I like visiting other teams boards and having intelligent discussions based on observation and statistical analysis. I have never been a troll and like to just talk baseball. If I feel that I can add something to a discussion, I might chime in, but not usually on another team's board. However, it is comments like these that I have a hard time with. The Brewers have been clearly a better team than the Cubs this year. The Cubs have won some games against weak opponents just like the Brewers have done lately and have climbed over .500 playing some good baseball. However, the Brewers have been and are the better team as of 5/6/07. Now could that change. Of course. I would hope the Cubs would be more competitive than they were to begin the season based on talent and payroll alone, but you have to give credit where credit is do. The Brewers are the better team right now. Now I will return to the woodwork. I think there's a distinction between saying the Cubs are just as good as the Brewers and saying the Cubs have won as many games as the Brewers(obviously false). For example, fan favorite Neifi Perez went 2 for 4 with a 2B and a HR today. Aramis Ramirez went 0 for 4 with a walk. No one questions Neifi performed better today, but to extrapolate that he's better isn't correct for a multitude of reasons. Likewise, the Brewers have won several more games than the Cubs to this point, but peripheral factors(run differential, analysis of the players/teams prior to the season) indicate they are very close to each other in overall ability. So while no one questions that the Brewers have won more games, that doesn't necessarily mean they've improved on the whole from where they were thought to be at the beginning of the year.