You could argue that Sanchez has peaked, but it is debatable whether that is true. Looking at his careers numbers: 2006 SF .750 738 185 3.99 18.5 80.5 7.43 1.44 .250 .357 .365 .722 2007 SF .167 1006 238 4.23 19.3 81.8 10.73 2.21 .284 .381 .443 .824 2008 SF .429 2830 695 4.07 17.9 97.6 8.94 2.09 .257 .344 .402 .746 2009 SF .400 2849 710 4.01 17.4 96.4 9.75 2.01 .221 .324 .384 .708 2010 SF .591 3233 812 3.98 16.7 97.8 9.54 2.14 .204 .307 .343 .650 Total -- .466 10656 2640 4.04 17.6 96.0 9.41 2.05 .233 .331 .380 .712 He's consistently been improving on all hit-related metrics - batting average, OBP, SLG, etc etc have been going down each year. His K/9 has stabilized while his K/BB ratio showed slight improvement. Thus while you can argue that he was lucky last year in his batting average given up being very low, at the same time it isn't exactly an anomaly. As for Bumgarner - I haven't heard anyone say he's the second coming of Lincecum. If he is, great. But really what matter for 2010 vs. 2011 comparisons is how he performs in 2011 vs. Wellemeyer or equivalent. I think Wellemeyer is a great guy and tried hard, but equally he just didn't do well. He had one or maybe 2 games where he pitched such at the Giants of early 2010 could win; the rest of the time it was pray for a blue moon/Giants' offensive outburst or expect a loss.

The real issue which matters for the Giants' hopes for 2011 is the rest of the division. San Diego got worse. Arizona only somewhat improved. Colorado stayed pat. LA should improve but there weren't any magical changes. The only reason the 2010 Giants' didn't lead from start to end was a season long hex against the Padres, plus highly inconsistent offense. Barring some major surprises and/or injuries, the Giants should have an easier time winning their division this year - hence the high likelihood of playoffs. Sure, it is early to say. But true nonetheless. Just like it is easy to see the Yankees no longer contending for their division lead after a frankly lackluster offseason. While the Rays will decline, Boston will step up while the perennially bad Orioles may actually be surprising.

I don't understand why some people seem to think Sanchez and Bumgarner are just locks to repeat their 2010 performances. Sanchez pitched well above his what his career says he really is. At this point 2010 is the anamoly.

Not being able to see the article behind its pay wall, nonetheless I think regression is quite possible/probably. However, I don't see the Giants' starting pitching as having had a career year in 2010. While Bumgarner might not do as well as he did after his callup and in the big leagues, at the same time it is ludicrous to think he's going to regress to Wellemeyer level. Zito wasn't great, neither was Lincecum until very late in the year. Sanchez also wasn't particularly standout - his great numbers were offset by the Giants' lack of offense such that it is debatable just how much difference his great numbers actually made. Cain was...Cain. On the relief pitching side, absolutely some regression is possible. But again, from most metrics outside of W/L and saves, the relief pitching group that kept the Giants in contention until the late season additions (September onward) again did not have a career year: Wilson had a lot of saves but had a high WHIP but middle relief was very spotty. Romo coughing up big homers wasn't just a playoff thing - he did so vs. the Dodgers among others during the season...maybe the only impact ManRam had all year for the Bums. On the offense side - outside of Uribe hitting a few key home runs, it is difficult to point to any one Giant outside of Andres Torres as having been exceptional. Huff had a good year, but it wasn't spectacularly above what he has done before. Again the Posey full year - even with some decline - is not going to be a regression vs. the full year catcher spot for the Giants. Similarly Sandoval probably isn't going to get worse and likely at least somewhat better.

Just clarify Szymborski doesn't expect performance regression for the SP, just notes that pitching is frought with injury hazard, and that the Giants face a particularly steep drop off if they need to plug in their #6 starter. I think Huff, Torres, the SS spot and perhaps Burrell might be worse next year, either defensively or offensively. (Honestly, I just don't know what to expect with Torres). I think it's just as plausible that less ABs from Rowand and Molina cancel out those players that do decline, because I'm as sure that not all of them will decline as I am that at least one will.

Fair enough. I expect the Giants to make the playoffs this year again, but there is inevitable risk because their team is so dependent upon the health of that five-man rotation. If Matt Cain were to suffer a year-ending injury, the Giants' chances of making the playoffs would quickly fade. I'm also hoping that Brandon Belt adjusts to the majors as quickly as Buster Posey did. If he meets his ZiPS projections, his bat will most certainly improve the lineup. I don't mind when people mention all these risks with the Giants -- just when they ignore the "good" regressions: Pablo Sandoval, Tim Lincecum, and Jeremy Affeldt should all have better seasons in 2011.