I don’t think you really need to break down the methodology of FIP or know what the hell tRA is or have any ability with math whatsoever to understand that the number of games a pitcher “wins” can be affected by his bullpen, the defense behind him and the runs his offense puts up.

This is a really, really simple concept. It’s not a result of advanced stats, advanced stats are a result of people realizing W/L is ridiculous to look at (I say this as someone who started looking for sabermetrics when he realized it made no sense to put that much weight on W/L in middle school). KLaw isn’t just preaching statistics; more importantly, he’s preaching LOGIC.

“Aha! He admitted it. We’ve got him right where we want him.”

They clearly don’t understand that had Carpenter or Wainright been more effective with K/9 and BB/9, the Wins, ERA, etc would’ve been much, much higher for those two. The radio dudes seem to want to believe that KLaw discounted Carpenter based upon team play, and I think KLaw did a pretty good job showing he didn’t do that at all, and arguing that the team would’ve benefited even more had “Carp/Waino” pitched more like Vazquez or Lincecum. But, the thought I had is that the argument of the radio guys that KLaw dismissed Carpenter because he played on a good team is really, really ironic because think about how many writers have discounted Cy Young candidates because they were on poor teams.

The whole Carpenter/Vazquez debate is really difficult to resolve in my mind. I agree with KLaw that more IP by Vazquez resulted in more bulk production, but I also tend to favor the performance of pitchers who keep the ball in the park, which Carpenter did far better than Vazquez. I think I would lean toward Vazquez, since both his IP and K/9 were quite a bit higher than Carpenter.

They ask him who pitched better in September, and he asks if they made a change to the rules valuing games in Sept. more than May and June.

I think the counter to that would be that a GB pitcher is going to see that reflected in the lower home run rate.

It is reminiscent of the “Ichiro could hit 40 homers a year if he wanted” argument.

Maybe Wainwright could strike out a bunch of hitters if he wanted to, more than he has. But if he were, he’d probably walk more batters and give up more homers, to the point where the value of the increased Ks is more than negated. And if that’s not the case, then the Cards are screwing up by having him pitch more to contact.

But then at that point, it still comes down to what you do, not what you could have done if management wanted to handle you differently. If the Cards were to sit Albert Pujols 30 times a year because they think he’ll be fresher and more potent in the offseason, that’s great…but he’s not going to be the MVP if they did that, because he wouldn’t have played enough to be more valuable than other players, and the fact that he could have played every day but didn’t doesn’t matter.