By "wipeout," I mean a scenario in which Japan sinks six carriers and eight battleships of the American Pacific fleet in 1941-1942 with their trained and relatively experienced crews, with the loss of no more than one or two capital ships...
(Note: there were only five US carriers in the Pacific in 1941-1942: Saratoga, Lexington, Yorktown, Enterprise, and Hornet. Ranger and Wasp were in the Atlantic and considered too vulnerable for the Pacific.)
You've basically described the Japanese naval doctrine of Kantai Kessen or "naval fleet decisive battle". The Japanese would bait the US fleet into crossing the Pacific, either to defend the Philippines or attack Japan. They would whittle the fleet down along the way with air, submarine, and nighttime torpedo attacks. Then, once the US was far away from their bases of supply and repair, the main Japanese fleet would attack and destroy or cripple the US fleet.
...then decimates the numerically largely but less experienced fleet that American turns out in 1943.
This wasn't part of the plan because, up to that point, rebuilding a fleet in wartime was considered an impossibility. The axiom was that you fight with the fleet you have. Replacements of major ships would come from whatever was already under construction when the war started. The US rebuilding their fleet in 2 years was unprecedented, it wasn't considered time enough to build and shake down new major combat ships.
After the US Pacific fleet was crippled, the US was supposed to sue for peace, like the Russians did after Tsushima. Japan did not want to fight the US, it wanted to conquer the South Eastern Pacific for resources; specifically the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. The US was just in the way; specifically in the Philippines. The Japanese assumed the US wouldn't fight hard to protect other nation's possessions.
It might have worked. The US was planning to act as the Japanese had guessed. Given the pasting the US Navy received early in the Guadalcanal Campaign, and their poor defense against Japanese long range torpedoes, the US might have fared poorly in their first major engagement.
Ironically, their attack on Pearl Harbor likely ruined their own plan.
First, it left the US with no surface fleet to send to a decisive battle. They would instead husband their resources and fight when they had the advantage.
Second, it turned it from a war over what the public would perceive as some distant Pacific possessions, to a surprise attack on American soil. Even if the first US fleet was destroyed, it may not have brought the US to the bargaining table.
Third, it caused the US to invest heavily in a crash building program which resulted in an unprecedented brand new fleet by 1943, and overwhelming superiority by 1944. With an intact fleet, and no infamous surprise attack to spur public outcry, the US may not have fully mobilized for war.