Trout scoring at Fenway -- get used to it.
After last night's debacle in Oakland, I thought I'd stay away from the Red Sox for a change and focus on someone actually having an upbeat year -- although I don't agree with how it is being viewed.
Watching him help the Angels
sweep the Sox at Fenway earlier this week, and based on his entire body of
work this season, it's clear that Mike Trout is one of the most
exciting young players in the majors. He may even be the American
League MVP when all is said and done, but there is one thing I don't
think the 21-year-old phenom should be:
Rookie of the Year.
Technically, Trout is a rookie. As the
MLB rules state, “A
player shall be considered a rookie unless, during a previous season
or seasons, he has (a) exceeded 130 at-bats or 50 innings pitched in
the Major Leagues; or (b) accumulated more than 45 days on the active
roster of a Major League club or clubs during the period of 25-player
limit (excluding time in the military service and time on the
disabled list).
Trout makes the cut – barely. He
played in 40 games (32 starts) during 2011, in which he had 123
at-bats. This may qualify someone for rookie status the next year,
but it seems like an awful big sample set for me.
Trout is a phenom -- but should he be a rookie?
Forty games is nearly a quarter of the
MLB schedule, and in Trout's case these were not just meaningless
down-the-stretch contests. His first appearance came on July 8
against Seattle, and he wound up playing 14 games in July, eight in
August, and 19 in September as the Angels battled for both an AL West
title and a Wild Card spot. They got neither, but Trout – who hit
.220 with five home runs and 16 RBI – got plenty of experience.
This year, of course, has been a
different story. Trout has been with the Angels since late April and
has torn up the league with an AL-best .336 average, 41 stolen bases,
and 103 runs scored (along with 25 home runs) entering last night.
Much hoopla was made when he became the first rookie to have both 25
homers and 40 steals during the Red Sox series, but he just doesn't
feel like a first-year guy to me.
He was an everyday player for Los
Angeles during a good stretch of LAST
season, and while he may seem like an entirely different performer
this year, Trout is in fact the same guy who had already seen plenty
of big-league pitching entering 2012. To me, a true Rookie of the
Year (ROY) winner is a guy who debuts the year he captures the award,
or at most plays in 10 or 15 September games the previous season.
Baseball
is the only one of the four major professional sports that has this
type of shady rookie status. Football players, of course, go straight
from college onto NFL rosters and have zero pro experience entering
their first year. Ditto for hockey players, who enter the NHL from
college or the minor league ranks. And while basketball players
may have overseas professional experience, the first NBA games for
every Rookie of the Year are played during his initial season in the
league.
Blake Griffin -- a "true" rookie.
My
11-year-old son Jason had a very perceptive comment when I mentioned
this discrepancy to him. “If Mike Trout is able to do this, what
will keep managers from making sure young players don't break the 130
at-bat limit so they can get better and older?” I found no proof of
this with Trout, who Angels manager Mike Scioscia played all game,
every game down the stretch of 2011. It would have been interesting
to see what might have happened had Trout gotten six more at-bats, of
course.
Jason
also had another funny premise: if a guy came up from the minors for
10 games a year for three years, would he still be considered a
rookie going into his fourth season? According to the MLB rules
above, he would. This seemed too funny to be plausible, but it
happened – the 2008 NL ROY, Cubs catcher Geovany Soto, had played
with Chicago for one game in 2005, 11 games in 2006, and 18 games in
2007. A fourth-year rookie!
Geovany Soto -- Jason was right.
I
first started thinking about Trout's freshman/sophomore status when
Will Middlebrooks was shining for the Red Sox earlier this summer. A
broken wrist derailed Middlebrooks in mid-August, and even if he had
played out the string the chances are slim he would have put together
stats like Trout. But since Middlebrooks was a TRUE rookie whose 75
major games, 15 homers, and 54 RBI all came this season, one could
argue (outside Los Angeles) that he is a more worthy Rookie of the
Year winner than the guy who will get the award.
For
some more perspective, I looked back at AL and NL ROY winners from
the past 10 seasons to see how they compare with Trout in pre-ROY
experience. Soto was the only one I found with three MLB seasons
under his belt, but one other player (Angel Berroa in 2003) had
played shortstop for the Royals for a combined 35 games and 128
at-bats in 2001-2002. Talk about cutting it close to the 130 at-bat limit!
Most
of the others fell into the more reasonable range of 15-20 games and
50-75 at-bats for position players and 5-15 games for pitchers. Six
of the 20 awardees were “true” Rookies of the Year who saw their
first MLB experience in their winning year – Chris Coughlin, Andrew
Bailey, Evan Longoria, Ryan Braun, Dontrelle Willis, and Eric Hinske.
Honorable mentions go to 2006 winners Hanley Ramirez and Justin
Verlander, who both played in just two games the previous season.
Andrew Bailey -- as true as rookies can get.
I
think the system needs some revamping. Lower the pre-ROY maximum
numbers to 20 games and/or 50 at-bats for position players, and 10
games and/or 30 innings for pitchers. This will ensure that September
call-ups can still be considered rookies, but guys who played three
months like Trout last year will be out of luck.
And
what if Trout pulls off the double-win and captures both the Rookie
of the Year and the MVP awards? He would be just the third man to
achieve this feat, after Fred Lynn (in 1975) and Ichiro Suzuki (2001)
– two men who offer another contrast in rookies. Lynn played in a
reasonable 15 games in September of '74, and while Suzuki was a
“true” rookie in '01 with regards to his MLB status, he did have
nine seasons and more than 1,000 games in the Japanese professional
leagues under his belt.
Now
that's another discussion altogether.
No comments:
Post a Comment