Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187
I am about to embark on a rant, so please forgive me:
My whole take on stats and sabermetrics is that every stat is pretty much worthless on its own and that every stat is worth considering when looking at the grand scheme of things.
For a pitcher, wins and saves are pretty worthless stats in and of themselves but they are not completely worthless. If a guy has 40 saves with a sub two ERA and low WHIP, hey, that's pretty impressive. Conversely, if a guy is like Joe Borowski and has 40 saves with a 5 something ERA, that's not so impressive. The same thing is true with wins, but I will say that I think there is something telling about a guy who is capable of winning a lot of games or saving a lot of games regardless of what his other numbers are. It might not be saying much but it says something. Maybe it's just that he is on a good team.
One of the weaknesses of sabermetrics is that while they were created to challenge conventional wisdom, I think that they have created a new conventional wisdom that some people are as enslaved by as others were/are by old school conventional wisdom. I also think that some devotees of sabermetrics shout louder than others, which makes it more tempting to ignore/dismiss them.
Every stat is just a tool at understanding the game and I think too often people get bogged down in understanding one aspect of it and lose sight of the whole picture.
I could have bolded the entire post, I thought it was that good. In fact I hope you don't mind but I'm going to bookmark this and save it for future reference. You have distilled the argument down to its essence.