Can you do a graph to show the performance of Jeremy Affeldt, or would that just break your computer? I like Jeremy Affeldt, he seems to be a really nice guy, but he has just been awful this year. As soon as he came in, I told my wife he was going to blow it. And then he did. Also, what is up with Bochy continually pulling the starter and bringing in a similar pitcher to replace him? He keeps pulling Sanchez and Bumgardner (who were pitching to a RH dominated lineup) with LH relievers who throw about the same speed with similar pitches. Very few pitchers can successfully pitch through a lineup 3 times without gettting hit a little. That is the point of bringing on the relievers. The reliever is fresh, so he may throw harder. He is also a new pitcher and the lineup typically takes a while to adjust to the new motion or pitches. But when you keep following Bumgardner with Lopez (semi-sidearm vs. a low-sidearm delivery) or Sanchez with Affeldt or Runzler (all hard-throwing LHP), what do you expect?

Can you explain the graphic? I have no idea what it is supposed to represent. Is it the respective teams chance of winning as the game progresses? And what is the bar graph in the lower portion?

Would anybody like to do some analysis showing the 2011 Giants' splits with and without Torres? It seems like both of the Giants' best runs this year have taken place since Torres returned to the top of the lineup. Rowand had some nice hits while filling in, but Torres = real productivity. It feels like everybody else's ups and downs kind of wash out, but Torres makes the biggest difference. It's just a theory for you to investigate. BTW, the 2010 championship run was a whole mosaic of guys coming through and things fall just right, but Torres-as-catalyst seems to be an underrated factor when explaining last year's results.

I'm not sure whether I should be optimistic or pessimistic at the run differential. On the one hand the Giants have been able to put up a pretty good record without Sandoval and without Torres and Ross for a good chunk of the season. Once they get the Panda back hopefully it will mean no more Migsucky and more runs. Also, they've been able to do it with a fairly ineffective Huff and Burrell and with Brandon Belt in Fresno, once again if they can get those guys going or even just 2 out of 3 they should score more runs. Lastly, the pitching has been pretty good, but not other-worldly like it was last September. In summation, the optimistic view is that they've won the games they shouldn't have when they weren't playing their best ball. The pessimistic view on the other hand is that, holy crap, they have a +3 run differential, if that doesn't scream .500 club I don't know what does. Maybe this is what the Giants are, and they're going to need to get very lucky along with LOLarado continuing to crap the bed. Which, I doubt very seriously is going to happen two years in a row. I mean their offense has been bad before, but how many guys can you run out there everyday who are fighting to stay above the Mendoza Line? In summation: I have no idea what to make of this team, but I'm glad they're winning, it sure beats losing.

If he hits 280 with mostly singles, he can steel a lot of bases and turn those one base hits into two baggers. He also will put pressure on the pitcher and defense, and give the opposition a sense of gloom in those close one run games once he gets on first and no one is on second to block his stolen base, unless it is Ford, and then they can do a double steel.

I like it when the Giants win games.

Burriss's problem is more specifically related to his lack of power than his ability to hit. If one would look at his contact rate during career, he is good at hitting the baseball, resulting in a relatively low strikeout rate. The huge problem is that there is virtually zero power, as in almost zero ISO, making his offensive worth not so good. And people point out his hitting in AAA but fail to note his low ISO.