ToupeeOnFire

Sweet! :)

My KW prediction: 5 IP, 2 ER. Hopefully that will be enough.

Cubs Win!!! 2 in a row. Can't remember what this feels like.

Although the Nats are not a good offensive ballclub, over the last 7 games prior to this series, they scored 5-7-6-4-2-5-8 runs respectively. That's 5.3 runs a game over the last 7. The Cubs would kill for that kind of offense. Give credit to Zambrano and Marhsall for doing their jobs.

http://mlb.mlb.com/images/players/mugshot/ph_150182.jpg Scott Williamson has that vaguely satisfied look of a man just walking out of the methadone clinic.

His back exploded. *aka, a lower back strain* Great. Lower back strain. Uh, dude...check out the bold... Well, Andy Masur just described it as mild lower back strain. So there.

His back exploded. *aka, a lower back strain* Great. Lower back strain.

The Cubs are dead last in runs scored and it's not even close. It goes like this... CUBS 143 Pittsburgh 159 Washington 170 Sad..so tremendously sad. Even if the Cubs were to get Kerry and Prior back and pitching to their full capabilities, with the offense the way it is, this team still isn't going anywhere.

Ron Santo is beside himself right now.

UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

Ha ha. Turnbow blew it.

Nick Johnson is a tough out.

I like the fact that Marshall is taking advice from Greg Maddux, but I think he needs to learn about holding runners from another guy.

Robert Fick, rhymes with....(use your imagination).

Yet he was Cy Young against the Cubs. Not surprising, actually. I think the Cubs are singlehandedly responsible for the entire NL West being at .500 or better.

Well, without Aramis, expect more Neifi. The good news (or bad news) is that with the way Aramis has been hitting, Neifi isn't quite the monumental downgrade that he normally would be.

He came out after the 4th inning. Len and Bob don't know why yet. I'm scared.

I like playing the Nats.

Beauyoootiful.

Agreed, excellent article. The problem with the coverage of the Cubs in the big papers (Tribune, Sun Times) is that, while writers are able to successfully diagnose that there is a problem, they are not able to correctly identify its source. So instead they are constantly harping on stuff like curses, the futility of Cubdom, the cheapness of the Tribune, lack of fundamentals, etc., etc. Things which are either peripheral, or downright silly. The real problem goes right down to the very marrow of the organization; they don't understand the value of a walk -- their pitchers can't throw strikes, their hitters don't work the count. It infects all aspects of the organization from scouting to coaching to free agent signings. It's almost like the Cubs are being willfully ignorant, trying to flaunt conventional wisdom out of sheer stubborness. And conventional wisdom it is, because while Moneyball may be a recent and relatively new phenomenon, the idea that baserunners lead to runs (via walk or hit) has been around forever. The understanding that taking walks (and, conversely, having pitchers who don't allow them) is a critical and important skill goes back to the 30s and 40s and Branch Rickey. It's not just some disposable fad that can be ignored in favor of some alternative, but a fundemental truth, like saying good pitching helps you win. That's really the source of the problem in a nutshell. A fundamental aspect of the game is ignored by the Cubs in favor of shiny numbers and flashy tools. It's the reason why the Cubs bid against themselves for a no-hit SS that nobody else wants; it's the reason why the Cubs gave an outrageous contract to Jacques Jones; it's the reason why the Cubs only seem to develop young offensive talent through accident; it's the reason why the Cubs can't ever seem to assemble a major league bench; it's the reason why they coveted Juan Pierre so highly; it's the reas...well you get my point...etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. In short, it's the reason why the Cubs find themselves in the position they are in. Unfortunately, Chicago writers only seem to pick at the symptoms as opposed to the root of the problem. Which is why I wish there were more Bruce Miles types to tell it like it is.

If the Cubs fire Dusty, he is going to be portrayed as the victim (in the Chicago media and elsewhere). Sad but true. Seattle can have him.

Ron Santo: Pat Hughes: Ron Santo: Didn't I push my button?

One thing I've noticed about Baker. He'll never preemptively have the bullpen warming up in these situations. He always waits until the first sign of trouble and usually doesn't pull the pitcher until it's too late. Baker is reactive rather than proactive. perhaps it's a show of confidence in z??? the guy's quite proven. no need to be pessimistic. Z looked terrible, and he was clearly tired. The Cubs, and Zambrano, got very lucky there. And who cares about showing confidence in him? The Cubs need to win, not make Zambrano feel better by having no one up in the 'pen. That's plain old bad managing. Not replacing Z was a mistake, and it was then compounded by leaving him in there for 20 pitches. amazing. washington gets zero runs and it's a mistake. i give up. Bad managing is bad managing. Just because it worked (but not without having Z toil for 120 pitches), doesn't it make it less so.

Fixed.

One thing I've noticed about Baker. He'll never preemptively have the bullpen warming up in these situations. He always waits until the first sign of trouble and usually doesn't pull the pitcher until it's too late. Baker is reactive rather than proactive. perhaps it's a show of confidence in z??? the guy's quite proven. no need to be pessimistic. You know Z is at 100 pitches. You know you have one of the best bullpens in the league. It is inexcusable to not have somebody warming up just in case. It's not pessimism. It's called being prepared. it's called ticking an all star pitcher off. If Zambrano gets ticked off because relievers are warming up in the pen "just in case" than he has issues.