Skip to content

Tim Wakefield is never going to win his 200th game

Sep 8, 2011, 8:50 AM EDT

Tim Wakefield

On the one hand I think round numbers for the sake of round numbers are kind of silly. On the other hand, I like knuckleballers and I really like Tim Wakefield, so it makes me kind of sad to see him get start after start in the pursuit of 200 wins only to fall short each time. Seven straight times, in fact.

Last night’s no decision was particularly hard to take as he had the lead — a three-run lead — when he was yanked after five innings.  Daniel Bard loaded the bases on a HBP, a single and a walk and then, after a couple of strikeouts, walked in two runs in a row. Then Matt Albers came in and let Edwin Encarnacion clear the bases with a double. Bam! The three-run lead is a two-run deficit and, though the game itself was not yet decided, Wakefield’s chance at a win was.

Not that Wakefield cares about that. At least publicly. First he blamed himself for not pitching more than five innings. Then he said:

“If it happens, it happens,” Wakefield said. “If it doesn’t, it doesn’t change what I’ve done. I’d like it to happen. But more importantly, I think, is for us to get into the postseason. … That’s our ultimate goal.”

Team player. But if you root for guys like Wakefield more than you root for the Red Sox — and I’m in that group — it’s cold comfort. And that’s the case even though, yeah, he would have had 200 wins a long time ago if, he you know, pitched better.

Barring a couple of perfect games in the playoffs or something, the legacy of Tim Wakefield has already been written. If he finishes his career with 199 wins instead of 200 it will make absolutely zero practical difference in terms of how he should be analyzed and considered as a major league baseball player.

But I’m human and I’m not ashamed to say, gee, it sure would be nice to see him get that nice round number.

NOTE: As is evidenced in the URL, when I first posted this the headline read “Tim Lincecum,” not “Tim Wakefield.”  It’s worth noting that I took copious amounts of Ny Quill last night and may still be feeling the effects.  FWIW, however, there’s no guarantee that Lincecum will win 200 either.

  1. Matthew Flint - Sep 8, 2011 at 8:51 AM


  2. phillysoulfan - Sep 8, 2011 at 8:53 AM

    What does this have to do with Lincecum?

  3. crispybasil - Sep 8, 2011 at 9:23 AM

    That was painful to watch, especially when Bard came back with the back-to-back Ks. Definitely agree with what Craig said – I’m a Sox fan, but when they blew it, I cared more about the fact that Wake was denied his 200th, rather than the fact that the Sox lost. I suppose we should never put one player before the team, but it’s hard not to root for the 200th win to happen.

  4. Detroit Michael - Sep 8, 2011 at 9:35 AM

    After reading his recent autobiography (which wasn’t really an autobiography, but I digress), I think it’s clear that Wakefield does value the 200-win milestone. Not that he should come right out and say that in a post-game interview after the bullpen blew the win.

  5. proudlycanadian - Sep 8, 2011 at 9:46 AM

    Wakefield did not pitch well last night. He was given an initial 3 run lead and he subsequently gave up 5 runs in 5 innings The only reason that he was in a position to win was because Morrow pitched worse than him.

    • cur68 - Sep 8, 2011 at 10:16 AM

      Nailed it, PC. Wakes was pretty bad. Maybe it had to do with the roof open, messing with his KB, maybe he’s just getting old. Maybe it’s both? Whatever, he sucked. But Morrow Heli-Sucked, which was indeed the only reason Wakes was in it at all.

  6. purnellmeagrejr - Sep 8, 2011 at 10:10 AM

    Does anyone remember the ordeal Early Wynn went through to get to 300?

    • ta192 - Sep 8, 2011 at 11:39 PM


Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Ramirez (2414)
  2. G. Stanton (2370)
  3. G. Springer (2353)
  4. C. Correa (2323)
  5. J. Baez (2307)