Don't really want to single this argument out specifically, but the one thing that's held true of people who solely use FIP, xFIP and BABIP in arguments is that they generally don't even come close to using them correctly.
Dickey's peripherals are off because he's reverted to his Mets-era hard hit %. Considering he did it for a full 2.5 seasons before (second half of 2010-2012) I'm saying its just as possible it continues for two months as it doesn't.
I'm curious about all of this.
I like the more advanced stats and enjoy reading about them and looking at them. But, I can't say I'm intimately connected with them.
My impression is this: Dickey has pitched, really, really well since June. Then I see someone post that Dickey has essentially out-performed what should have been expected.
Which is fine. I look at stuff like that and think: "That's baseball." Before August, most of use would have argued that EE was having a below average year. Then he has this record setting month and suddenly his numbers are about where we expected.
But it makes me wonder, when he was really, really bad in April and May was he under-performing what was expected?
In other words, there's luck, there's bad luck and then there's pitching/playing to the level that was expected. I look at Dickey's overall numbers and figure he's about where I would expect him to be (maybe a little below, but with a month to go).