Originally Posted by TDog
I have always believed that if I am looking back at my team's season, I would rather have a starting pitcher with 20 wins and an ERA of 3.50 than a starting pitcher with 10 wins and an ERA of 2.50. I shouldn't have to apologize for that. I don't do fantasy baseball, and having spent half a century as a White Sox fan, I value winning over style points.
EDIT - OK, nobody is asking you to apologize for HOOOOW your team wins; basically what you've said here is that you prefer to root for a team that wins 95 games with a good offense and mediocre pitching staff over a team that wins 75 games with a good pitching staff and a ****ty offense. Having just spent a year watching the 2013 White Sox, I'm sure we can all relate. The idea that wins are meaningless is ONLY IN THE CONTEXT of comparing two, INDIVIDUAL pitchers to one another. So yes, while we can all agree that we'd much rather root for the team that wins more games, we can also agree that if given the choice, we'd take the 10-game winner, 2.50 ERA pitcher over the 20 W/3.50 ERA pitcher because it's extremely likely that the difference in wins has nothing to do with their individual abilities, but rather things that are completely out of their control; their offenses, their bullpens, etc. That's why people don't give a **** about wins AS AN INDIVIDUAL STAT FOR RATING PITCHERS
Your argument is basically that you'd rather have Jeremy Guthrie and his 15 wins and 4.04 ERA, 1.39 WHIP, 4.7 K/9 IP etc. over Chris Sale and his 11 wins and 3.07 ERA, 1.07 WHIP, 9.5 K/IP becasue, WINS... Guthrie is obviously a 36% better pitcher than Sale because he won 36% more games than he did. And anyone who would argue that would be a lunatic.