In yesterday's New York Times, Murray Chass wrote, "It was only one game, but the Yankees and the Red Sox demonstrated yesterday why they will almost certainly finish the season in that order."

Now, I suspect that all of you know that one game doesn't mean anything -- well, it does mean a win for one team and a loss for another, and in this case a two-game swing in the standings -- but in case you're curious, Chass "reasoned" that the Yankees will almost certainly finish ahead of the Red Sox because 1) Enrique Wilson hit a home run; 2) Red Sox manager Grady Little ordered a sacrifice bunt in the fifth inning; and 3) the Red Sox failed in their attempt at a double steal.

Hey, I'm just reporting what I've read. And no, it doesn't make any more sense in context. I think the Yankees are going to win the division title, too. But it's far from a sure thing, and that one game (that the Yankees won) actually told us slightly less about the race than did the other two games in the series (both of which the Red Sox won). They were just three baseball games between two bitter rivals, but in the long run they probably won't make any difference in the final outcome.

With all that out of the way, let me say this ... if a June series can be critical to a team's chances, then this week's Mariners-Athletics series might be critical for the Athletics.

Because while the A's are currently eight games behind the first-place Mariners, they're nine games behind the Yankees and 11 games behind the Red Sox. In the wild-card standings. If such things existed yet.

Granted, the A's don't have to win the West. They could get hot like they did last year and win the wild card like they did last year. The A's are currently 27-28. Through 55 games a year ago, they were ... would you believe 27-28? It's true. The Athletics got off to exactly the same start last season (at least in terms of wins and losses).

And the A's didn't get things turned around at that point, either. After losing in Seattle on June 26, Oakland's record stood at 35-40. That left them 21 games behind the Mariners in the West, and also seven games behind the Yankees (who were then in second place) and 10 games behind the Twins in the wild-card standings.

But of course, the A's would eventually mount one of the great stretch runs. They went 58-17 after the All-Star break, for the second-best post-break winning percentage in history. The A's were the first team in history to win 100 games after falling 10 games below .500 at some point during the season (they were 8-18 after losing in May 1).

I practically wrote the A's off last April. And I thought Billy Beane was nuts for trading prospects for Jermaine Dye on July 25, though by then they were back in the wild-card chase (3.5 games behind the Red Sox, four games behind the Indians and Twins). But Dye was great and the A's did what they did.

They're not going to do it again. There will be those who view last season as evidence that the A's can turn things around this season and win 100-some games again. I view the rarity of their performance last season as evidence that they almost certainly cannot win 100 games again.

Of course, they don't necessarily have to win 100 games to reach the postseason. They won 102 last year, but 90 would have been plenty. This year, though, it probably won't be. Not with the Yankees and Red Sox doing what they're doing. The Athletics' best chance may be in the American League West. Which is why the four-game series that starts tonight might actually be critical. If the A's don't get swept, they're still theoretically in the hunt. If they can sweep the M's, they'll be only four games behind and have to be considered players. But in the unlikely event the A's do get swept, they're 12 games behind and they're done. For the next four months, all that's left to play for are pride and 2003.