We've only won the monthly award three times in our history with Ross Gload, Gordon, and Alexei each winning once.

 

 

Anyways there's a good chance from Abreu to win in this month, but the competition and marketability of Tanaka might be too tough. It's a two person race definitely.

 

For reference Semien is second in WAR among the position players and Daniel Webb is second among the pitchers.

 

 

Abreu is .259/.340/.600/.940. 21 RBIs, 7 hrs, 7 doubles, and 16 runs.

 

 

Tanaka is 3-0, 2.15 ERA, .82 WHIP, 29.1 IP and 35 Ks.

 

 

Looking at that, Abreu will probably need a bad start from Tanaka to win in April. Or just keep hitting 450 monster shots every game.

 

 

Alexei has an outside chance at player of the month if he ends on a hot streak. It'll be tough to be out Trout and Pujols though.

Edited April 24, 201411 yr by Buehrle>Wood

I'm sure it will be Tanaka. Too much Yankee factor there.

Both look awesome and it should be a good race for AL ROY. Tanaka has second best xFIP in baseball and excellent 10.74 K/9, 0.61 BB/9. Abreu leads the league in power (well, tied with Pujols) with .341 ISO. Tanaka at 0.9 WAR, Abreu at 0.7. Both are a heck of a lot of fun to watch.

Though I will say this now, neither should be eligible for ROY.

I wonder if our attendance would be over 20,000 per game with Abreu AND Tanaka?

 

Kind of doubt it.

 

Maybe? I'll give Sox fans the benefit of the doubt and believe they would really start to come back to support the team, despite the obvious bullpen flaws....seeing a clear blueprint going forward.

 

Makes you feel more confident about their decision-making process going forward when they were so right (and it's early) about two huge FA's. Hopefully that will extend to the June draft as well.

 

 

Don't forget Ventura with the Royals. Although only 3 starts so far, electric stuff.

Edited April 24, 201411 yr by caulfield12

I can't imagine Tanaka doesn't win it. Not only does he deserve it, but he is a Yankee, so it will be a slam dunk, lock down award.

Though I will say this now, neither should be eligible for ROY.

 

^^x2^^

 

Poo-holes hit his 500 this month / end of discussion

^^x2^^

 

Poo-holes hit his 500 this month / end of discussion

?

 

I do believe that both Jose Abreu and Masahiro Tanaka have a better claim to the rookie of the month award than Albert Pujols.

Alexei has an outside chance at player of the month if he ends on a hot streak. It'll be tough to be out Trout and Pujols though.

 

Gotta read *all* of the thread

What if the Sox actually signed Tanaka? I still think about that every once in awhile.

Though I will say this now, neither should be eligible for ROY.

Why not? They are both rookies. What is Japan baseball equivelent to, AA? Cuban baseball -- A ball? Is it their age that bothers you? If so, what would be your age cap?

Why not? They are both rookies. What is Japan baseball equivelent to, AA? Cuban baseball -- A ball? Is it their age that bothers you? If so, what would be your age cap?

It's a tough one. They are both rookies to MLB, and I would agree that both Cuban and Japanese baseball are not the same as the majors. I think what both are doing is pretty damn good. Being biased of course, I think Abreu's success is more telling. He has to adjust to different pitchers everyday, where Tanaka has to go out there and do his thing, which he does every time he pitches.

 

But, I also see the age and experience argument. Overall, though, I'd say they should be eligible.

Rookie of the Year should be for players in their age 24 season or younger.

Rookie of the Year should be for players in their age 24 season or younger.

So if a player goes to college for four years, graduates at age 22, gets drafted, signs, has two full seasons in the minors, goes to the bigs at 25, he is not eligible? This will be called The Flavum Rule. Do you recommend baseball goes back and rescinds the awards based on age? Jackie Robinson won ROY at age 28 or 29 if I recall correctly. Sorry, Jackie, Flavum says you were too old. Give it back.

So if a player goes to college for four years, graduates at age 22, gets drafted, signs, has two full seasons in the minors, goes to the bigs at 25, he is not eligible? This will be called The Flavum Rule. Do you recommend baseball goes back and rescinds the awards based on age? Jackie Robinson won ROY at age 28 or 29 if I recall correctly. Sorry, Jackie, Flavum says you were too old. Give it back.

 

I might be flexible on 24 or 25, but I've never been big on foreign players from other leagues winning ROY at 28-29. I don't think that's in the spirit of that award.

Why not? They are both rookies. What is Japan baseball equivelent to, AA? Cuban baseball -- A ball? Is it their age that bothers you? If so, what would be your age cap?

 

If you are playing in a self-professed "major league" you shouldn't be eligible for the "rookie" of the year. If you want to change it to "first year" player of the year, that is fine. As it is, I hate that we give a 32 year old veteran star from Japan/Cuba/Wherever, the same consideration as a playing getting his first taste of major league baseball

Use 30 years old or something like that then. There are plenty of guys who do come up at 26 or 27 and they're really good regulars.

 

Frankly, if we want to talk about guys who played in a "major league," that would have been Viciedo ineligible his rookie year then too. He obviously wasn't worthy of the award, but that hardly seems fair.

Use 30 years old or something like that then. There are plenty of guys who do come up at 26 or 27 and they're really good regulars.

 

Frankly, if we want to talk about guys who played in a "major league," that would have been Viciedo ineligible his rookie year then too. He obviously wasn't worthy of the award, but that hardly seems fair.

 

I've said it before, and will say it again. I am OK with that.

I think if you sign as a free agent from another country, that was playing in that country's top league and go directly into MLB, you should not be eligible. This would eliminate the proven players such as Tanaka, Ichiro and Abreu from winning the award, but allow amateur free agents who do develop in the US to still win (such as a player like Viciedo). I don't care how long or how old you are before you finally make it to MLB if you developed in this country because you were not playing at the top level until you got to MLB.

I think if you sign as a free agent from another country, that was playing in that country's top league and go directly into MLB, you should not be eligible. This would eliminate the proven players such as Tanaka, Ichiro and Abreu from winning the award, but allow amateur free agents who do develop in the US to still win (such as a player like Viciedo). I don't care how long or how old you are before you finally make it to MLB if you developed in this country because you were not playing at the top level until you got to MLB.

 

I wouldn't mind that adjustment. It would be a step in the right direction.

I don't know, guys, do you want to attach those criteria to the definition of the word "rookie?" I see what you're getting at, but a rookie is a rookie. I think the ROY award is designed to identify breakout players for fans, and I think that's what it does.

I don't know, guys, do you want to attach those criteria to the definition of the word "rookie?" I see what you're getting at, but a rookie is a rookie. I think the ROY award is designed to identify breakout players for fans, and I think that's what it does.

 

ROY wasn't designed with professional veterans from around the world in mind. It was designed with kids who hadn't playing major league baseball in mind. Japanese and Cuban baseball weren't even an iota of thought in that process.

Giving a guy like Ichiro or Tanaka the ROY award is basically the same as giving Bobby Hull a ROY award when he left the NHL for the WHA.

Okay, some of you guys want to re-define the word 'Rookie', and that MLB should then specifically exclude players from certain countries if the players ever played for one of their top teams. In these politically correct times, I would love to see how this is handled without offending any national or ethnic group. Good luck. For myself, I like the current definition, which means that if you never played in MLB before, you are a rookie. When Ichiro broke in, he was a rookie, end of story, the fact that he was a polished rookie notwithstanding.

Okay, some of you guys want to re-define the word 'Rookie', and that MLB should then specifically exclude players from certain countries if the players ever played for one of their top teams. In these politically correct times, I would love to see how this is handled without offending any national or ethnic group. Good luck. For myself, I like the current definition, which means that if you never played in MLB before, you are a rookie. When Ichiro broke in, he was a rookie, end of story, the fact that he was a polished rookie notwithstanding.

 

MLB can make their own rules. If other countries/leagues don't like it, tough s***. They want to join MLB, they play by MLB's rules. Only Japanese born players are eligible to win the NPB ROY. Any American that goes over is not eligible.