Assuming that I ever attain a passable understanding of how the new normalized/relative fielding works, I doubt I'll ever be able to figure out how to incorporate it into my typical player search. I'm particularly curious about how to incorporate the impact on team defense into my search criteria for pitchers. I am not satisfied with the nuclear option of not drafting deadball pitchers; those pitchers have their own advantages, and it's fun to keep them in the mix. I am also not satisfied with the answer that you need to look to outside resources, such as BR.com, to figure out relative fielding percentages by league/year. Any factors that significantly impact gameplay should be reflected in the available search criteria (to some minimum extent, at least).
The question is whether searches based on pitching stats (WHIP+, BB/9#, ERC/ERC#, HR/9+, etc.) will yield deceptive results. Such a search won't reflect the impact the pitcher has on team defense, will it? A deadballer that looks like a good dollar value in comparison to a modern pitcher may not be worth the savings if he drags down your defense, but the search engine doesn't give you any criteria to evaluate that difference. Or does it? Compare 1906 Doc White to 1998 Roger Clemens, or 1906 Mordecai Brown to 1968 Bob Gibson. Those aren't perfect comparisons, but how does one incorporate the defense effect when deciding between those modern/deadball pairs?
Or, by even asking these questions am I simply illustrating my complete and total ignorance when it comes to the concept of relative fielding? Am I worrying about nothing? Is ignorance bliss? Why does bread always land butter-side down? Bueller?