Oh, talent is a much bigger input to success than process control. I bet I could do SPC better than perkins (or about the same), but I have no chance to pitch.
Having been in communications and organizational change management and strategic management at various times, it is clear from my experience that employees benefit from having this kind of knowledge. We repeatedly find that letting employees know how their success is judged, how we measured their process performance, how the overall company's success was measured, greatly increased the quality, speed, and (decreased) the cost of outcomes produced.
For a baseball player, they have often looked at RBI or BA to judge how they were doing (in the old days, and still today). Pitchers (just ask jack morris) looked at wins.
Perkins, he's looking at other outcome measures.
But, your overall point remains. Talent>process.
But, as Tony Gwynn reminded us, process is very important also.
But do these stats actually help a player with process?
When I think of pitching, I would say:
Desired Outcomes = maximize outs, minimize runs
Desired Goals = maximize strikeouts, ground balls, minimize walks, home runs
Process = Preparation to pitch (work outs, bullpens, etc), scouting of opponent/game plan (scouting reports, pitch f/x data, understanding of location, game situations, etc), proper utilization (pitching roles)
I'm just thinking of how this specific knowledge fits in. I can see for confidence reasons and I suppose that specific personality types would eat it up more than others, but I hardly see it as necessary for most players.