Rookies of the Year announced

DMZ · November 7, 2005 at 12:39 pm · Filed Under General baseball 

No Felix, of course.

Huston Street for the AL, and Ryan Howard for the NL (man, if only we’d traded for that guy).

Huston Street
Robinson Cano
Jonny Gomes
Tadahito Iguchi
Gustavo Chacin
Nick Swisher
Joe Blanton
Clint Barmes
Jesse Crain
Scott Kazmir

Not even a third place vote? Really? That’s gotta smart.


49 Responses to “Rookies of the Year announced”

  1. The Other Tom on November 7th, 2005 12:50 pm

    Will Felix be eligible next year?

  2. Dave on November 7th, 2005 12:51 pm


  3. Dave on November 7th, 2005 12:51 pm

    In the writers defense, this was a pretty awesome year for rookies.

  4. Todd on November 7th, 2005 12:59 pm

    I think that the writers recognized the rightful winners. Too bad they could not be this accurate with the GGs.

  5. Evan on November 7th, 2005 1:04 pm

    I think my IBA ballot was Blanton, Gomes, and Chacin.

    I don’t see how Cano warranted that much support.

    I’m surprised Crain was still eligible.

  6. Zzyzx on November 7th, 2005 1:05 pm

    “I don’t see how Cano warranted that much support.”

    He has a NY on his hat.

  7. SeanD on November 7th, 2005 1:08 pm

    #4 – the writers don’t get to pick the GG winners – they’re done by a poll of coaches and managers. I agree with you the GG selections can be a bit sketchy. Good choices for the ROY’s though.

  8. Phildopip on November 7th, 2005 1:13 pm

    Yeah, thank god it wasn’t Cano.

  9. Evan on November 7th, 2005 1:40 pm

    The BBWAA have been doing pretty well with RoY in recent years. It’s the Cy Young and MVP awards they’ve been screwing up.

  10. Conor Glassey on November 7th, 2005 1:49 pm

    Clint Barmes is in the NL.

  11. Brock on November 7th, 2005 1:54 pm

    What is the deffinition of rookie??? Are we sure that Felix won’t be eligible next year. I mean he came up in August and only pitch for a month and a half! How many IP takes the rookie status away?

  12. Jeff on November 7th, 2005 1:55 pm

    That just makes his top-ten finish all the more impressive, Conor.

  13. Kelly M on November 7th, 2005 1:57 pm

    What’s sad/interesting about Ryan Howard is that if Thome had not gotten hurt, Howard would have gotten a fair shot with the Phils. At best he would have been traded at the deadline, and the Phils probably would not have gotten good value for him.

    Maybe Bavasi can remind Gillick just how much he hates rookies/young players.

    “Hey Pat, remember all the good things you loved about Meche? Those things are still there. And Raul and Spez are great team players, unlike that Abreu guy who we hear is a clubhouse problem.”

  14. Phildopip on November 7th, 2005 1:58 pm

    11 – I believe it’s 50 innings pitched.

  15. Evan on November 7th, 2005 1:59 pm

    A rookie has:

    – Fewer than 130 at bats and 50 innings pitched in the Major Leagues or

    – Fewer than 45 days on the active rosters of Major League clubs (excluding DL time or any time after rosters are expanded on September first)

    Since Felix threw over 80 innings, he’s no longer a rookie.

  16. Evan on November 7th, 2005 2:00 pm

    That really should be an “and” instead of an “or”.

    Stupid wikipedia.

  17. Conor Glassey on November 7th, 2005 2:28 pm

    No, I believe “or” is correct. Take Lew Ford for example. In 2003, he only had 73 ABs, but he wasn’t a rookie because he was on the Twins’ roster for more than 45 days.

    Although…it should say “or” instead of “and” when it talks about ABs and IP, because you don’t need both.

  18. Evan on November 7th, 2005 2:40 pm

    But with “or”, having 73 AB would be sufficient for Ford to qualify as a rookie. Using “and” means that he must have both fewer than 130 AB and have been on an active rostter for fewer than 45 days.

    Otherwise, a rookie could play every day every September for years, racking up 1000 AB, or 300 IP, but since he hadn’t satisfied the other condition yet (45 days on the roster outside September), he’d still he a rookie.

    It should be AND.

  19. Deanna on November 7th, 2005 2:43 pm

    DMZ — I know it’s not the same, but at least Zach Duke got like 4 votes over in the NL. He’s also sadly in the same boat as Felix in terms of the ROY honors.

  20. Ralph Malph on November 7th, 2005 3:17 pm

    I don’t know exactly when Crain got activated but he made his MLB debut on August 5, 2004. Felix was called up on August 4, 2005. Because Crain is a reliever, he only pitched 27 innings the rest of the year last year (22 games). Felix, as a starter, pitched 84 innings in roughly the same length of time.

    Even though they spent about the same length of time on the roster, Crain is still a rookie this year because his IP were lower, where Felix will not be a rookie next year because he went over 50 IP.

    That doesn’t seem fair somehow.

  21. NBarnes on November 7th, 2005 3:42 pm

    Cano in second place over Johnny Gomes is insane. Must be nice to play for the Yankees.

  22. Mat on November 7th, 2005 4:05 pm

    “That doesn’t seem fair somehow.”

    It’s a pretty arbitrary award anyhow. A player on a franchise with a slow trigger finger on rookies might be pretty close to his age 27-28 seasons when he comes up, and he might wind up looking a lot better than if he was broken in relatively early at 22 or 23, even though bringing him up earlier might increase his value later in his career. It stinks that Felix wasn’t eligible, but this happens to great players all the time. I wouldn’t worry too much about a dearth of trophies on Felix’s mantle when his career is over.

  23. JPWood on November 7th, 2005 4:08 pm

    Ralph: not fair maybe, but I’m sure Felix is happy enough being a future SP ace while Crain will remain a reliever. Their horizons are not at all the same, especially at 19.

  24. ML on November 7th, 2005 4:28 pm

    “Not even a third place vote?”

    You really couldn’t vote for Felix over Street, Gomes or Iguchi – at least if a “most valuable to team” type of standard was used. Extrapolate their numbers over the course of the season and nobody else would have even garnered a first place vote. It will be many a Hefeweizen at Cheney Stadium before I get to eclipse the thrill I derived watched Felix pitch there this year. Then again, aren’t they going to move and just burn the place down (joking) after next year anyway? Does anyone know the status on the potential relocation? Last I remember hearing, 2006 was the final year for their lease. King Felix, didn’t he get that nickname here to begin with?

  25. JI on November 7th, 2005 4:55 pm

    At least they got these awards right. I don’t even bother with the Gold Gloves, Cy Young, or MVP anymore.

  26. ML on November 7th, 2005 5:00 pm

    Dream a little dream with me. Livan led MLB with around 250 innings last year, Buehrle a bit behind that. Obviously, we’d never abuse Felix as such at 19 and in retrospect we did a great job with the way he was handled, but let’s suspend reality totally and completely and look at Felix’s 250 IP projections:

    Felix 12-12, 2.67 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, 68 BB’s, 228 K’s

    Didn’t get many W’s, but that should have met muster. He might have worn down a tad though… 😉

  27. Phildopip on November 7th, 2005 5:08 pm

    26 – looks like Matsuzaka’s numbers.

  28. Conor Glassey on November 7th, 2005 5:13 pm

    Evan – I know this isn’t a big deal, and the wording is a little funky, but I still believe it should be “or,” in the sense that there are 2 ways to lose your rookie eligibility…

    -collecting more than 130 at bats / pitching more than 50 innings


    -being on the MLB roster for more than 45 days

  29. Adam on November 7th, 2005 5:17 pm

    Clint Barmes is in the NL…

  30. Taylor Davis on November 7th, 2005 5:26 pm

    Well he started by saying “A rookie has:”

    so technically a rookie has both less than X number IP AND x number of days on the roster. To lose rookie status, you can not fit into one OR the other. So it should have been AND on his original statement anyways.

  31. JMB on November 7th, 2005 6:00 pm

    I don’t see why people are so surprised about Cano — hit nearly hit .300, and you know that means something to the voters.

  32. Conor Glassey on November 7th, 2005 6:05 pm

    Taylor Davis & Evan –
    Yeah, sorry. It was just a wording issue. So, we’re not really even arguing about anything. Haha…my bad.

  33. The Other Tom on November 7th, 2005 6:21 pm

    .300 is nice, but not everything. Albeit in a weak year, Bobby Crosby won it last year while hitting .239/.319/.426.

  34. NBarnes on November 7th, 2005 6:58 pm


    It’s not that Cano didn’t have a fine rookie year or doesn’t deserve some votes. But saying he had a better rookie season than Gomes is unsupportable. Cano had, overall, more or less a very slightly above league average season; Gomes had an OPS north of .900.

  35. JMB on November 7th, 2005 7:12 pm

    Ok, so I’ll play devil’s advocate.

    Gomes spent half his time as a DH; Cano played up the middle.
    Gomes only had 348 at-bats; Cano had 522.
    Gomes was helped greatly by his home park; Cano was killed by his.

  36. Mat on November 7th, 2005 9:37 pm

    Well…Cano may have had more playing time, but the margin of playing time narrows a bit when you consider PAs (551 to 407) instead of ABs.

    Cano may have played up the middle, but his VORP (which adjusts for position), is still about 9 runs less than Gomes’ VORP (27.5 to 36.9). VORP is also park-adjusted, so I’m having trouble believing Cano was hurt that badly by Yankee Stadium.

    I’m not sure that Cano especially distinguished himself in the field, either. Clay Davenport’s stats like him as an average 2B, but Zone Rating has him a little lower in the league. I haven’t seen him play much, but he didn’t seem all that great when I did see him.

    Also, Cano seemed to be pretty susceptible to LHP, while Gomes put up fairly even platoon splits.

  37. Dick Pole on November 7th, 2005 9:48 pm

    Vorp, shmorp. Just because Cano has an NY on his hat doesn’t mean he didn’t deserve it. He was solid for most of the year and carried the Yanks for a time when no one was hitting. Gomes? Have them swap teams and then tell me that Gomes is better.

  38. Mr. Egaas on November 7th, 2005 10:49 pm

    Fact of the matter is, nobody is going to remember or care who was runner up or 3rd in the running for Rookie of the Year. Street was my choice, and definitely earned it.

  39. Mat on November 7th, 2005 11:53 pm

    It doesn’t really matter if we remember the runner up for ROY, the point is that it should be a fun exercise to compare players to one another.

    And Cano gets no extra points for being a Yankee in my book. So he had to hit while the rest of his team wasn’t hitting? Boo hoo. Tampa’s offense scored 150 runs fewer than the Yanks over the course of the season, so I’d say there was just as large, if not a larger, burden on Gomes to produce for the D-Rays, especially since Lou wasn’t supporting him very much. Cano shouldn’t get extra credit because his teammates went dry for a stretch of the season. Until you can actually get Gomes to play for the Yankees, I’m not buying that he would be worse in New York than he was in Tampa.

  40. NBarnes on November 8th, 2005 2:36 am

    #37: You must be joking. Cano was carrying a team with Rodriguez, Giambi, Matsui, and Jeter? What part of the season was that again, when all four of those weren’t hitting and Cano had to carry the team, with his 103 OPS+ on the season?

    Cite, please.

  41. vj on November 8th, 2005 2:48 am

    The Chris, you’re a link spammer.

  42. Evan on November 8th, 2005 10:38 am

    Vorp, shmorp

    If it matters, measure it.

  43. JMB on November 8th, 2005 1:45 pm

    VORP is also park-adjusted, so I’m having trouble believing Cano was hurt that badly by Yankee Stadium.

    It was actually pretty drastic.

    home: 252/274/378
    road: 335/358/525

    Those road numbers are damned good for a 2B.

  44. Mat on November 8th, 2005 2:02 pm

    There’s a difference between performing poorly at home and being hurt by your home stadium. I see no reason why Cano’s particular approach is hurt more by Yankee Stadium than a typical player, so I’d chalk most of that drastic difference up to being a statistical blip, albeit a rather large blip.

    Put it this way, just based on the splits, I have no way of telling whether Cano was really hurt by Yankee Stadium, or he just happened to have most of his good days on the road. Time will tell, I suppose.

  45. Dick Pole on November 9th, 2005 10:14 am


    The reference I made in post #37 to Gomes being a Yankee isn’t that he would be a worse player, it is that you and other Yankee haters might look at him differently (likewise with Cano playing for TB). He wouldn’t be so bright and shiny.


    All I have time to cite, and I know you’re going to hate it, is my fantasy league. I had Gomes and he was not a consistent producer. Dropped him. Cano, I kept and he had a hand in winning me my league. How’s that for stats?


    You’re right. Street deserved it. (He was on my fantasy team too.)

  46. Evan on November 10th, 2005 10:53 am

    I don’t care who he plays for. I just look at their VORP numbers.

    Gomes was way better than Cano.

  47. Mat on November 10th, 2005 12:24 pm

    “…it is that you and other Yankee haters…”

    Now I’m a hater? Where did I discount Cano because he’s a Yankee? And why is Gomes bright and shiny because he’s a D-Ray? I don’t like the Devil Rays and I don’t hate the Yankees. Go ahead and keep guessing about my team loyalties, though.

  48. Jeff on November 10th, 2005 6:58 pm

    Have you considered that being a good fantasy baseball player does not necessarily make one a good baseball player?

  49. Dick Pole on November 11th, 2005 12:24 pm

    Nope. We’re dealing with stats, correct? Runs, hits, HR’s, Batting averages, etc. That’s what we talk about here isn’t it? VORP? Speaking of, White Sox had a COMBINED TEAM VORP of 187. Yankees 378.7.


    Pardon me. Didn’t mean to phrase it that you were a Yankee hater. But I do believe there is a strong prejudice against Yankees all around–not just on this website. BTW, I’m not a Yankee fan.