Windy is more predictable than the Sunrise

[riverrat56]

Where have you been the last 2 days? O wait thats right the Suxs dropped 2 games to the Cubs, AT HOME. I forgot you didn't post when the sox lost, they should start doing it more often, we wouldn't have to listen to you babbling on about a team that hasn't lived up to expectations in 4 years till this one.

[crappieflop1212]

[buzzsaw]

I always liked that one!!

[mnvikingsfreak]

[Windy City Walleye Hunter]

Sunrise....Sunset....Sunrise...Sunset

[Windy City Walleye Hunter]

I figured I better check in today, after my beloved Pale Hose finally lost a game, otherwise I would be accused of front running. Especially after Mr. Garland holds court tonight. Nice win by the Twinks over the D-Rays, but I see Mr. Santana, THE GREATEST PITCHER TO EVER RUB A ROSIN BAG, could not seal the deal. Wow, a great pitcher like that can't beat the lowly D-Rays. But, look on the bright side, Mr. Crain gets another cheapy. If he keeps that up and Mr. Santana continues to be mediocre, he may soon pass up THE GREATEST PITCHER TO EVER SPIT ON THE MOUND.

YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE BOARD...YES!

[crappieflop1212]

Geeze windy, by watching the sox game last night, I was under the impression that your boy Garland was the best pitcher ever in the history of the game. According to those horrible broadcasters anyways. I guess Garland is the only pitcher to ever throw fast balls. That's what they were saying anyways. So if Santana is mediocre, you must consider Garland mediocre as well.Their stats are pretty much the same.

[Windy City Walleye Hunter]

Crappie,

I have never made claims that Garland was the greatest pitcher in baseball's history. He is just the greatest pitcher this year! Twinkie fans, on the other hand think that when God created a starting pitcher he made YO-HAN and then as an afterthought made all other pitchers.

As for your comment about their stats being "pretty much the same", we can only go to the board to see how similiar their stats are: WINS Garland 13 Santana 7 (nearly 50% less) LOSSES Garland 3 Santana 4 (33% more losses for Santana) ERA Garland 3.29 Santana 3.74 (14% higher) Earned Runs Garland 42 Santana 49 (17 % more) HOMERS ALLOWED Garland 11 Santana 14 (27% more). I just can't see how you can possibly say that they are pretty much the same this year. It is obvious that Santana is having an off year and Garland is on fire. Santana has lost to some real cream puffs and other lowly teams he couldn't seal the deal with a victory, instead settling for a no decision when the Twinks manage to beat the other team. The numbers just don't add up, now go ahead and throw out the strikeout numbers but a popout is just as good as a strike out and a ground out is even better because you can't get a double play on a strikeout and the Sox are one of the best teams in inducing double plays. Here's to a safe and happy 4th of July to all my Twinkie-Loving FM'ers out there. Play hard but stay safe.

YOU CAN PUT IT ON THE BOARD...YES!

[crappieflop1212]

First off I was talking about those (Contact US Regarding This Word) on WGN.

how about OBA? Garland .240, Santana .220

strikeouts? garland 54, Santana 140 (really getting the job done)

Complete games? 2 each.

To say Garland is doing way better than santana this year is a joke. I know your team is doing great and all, but be realistic. I know there is a big difference in the W column, but I think that has more to do with luck than anything. Garland has given up more hits and pitched less innings than Santana thus far. His luck will run out soon.If he keeps pace, I'll be the first one to admit I am wrong. I am by no means trying to say Santana is having a better season. Just saying that Garland is no Bob Gibson.

[Quackaddict9]

just zip it.... just wait til the end of the year and see who has bragging rights.. not right now with Sept and Oct to go...

[Mudcutter]

I agree with Quack. Let the playoffs do the walking and the winners do the talking. The sox are on pace to win around 110 games. but ask the Mariners the year they won 110+ games the A's the year they won 105+ plus games, they got beat in playoffs. Same reason why guys like Santo and Byleven are not in the HOF. (don't agree) but the fall classix is what it's all about. Let's talk in mid OCT when the boys of summer get squeezed into the men of OCt.

Talk your smack then,

Muddy

[Down to Earth]

Let's not forget also that Garland receives nearly a run more than Santana in run support. Fact is you ask the majority of GM's who they'd rather have and they would probably say Santana. You switch the two teams around those pitchers are pitching for and I think you'd see a difference in wins and losses for the two. Garland is on fire this first half you can't doubt that. The question remains to be seen can it be maintained through the second half. Things will get interesting I think.

[Pig_sticka]

Not some gm's, every gm would rather have Santana and if you asked the White Sox I bet they would say the same thing, if they didn't they would be thinking it in their head. Garland has been a lifetime 12-13 game winner right? He has been a ok pitcher his whole career. Sure he is doing good this year it looks like he put a few things together. But still that is why there are bust years and career years.

The Twins still have to get a player though I dont care how great they feel with the players they have. It never hurts to add a good veteran player that can give the farmy's a bench spot until they can start playing better.

[bigbucks]

I think I understand the Santo comment, but not the Blyleven comment. Bert won a series with the Twins & I think he won one early in his career with the Pirates as well. That can't be the reason he's not in the hall. Quite frankly I can't come up with a good reason, other than playing most of his career with small market teams, which should mean exactly nothing, but apparently does.

[pikehunter]

Bert won a World Series ring in each league and went 5-1 with an ERA under 2.50 in postseason play.