It's difficult for me to really grasp FIP or other stats that show "true level of performance", because there's what "should" have happened, and there's what *DID* happen. David Tyree never in a million years *should* have caught that ball. But he did. Bucky Dent never should have hit that homer over the monster off Torrez. But he did.
The rotation's six guys' ERA and FIP (from b-ref):
Buchholz: 2.82 FIP, 3.78 ERA (-0.96 difference)
Rodriguez: 3.45 FIP, 3.15 ERA (+0.30 difference)
Miley: 3.98 FIP, 4.50 ERA (-0.52 difference)
Porcello: 4.45 FIP, 5.61 ERA (-1.16 difference)
Kelly: 4.18 FIP, 5.67 ERA (-1.49 difference)
Masterson: 5.26 FIP, 6.37 ERA (-1.11 difference)
Everyone but Rodriguez (SSS and all) are WOEFULLY underperforming their FIP. That is, taking things like babip into consideration, etc., it appears the Sox' starters are performing significantly better than their stats are showing.
But of course, the stats are what actually matter. If a .210 hitter jacks one off a 98 mph Kelly fastball on the black, even if that "shouldn't" have happened, it DID happen. So ERA tells us what has happened, FIP tells us what "should" have happened. And the reality is, the Sox' starters have FIP numbers much, much better than their actual ERAs.
So should we be encouraged? Discouraged? Obviously the results aren't there. But why? Are the Sox' starters just all (except for Rodriguez) very, VERY unlucky this year?