I think the term ace gets thrown around far too often. By the measure that some of you consider an ace, there's like 5 of them in all of baseball. Honestly, I'm not sure how someone can say Archer isn't an ace while saying that deGrom is. Archer: 201 IP, 11.15 K/9, 2.69 BB/9, 1.21 HR/9, .325 BABIP, 14.1% HR/FB, 4.07 ERA, 3.40 FIP, 3.35 xFIP, 3.44 SIERA, 4.6 fWAR, 1.17 GB/FB rate, 22.0% LD rate, 42.0% GB rate, 36.0% FB rate, 13.2/47.4/39.4 SOFT/MED/HARD rates deGrom: 201 IP, 10.68 K/9, 2.64 BB/9, 1.25 HR/9, .305 BABIP, 16.1% HR/FB, 3.53 ERA, 3.50 FIP, 3.23 xFIP, 3.44 SIERA, 4.4 fWAR, 1.34 GB/FB rate, 21.1% LD rate, 45.3% GB rate, 33.7% FB rate, 21.3/46.9/31.9 SOFT/MED/HARD rates Both age 29 seasons (deGrom turns 30 first) in 2018. So deGrom's an ace because he got luckier? I'm just saying, the term ace is being used too loosely. Giving up more hard contact isn’t “unlucky.” But for the term “ace”- it means 1. By definition there should be 30 then. Not that it’s what ace means typically