Fourteen wins already in April. Five games left in the month, four against potentially one of the all-time worst teams, the '13 Astros. Should be an April to compete with 2003, when we went 18-9--but were still three games out of first--and 2007, with the same winning pct. over three fewer games. We'd need to go 4-1 to top those years. But that still wouldn't top the start we had in '02. It would tie 1998, though. Look, we've had some great Aprils, let's just leave it at that. We've recently had some shitty Aprils, so we know we'll be going into May much happier than we have the last three seasons.

The O's and Yanks lost, making up for yesterday. We're back to 2 and 2.5 up over them.

In our game, we came back from down 3-zip, and then held off the resilient A's for a 6-5 win. We had 10 hits, five of them for extra bases. Lester got the win, Bailey got the save, Short-Haired Miller got a kew K. Good crowd energy. Fun stuff.

That ball Jed Lowrie hit with two outs in the 9th: Remy and Don did that thing where they sway everyone's opinion by calling it undoubtedly fair. I looked at it and thought, "Good, proof that it's foul," and then listened to them say the opposite. Leading TC to follow along on the postgame. Rice then said he thought it was "a pretty good call," before TC then made him change his mind too. Here's what I saw: Ball hits to foul side of line from left field view. Space in between ball and line, even. From right field roof, same deal, ball on foul side of line. Then they show the live close-up of the spot where the ball hit, at which point Remy went Ooohhhhhhh, and him and Don gave it the ol' "we got away with one" routine. Problem is, it didn't show evidence of a fair ball. It showed brown dirt covering the white chalk, with a dark mark clearly to the foul side of the line. The brown-on-white action was dirt from foul territory landing on the line. Not the ball itself landing on the line. They were under the impression that the ball "took a chunk out of the foul line." No. If the ball lands on the white chalk, it doesn't make the chalk disappear. To me, the mark where the ball hit (which is also confirmed by the shots of it hitting there from two angles) was on the foul side of the line. But when I say "the line," I mean the edge of the chalk trail, which doesn't include residual chalk which unavoidably lands on either side of it. If the A's manager said he saw chalk fly, it was a bit of that residual chalk. Do Don and Remy think the width of the ball is three times the width of the foul line? What do they think the ball-sized mark to the FOUL side of the line is? The only way brown dirt can end up ON TOP of white chalk is if an object strikes brown dirt NEAR said chalk, causing it to cover it up. I almost feel like they thought that close-up shot was from THEIR perspective, the home plate side, meaning they thought the left side was the fair side. But you could tell that shot was from the outfield side--you could see the foul pole to the left. I just might have to do a video about this....