idea to show that if you play baseball you understand that some people handle pressure situations differently than others.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 14, 2007 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I think it's pretty close to a total strawman. I agree with a lot of what Jay said and, on top of that, I think it's wrong to think that "baseball" somehow is the important word here.

Anyone who has come close to excelling on a small leve at anything has been faced with a situation that is roughly equivalent to what even a high level college player or minor leaguer can lay claim to. A lawyer taking the bar, a doctor taking the boards, anyone working a job where they're on a hard deadline, hell, a student who has to do well on an exam is under a level of pressure, in terms of the impact on the rest of their life and others, as somone who's playing college baseball but isn't a prospect. Similarly, the head of a major corporation goes through situations that you might equate to a major leaguer.

The way people think of "clutch" isn't unique to baseball. Everyone faces situations like this. They vary in significant ways but there's no reason sports, or for the purpose of this conversation those who like to think of themselves as high level or former high level amateur athletes, can be claimed as the place where clutch matters the most or whatever. It's just in a particular media spotlight.

And I don't buy that the media spotlight is what matters. If a CEO screws up at work today thousands of people can lose their job. It's not the same as being in the media but it matters in it's own way that you could argue is more important.

by afh4 on Aug 14, 2007 7:13 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

The difference is that a lawyer can study his lights out and memorize the test. Baseball relies on chance so much that a hitter may memorize a pitchers tendencies, but the pitcher may decide to do something differently. The amount of chance in baseball is greater than the amount in a test. I think that clutch is just something that is open to interpretation.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 14, 2007 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I don't think it's anywhere near that simple. There's actually more routine in baseball than in many jobs; the hitter knows that every day he has to hit, whether it's spring training or playoffs.

If shit hits the fan across a CEO's desk, it can be literally anything and, in many cases, they cannot make a mistake.

You can try to explain it away but I don't think it's any more than speculation on either of our parts. High level professionals have to perform at a high level under intense pressure. Baseball doesn't get to corner the market.

by afh4 on Aug 14, 2007 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Most performing artists are not doing an entirely set routine, but even those who are (e.g., opera singers) have plenty of opportunity to choke. Lots of things change from day to day, including the condition of one's voice, and a professional has to make it sound and look the same regardless.

I would agree that clutch is all mental, and I would agree that some people handle pressure situations differently from others. My point is that at the highest professional levels, the skill and preparation level mean that mental differences are translating into vanishingly small physical differences, possibly non-existent ones.

by Jay on Aug 14, 2007 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I do agree with you on that. The point of being a professional is to remove as much chance as possible. Baseball is just too much chance, though. An odd angle, a bad bounce and there goes the game.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 14, 2007 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

FWIW, I played high school baseball and made a couple All-Regional teams as a middle infielder/submarining reliever. I came up in quite a few "clutch" situations where my team needed a hit/walk/non-out. In exactly zero of these situations was I ever able to raise my performance at will. Frankly, I wasn't even thinking, "Oh shit, I have to get a hit...oh my God, I'm so nervous!"

Every single time, you know what my approach was? The same as it was in the first inning: get on base. The only things racing through my mind were the scouting reports on the pitcher and what I had seen from him in the past. At no point did I ever worry or panic because the game was on the line...and anybody who ever played baseball can tell you that.

IMO, if anyone has a "clutch ability" to raise their performance when the game is on the line, it is so incredibly small that it wouldn't make a bit of difference in their actual performance.

by Kos @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 14, 2007 8:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

I find that interesting. A clutch player does not raise his ability. He just finds a way to get the job done. I don't think that any player can raise his ability, but you can be clutch in the sense of producing when you have to. I also have played high school ball and I have trouble believing that you were never worried in a key situation. Unless you live in a bubble, I'm sure you were aware of what was at stake. Thanks for the response.

I heard that L.Carr is only going to dress 25 players this Sat........the rest can dress themselves!

by gahnki on Aug 14, 2007 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions

Re:

Aware, not worried. You say he "finds a way to get the job done," which is meaningless. That sentence means the player completes his task (getting a hit) because he tries hard enough, and that's just not possible. Whoever it is will only get the job done roughly the same amount of times that he does so in the first inning. The pitches aren't easier or harder to hit in clutch situations...it's the same game.

by Kos @ Let's Go Tribe! on Aug 15, 2007 5:40 AM EDT up reply actions

Network Bar

Let's Go Tribe -

Game One Hundred Eighteen: Yankees 5, Indians 3

Do you like this story?

Comments

Comments For This Post Are Closed

Secondary Sidebar

Search

User Tools

FanPosts

Recent FanPosts