- Thread starter
- #1
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
NL/AL ROY Winners Announced Tomorrow - Who Ya Got?
- Thread starter Jaypers
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Who voted for Trumbo? Banned.
gt2590
Super Moderator
I have a cheap Hellickson/Jennings lot and a Trumbo lot up, ending Tuesday so my vote may be tainted.
I think Freeman and Hellickson SHOULD win... :?
I think Freeman and Hellickson SHOULD win... :?
Superfractor
Active member
Craig Kimbrel, and Jeremy Hellickson for me.
markakis8
Active member
- Oct 31, 2008
- 12,081
- 2
Kimbrel and Hosmer for me.
Austin
Well-known member
I did not, but Trumbo did win the Sporting News Rookie of the Year, so it's not so far fetched.Wes said:
I would not be surprised if any of four AL rookies won (Hellickson, Hosmer, Trumbo or Nova)
Nova was excellent down the stretch, so that may sway voters who like wins.
Although, I believe the best choices are Kimbrel and Hellickson.
Anthony K.
New member
markakis8 said:
I agree with Carl here.
Had Hosmer started the season in the majors, there would be NO discussion for AL ROY, but Hellickson and Nova sure make a strong argument.
I think Trumbo is a terrible pick as he put up the sixth worse on base percentage of any MLB regular. Think about it, he failed when he went to the plate at a greater rate than every player in the majors except for Alcides Escobar, Carl Crawford, Alex Rios, Miguel Olivo and Vernon Wells.
Here's a look at his atrocious pitch recognition abilities: http://angels.ocregister.com/2011/11/10 ... es/107343/
Here's a look at his atrocious pitch recognition abilities: http://angels.ocregister.com/2011/11/10 ... es/107343/
With regards to Trumbo, a rookie is inherently an inexperienced player in the Major Leagues and there will be holes in his game.
I would focus on the positives instead hammering on the stuff he obviously does really need to work on.
An on-base percentage of .290 is bad, but he hit 29 home runs and had 31 doubles and was a legitimate power threat for Angels team looking for a first baseman.
Guys who come into the league playing like an Albert Pujols / Ichiro don't come along too often.
I would focus on the positives instead hammering on the stuff he obviously does really need to work on.
An on-base percentage of .290 is bad, but he hit 29 home runs and had 31 doubles and was a legitimate power threat for Angels team looking for a first baseman.
Guys who come into the league playing like an Albert Pujols / Ichiro don't come along too often.
hail2thevictors
New member
- Jan 20, 2010
- 2,187
- 0
So OBP is the end all, be all in baseball?Wes said:
Come on Wes. I don't care what his OBP was, he produced more runs than anyone else. Baseball is about scoring runs, and driving in runs. He hit .254, 29 HR, 87 RBI and the .291 OBP. You want to to make this a strict one category argument-about OBP. He failed more than almost anyone.
Well guess what? The rest of the AL rookies all failed to produce more runs than Trumbo. They all failed to hit more homers than Trumbo.
To single this down to one category is very short-sighted. I don't even like Trumbo, I am a Hosmer guy-but the production doesn't match Trumbo. The best player from this rookie group will be Hosmer IMO, but the best season was Trumbo. Or, I think Hellickson should be the guy. Your hate for Trumbo is disturbing.
hail2thevictors said:
It's more important than scoring runs or driving in runs, since he has more control over it. Runs scored and RBI are reliant on teammates. In nearly 100 less games Desmond Jennings eclipsed Trumbos' WAR. In just 43 games Brett Lawrie produced more. Pineda is my choice, as he had the finest season. I'm going to cut this argument short, if you want to measure value using runs scored and RBI, that's your business. I've built my case on stats that are generally accepted as superior measurements, I'll stick with my pick of Pineda over Trumbo.
Baseball is about creating runs, yes, and while Trumbo did some things to do so, he also did some things to subtract them (making outs more frequently than 98% of other players). His overall value does not match up to that of Pineda or the others that have been mentioned.
hail2thevictors
New member
- Jan 20, 2010
- 2,187
- 0
What I don't understand is comparing someone in a ROY discussion, to the rest of the non-rookies in the AL. Go ahead and look at other AL rookies who played in, say, 100 games-and his OBP isn't near as atrocious as you make it out to be. Hosmer, who I considered a good hitter, had an OBP of under .340.Wes said:
If you go pitching, here are the stats of Pineda and Hellickson:
Pineda-171 inn, 3.74 ERA, 1.10 WHIP, 173 K
Hellickson-189 inn, 2.95 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 117 K
Kind of a toss up I suppose.
hail2thevictors said:
The difference between a .291 OBP and a .334 OBP is the same as the difference between Mickey Mantle and David Justice.
Keyser Soze
New member
Superfractor said:
+1. Kimbrel is easy. Hellboy had a much larger body of work than Hosmer.
hail2thevictors
New member
- Jan 20, 2010
- 2,187
- 0
I think it goes:Keyser Soze said:
1. Hellickson
2. Trumbo
3. Hosmer
4. Pineda
In the NL, I think it's Kimbrel as well. Just like guys in the past, good RP's seem to have a great shot at the ROY.
hail2thevictors
New member
- Jan 20, 2010
- 2,187
- 0
You are missing my point. It is neither here, nor there, to compare any ROY candidate's OBP to the rest of the non-rookies in his league. In the AL, Trumbo's OBP among players who played a lot of games isn't near as bad. This ROY race has nothing to do with non-rookies. If you want to talk about OBP, compare his OBP to other rookies who have played enough games. We are talking about ROY, right?Wes said:
hail2thevictors said:
Similar threads
