In this Sunday’s New York Times it becomes clear that the question which has intrigued and bedevilled the teams’s followers since the start of the season, why does this team win, is being asked in places other than San Francisco. The answer to the question, however, is no more apparent to the New York sportswriter, Jack Curry, than it has been to those of us who have been following the team through it’s first 116 games. Curry defines the team as “the sum is greater than the parts San Francisco Giants” and takes off from that premise.

Click below for more of Ed’s analysis on the division leading Giants.Yet, in a lengthy article, he fails to come up with anything more than the obvious ,namely, Barry Bonds. He comments that ‘after reflexively citing Bonds, it is much more complicated to explain how and why the Giants have become so formidable”. The best he can do is to point out why, in simply examining the team’s personnel, a ready answer doesn’t come to mind. After all, he says, the team is playing with an ancient catcher and an even older Galarroga, they have two rookie pitchers in the rotation, they have resurrected a pair of outfield retreads (now three, with the addition of Hammonds) and have had to overcome a season ending injury to their closer, Nen. He mentions ” the disappointng Alfonzo and Aurillia, who have combined for only 90 RBIs”. It might be noted in that respect that from the very beginning of the year a vote of no confidence in the left side of the infield has been a constant observation here. He writes about the transformation of the team from last year, the Giants having 16 players today on their roster who were not on their 2002 World Series roster. One of those players was Kent, whose run production ability hasn’t been matched by any of the replacements. He describes the drastic changes in the club, hiring Alou, injecting new starters at 4 positions, and revamping their pitching staff. He then opines that such changes” have boosted them, not buried them”. But, if we look for an explanation for the “boost” rather than the “burial” we will not find it. He quotes Alou, while searching for his answer, to the effect that the Giants have been successful because they are the best defensive club in the league.” That is apparently true but being a good defensive club still leaves one perplexed as to the reaon the team is, after116 games, out in front by 11 games. Curry points out, in describing his dilemma,” that the team does not lead the league in any other significant categories, being 4th in ERA and 5th in runs scored”. ” What they do have is a veteran club built to win” is his ultimate observation. This is not unlike the observation made by this observer not so long ago, when faced once again with the season- long question, that the answer to the question is that the team wins because it is a good team and a great deal better than it’s opposition. This will probably continue to be the answer, unenlightening tho it may be. A few further comments. Pitching is still the name of the game. The Giants have had a bullpen which has invariably managed to turn the game into a six inning affair. If the team has a lead at that point they win. Their rotation has given them more than their share of what is now known as ” quality starts”. They have a strong bench and do not suffer dramatically when called upon to replace injured players. Perez is a better shortstop than Aurillia and a better second baseman than Durham. He isn’t the leadoff hitter Durham is, but has been better, hitting ,than Aurillia. Galarroga, when called upon to play in place of Snow, provides the team with more power than Snow and is an inspirational type of performer. Feliz has become a player who not only can play 3rd base but who can adequately play a number of other positions as well and has hit in the clutch on a number of important moments. Is this enlightening? Probably not, but it’s the best one can come up with. Alou has definitely been a great replacement for Dusty, but mangers don’t hit or pitch. The team is better today than it was a few weeks ago, because of the addition of Ponson, for the playoff season. Will they do better than they did last year in the playoffs? If they do it will mean that they will win it all. They came awfully close last year.Even if they are that successful, we may still be looking for the answer to the question, how and why does this team continue to win?