Relievers and starters should not be treated the same way via stats. Even though they are both pitchers, what they do is very different, and nets different results statistically.
Relievers face only a handful of batters a game and can throw as hard as they want the entire time. Starters have to face the same lineup multiple times each game, and must pace themselves in terms of velocity and pitch selection. Relievers also usually come in during high leverage situations, causing them to pitch differently than when starting an inning clean and/or a big lead.
All of this and more leads to different stats and changes the importance of each stat for reliever and starters. You are using starter stats to talk about Ondusek, and they aren't as relevant for him since he's a reliever.
You pasted a quote from another post that outlined Ondrusek's 2012 numbers:
As I went back through the stats, 25 out his 47 appearances have come against teams with winning records, and 12 appearances were against teams who were in first place in their division. He went his first 17 appearances and gave up NO runs.#141 of 155 in FIP (4.93)
#152 of 155 in xFIP (5.22)
Finally, on May 17th, he had a bad game and gave up five runs (in NY, not GABP). Take away that one appearance and his ERA drops to 1.84 for the season.
Honestly, I've never been a Logan Odrusek champion - mainly because I've listened to and believed all the complaints about him. But the more I look at Ondrusek's stats, the more I wonder why all the uproar. I'm not sure what else Logan Ondrusek can do.
Is Ondrusek lucky? Probably. But his luck has been going on for about three years and at some point, you have to start wondering if some of it is actual skill, an not luck.
"I got all of it ... I crushed that ball ... and it BARELY cleared the outfield wall. I settled into my home run trot ... then I realized I didn't even have a home run trot." - Bob Uecker
Across MLB, there is little to support that relievers do a better job of controlling BABIP than starters. Currently, starters in the MLB have a .294 BABIP against, while relievers have .290.
Whether or not a pitcher is pitching 1 inning or 7 innings, you still want the same things: High K rate, low walk rate, low HR rate. The fact that Logan doesn't K enough guys, and walks too many guys doesn't make it OK just because he's a reliever and he's had some BABIP luck. I'd find it very, very, very difficult to argue that Logan is such a good pitcher that he's able to control his BABIP, yet he's not good enough to strike guys out, and not good enough to prevent from walking them.
Sure, some pitchers' "stuff" is better suited for the bullpen than the rotation, and obviously relievers pitch differently that starters. That doesn't mean that FIP and xFIP are any less valuable for a reliever than it is a starter. It certainly is a better predictor of talent and future success than ERA is.
Overall, Logan's ERA is below 3.00, yes. If I'm looking backwards, would I rather have a guy with a 3.00 ERA but a 5.00 FIP, or would I rather have a guy with a 5.00 ERA, and a 3.00 FIP? Obviously (if looking backwards), I would want the guy with the 3.00 ERA. But, if I'm looking forward (as Dusty, and anyone in any decision making role with this ball club should be doing), I want to put the best pitchers in the best situations to succeed. A guy that walks that many and allows that many balls to be put in play is a ticking time bomb. It almost came back to bite Dusty against Houston last week, but Stubbs saved him. Logan's only saving grace is luck on balls put in play. Do we really want to see how long we can ride out that lucky streak?
The point is there are many, many arms in the bullpen that are better than Logan. Logan should be used in the Simon role, and should not pitch in key situations.
Can't win with 'em
Can't win without 'em
Plenty of relievers, not just the elite ones have been able to maintain low BABIP over their careers. Extremely logical that a pitcher can control his BABIP by getting weak contact, but can't get a lot of K's. Not sure why that is hard to understand.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.