And can only guess as to their tone by reading comments on an internet forum. I seriously never take stuff personally.

/clinks a beer glass

I’m reconsidering my vote for Fogg…but its a very close race. I did think of Marquis, but for me longevity has to play a role over the course of 10 years….

You really need a broad range of stats to fully appreciate a pitcher’s worth. K/9, FIP, K/BB, even ERA and WHIP are all good, but you need a combination of all of them to paint the whole picture of how good and valuable a pitcher is. If you’re only looking at stats that tell you that Ricky Nolasco is a better pitcher than Ubaldo Jimenez, then maybe you should incorporate more stats. And maybe when you do you discover that, surprise, Nolasco is better. That’s why we have all of these stats. To get the best idea we can of who the best players are, and, possibly, to make some surprising discoveries.

By the way, I don’t think that Ricky Nolasco is better than Ubaldo Jimenez.

I’d argue that Wins are almost more complicated in their lack of comprehensiveness, as they really don’t tell you much and you have to seek the additional context to really get a handle on what they mean. Hell, you could argue that saying “He pitched good” in itself is more descriptive, as a pitching win might be telling you more about the bats than the pitcher.

So ERA – why not that? It’s not perfect, and I don’t like it nearly as much as the others, but FIP and tRA need ERA to balance them out and provide context. If Pitcher A has an ERA of 1.86 over a 1 month span, he’s a stud no matter how you look at it. But when you consider how just about every metric available says “damn Zack Greinke is the best pitcher in the AL right now” and then realize that SCOTT FELDMAN has more wins, I protest the usage of pitching wins in general. Hell, Greinke went 0-3 in July with a 2.53 ERA and a 3.23 xFIP – he pitched like a beast made of fire and doom and went winless. I know it’s the Royals, so it makes sense, but if I say “My pitcher went 0-3 in July” you would probably say “damn, dude sucks”, while if I said “My pitcher posted a 2.53 ERA in July” you say “DAMN, dude can pitch!” and if I say “My pitcher posted a 3.23 xFIP in July” you say either “huh” or “thanks for providing the park-adjusted figure. Could I get an idea of a inning load and a league baseline so I can attempt to formulate a run value above average for said performance?” and then I get out my spreadsheets and everyone goes back to hating me and I shrug and turn off the extra lights in the basement and heat up some ramen noodles and go back to leveling my level 47 ogre battle warrior with the sword of vulcan’s flame.

My problem is that if most people are at least acknowledging that there are better numbers out there, why not use them? It’s not as if you have to dig through the annals of the internet and baseball lore to find them, usually it’s “Pitcher Name, G, GS, W, L, ERA, whatever past that” so it’s not as if you can’t just pull it up, and even Fangraphs gives you the advanced stuff along with the basics just by flexing 2 joints on your index finger of your right hand (scrollwheel). If you understand ERA, and appreciate ERA, just use ERA! It’s deceptive in the eyes of the numbers guy, but on the surface it gives you a decent idea of how well said pitcher pitched, regardless of the bats surrounding him.

Note: this whole rant is being posted as a reply to Teekalong, but not specifically directed at him, but rather just at the topic of discussion. Do not take “You” personally.