(08-17-2017 05:59 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-17-2017 02:30 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  Just 2 examples of many, many common outcomes where ERA gives a very misleading view of pitcher value. You've got to correct for them OR you've got to consider ADDITIONAL information to evaluate a pitcher.

The fact that ERA is far from perfect doesn't mean that a mishmash of statistics tweaked to create a number similar to ERA is needed. Just look at other data. The raw data that goes into FIP tells you all you need to know anyway.

Yeah, that's a valid point. But let's face it, that "mishmash" exists because they were looking for a number that would be in the neighborhood of ERA. The advanced stats guys have a marketing problem. They clearly tried to create FIP to look like ERA so the transition would be easier. And even that's hard enough, but trying to get rid of a single number in favor of 4 that you track separately? Very tough sell.