Omar

Langerhans Ks! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN!

UNO MAS!

K!!

I've always wondered how baseball would be if you were allowed to reuse players.

Just when you think you're in control, just when you think you've got a hold, just when you get on a roll, here it goes, here it goes, here it goes again. Oh, here it goes again. I should have known, should have known, should have known again, but here it goes again. Oh, here it goes again. It starts out easy, something simple, something sleazy, something inching past the edge of the reserve.

Base hit.

That wasn't a walk. :shock: Instead a Pierre grounder. 1 down.

Gah. Piniella brings in a reliever, who throws 30-40 foot curve balls to the boot.

Error, walk, infield hit, home run. Cubs lose.

Please have a nice & quick 1-2-3, Howry.

In 79 career starts, Tim Redding has never had a complete game. There's a first time for everything.

2006 WHIP Zambrano: 1.29 Marshall: 1.52 Career WHIP Zambrano: 1.28 Marshall: 1.44 Marshall still holds the edge for 2007 based on a few nice starts, but that margin is closing fast and will probably disappear within the next 2 starts Still, Z led the league in walks. Doesn't say much for him and those whip is mostly hits for Marshall and walks for Z. Z's control doesn't look to improve but Marshall's "stuff" does. And even if Zambrano doesn't improve his control, he's still a better pitcher than Marshall. Even with Zambrano's control issues, he's still had those awesome seasons. Even with what you call great control by Marshall, his best would be the worst full season Zambrano has seen in 5 years! And when Marshall has those 5 years of experience we'll see whose better. All we're doing now is debating without fair statistical comparison. But in a lot of ways we are. We can compare each player to the other at the same age. When Zambrano was Marshall's age, he was dominating major league hitters. I'm trying to take you seriously, but it's laughable to think Marshall is now or ever will reach the level of pitching that Zambrano has achieved. I'm not asking you to agree with me i'm just giving my opinion, and on paper Marshall deserves all star more than Z. Well, Zambrano may not have deserved the ASG. That's debateable. But Marshall's 8 starts of 3.50 ERA doesn't make him all-star worthy in any shape or form...and in now way makes him a better pitcher now, in the past, or in the future than Zambrano. If you were using hyperbole to state your love for Marshall, you should have dropped the inane arguments a long time ago. Because if you think Marshall really is better than Zambrano, I'm having trouble wondering if this is the first year you've actually followed baseball. No, it's not. Then you should observe things a little more closely. Marshall is in no way the pitcher Zambrano is. or you could stop getting so worried about my knowledge and worry about yours Or I could just laugh at the fact that someone thinks Marshall is better than Zambrano. go ahead laughter is good for you, maybe it'll make you smarter I think the intelligence factor in this argument is self-evident. This quote thing is getting long. hot.Cold Indeed.

DeRosa, Lilly & Marquis have all done better than we all expected. Ward has done his job. What we expected of him. Great addition to the bench. Expected a little more power from Floyd. He's still put up good numbers. Soriano... expected a little better of him. his OPS+ is hovering around his last season's. Didnt Ramirez file for free agency? :lol: He's also hovering around his numbers.

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g302/gregvan83/ZWAGUN.jpg

¿QUE?

Chicago Cubs Vs. Tim Redding http://i12.tinypic.com/4q8d4e1.jpg Washington Nationals Vs. Carlos Zambrano http://i19.tinypic.com/4l95glt.jpg

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/images/gameday/mugshots/mlb/150037.jpg

5-4-3 DP! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN! CUBS WIN!

THROW STRIKES.

Bases loaded.

THROW SOME STRIKES!!

Come on DP!!

7-2. Things looking all-too familiar.

No Fontenot, no Pie. If Pie isn't gonna play everyday, why is he in the majors??

1024 x 768 You have to center it. It's the same picture, just that the width is 1024. The actual picture is 1024 x 690, but it's set for the 1024x768 resolution. It won't be vertically stretched like the other picture if everything goes as well.