Last time I had the "Ace" discussion on BN I was told "most people" accepted that there are only 15, or so, "Aces" and now you tell me that "most people" agree there are 8-10. I'm sure next time it will be 6-8 and, certainly, NONE of this is arbitrary. Is there a certain place where "most people" vote on this? I've missed the "most people" meetings. Maybe the invites have gotten lost in the mail.
Being called a #2 is not a knock on him at all. Most people look at being called an Ace as something very special and feel their are only 8-10 in the game at a time. He is 10th in xFIP (3.07), 16th in FIP (3.03) 8th in K/9 (9.73), 14th in LOB% (72.4), 14th in WAR (2.5) and 13th in IP (106.1). All of those numbers are right on the cusp of being an Ace and why there is a debate about it, but they just don't reach that 8-10th best pitcher level that most are looking for. He has the potential of being an Ace. He just isn't there yet. Again, being a top #2 isn't a knock on him whatsoever and he would the best pitcher on a lot of teams. He just isn't a true Ace yet.
As to the numbers you cite, A ) you lump AL starters in with NL starters and that's just wrong. AL starters don't bat and, as such, their IP are greater (and K/9 lesser). Apples to apples. B ) a pitcher's numbers are interwoven with the actual team an individual plays on. The Cubs aren't just a BAD team, they are a team that is TRYING to be BAD. As such, the offensive support for Ace is really low (see above). That affects IP, K's, etc. The bullpen is all kind of suck (see above). That affects Ace's ER, ERA, W-L, etc. The defense is ugly--that affects BA, OBP, SLG, etc. and those affect virtually any, and every, other number out there.
As the original post said, the excuse given for Ace's dis-inclusion was that he pails next to some mythical "World Series contending" Ace. The fact is that a team makes an Ace every bit as much as an Ace makes the team. SamardzijAce would be a better pitcher on a better team--one that tried to be good.
Regardless, looking at what Ace has done over the last year and a half (especially while being ALLOWED to use his three best pitches--see above) few others compare.
Listen kid. I have never had a discussion with you about Samardzija before. 15 Aces is way too high. And as far as playing for a bad team, I guess it's a good thing I only used numbers that were independent of what team he plays for. I said he is close and he is. He deserves to be in the discussion, but the numbers just aren't quite there yet. Now, that's not to say after another year his numbers won't be there, but as of right now he is just on the outside knocking on the door to get in. And you're dang right I lumped in the AL. The fact that you say AL k/9 is lower would work in Samrdzija's favor. That's all I've got for right now, I'm on my phone and its a pain to type.
Hey, Pops, perhaps we can carry on a conversation without invectives.
"I have never had a discussion with you about Samardzija before."
Never said you did. You did speak for "most people," however, and "most people" involved in the earlier discussion disagreed with you.
"15 Aces is way too high."
You get that same argument about grades, "Five A's on that test? That's too many! Sorry, fella, your 100% just became a B." I come at it from a completely different perspective--how many students earned A's? That's how many A's you get.
What happens if, over the next week, the top 8-10 "Aces" need TJS? Do you "promote" the next 8-10 guys because "Zero Aces is way too little?" Of course not, the number is what the PLAYERS make of it on the field--regardless of whether it looks "too much" or "too little."
"And as far as playing for a bad team, I guess it's a good thing I only used numbers that were independent of what team he plays for."
That just isn't true. You used six stats and, clearly, at least four are affected, in part, by other players on the field (IP, LOB%, WAR and K/9).
*IP is hampered by multiple things outside the pitcher's control: infielders fielding poorly, the offense not scoring (poor hitting, baserunning, pinch-hitting), etc.
*LOB% is clearly affected by both defense (both good and bad--in this case, bad) and poor (or good) relief work--in this case really, really bad. For instance, Fangraphs uses (LOB% = (H+BB+HBP-R) / (H+BB+HBP-(1.4 HR)). Clearly R's (especially R, and not ER, but really BOTH) are affected by fielders AND relievers.
*WAR (Baseball Reference, BP, Fangraphs and others all use differing formulae) is dependant upon IP, which is dependant upon BOTH the defense behind the pitcher and the offensive support he receives. Same for R (earned and unearned) as I show above.
*Ignoring negative effects from a poor defensive catcher, K/9 can be positively affected by a defense "giving" a pitcher another opportunity to strike out the "fourth out" in the inning.
So, No, these are not "independent of what team he plays for."
"And you're dang right I lumped in the AL. The fact that you say AL k/9 is lower would work in Samrdzija's favor."
Of course K/9 works in his favor (And, yes, I brought it up simply because it's true). There are too many variables for this type of analysis without segregating--something as simple as "He's ranked X in his league for IP/GS" works.
"I'm on my phone and its a pain to type."
Something we can agree upon. Especially for me on this site for some reason.