As expected, the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) has named Los Angeles Angels center fielder Mike Trout the American League Rookie of the Year. Pardon me if I don’t fall over in my chair on this one.
Don’t get me wrong. Trout rightfully deserved the award. He was far and away the best rookie in the league, if not in all of MLB. I just hope this isn’t a poor consolation prize from the BBWAA.
Trout (.326 avg, 30 HR, 83 RBI. 49 SB and 129 RS) was already denied a Rawlings Gold Golve Award, which he probably should have won, and chances are that despite his having what would normally be considered MVP credentials, he’ll probably lose out on that award to Triple Crown winner Miguel Cabrera.
Not trying to diminish Cabrera’s accomplishments at all, it’s just that it amazes me how in some years the voters talk about how the stats of a particular player put them over the top, and then in other years we hear how stats don’t always tell the whole story, and they have to consider the intangibles.
In my eyes, Trout has those intangibles, Cabrera doesn’t.
The problem with all of these postseason awards is that there is no real criteria. Nothing to tell the voters and the fans what is being looked at as the true gauge for the award. It’s a primitive mixture of stats, intangibles, and voters personal feelings, (and if you want to sit and tell me that doesn’t enter into it, let’s go in together on that Brooklyn Bridge deal).
It’s time that the BBWAA came up with a defined set of items to look at for all the MLB postseason awards, that can be calculated and weighed in different percentages until a winner is determined. I shudder in my chair as I type these next words, but kind of a BCS for baseball awards.
So congratulations Mr. Trout. You are the best…rookie…in the American League to play baseball in 2012. Hoo-ray. But don’t feel too bad. Freshmen never win the Heisman trophy either.