And Your 2008 ROY's Are.........

[love_that_reefer]

I like my typing skills. Edited for your pleasure Dirty

[catman]

I have no problems with the selections this year. It was a good year for rookies.

[DirtyKash]

Well done, once again, by our bumbling fool of a commissioner, Bud Selig.



On Volquez's erroneous Rookie of the Year bid | FanNation

Armed with a mid-90s fastball and a devastating circle-change, Edinson Volquez burst on the scene in 2008 as one of baseball's best young pitchers. After finishing his first season in Cincinnati with a 17-6 record and 3.21 ERA, the 25-year-old right-hander placed fourth in this year's NL Rookie of the Year voting.

Only one problem: Volquez was not a rookie.

According to this "official info" on MLB.com, "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."

Well, that's interesting, because prior to that now-famous Volquez-for-Josh Hamilton trade, Volquez had already logged 80 innings for the Rangers from 2005-07. Remember, the 50-innings barrier refers to "a previous season or seasons."

To make sure I hadn't lost my mind, I placed a call to the MLB offices. The governing body of our nation's pastime confirmed it: Volquez definitely wasn't a rookie in 2008.

With this knowledge in hand, I contacted the folks who actually hand out this award: The Baseball Writers' Association of America. BBWAA secretary/treasurer Jack O'Connell graciously admitted the oversight: "It was a mistake. It slipped through the cracks."

Turns out three writers incorrectly filled out ballots with Volquez in second place, and BBWA didn't catch the error. Although BBWAA usually picks off flawed ballots before they are counted, O'Connell disclosed that this has happened "multiple times" in the past. BBWAA will not correct the mistake because it would not change the winner (Chicago's Geovany Soto).

"Luckily it didn't affect the outcome," O'Connell said. "Consider it the missing chad."

Even though he had absolutely nothing to do with this award or its voting, one man is going to take some unnecessary heat for this embarrassing gaffe: America's favorite whipping boy, Bud Selig.

[HollywoodLeo]

As much distaste as I have for Bud Selig I don't see how we can fault him in this case.

This is strictly on the BWAA.

[missionhockey21]

Joey Votto had a fine season and was clearly the NL's No. 2 rookie, but the writer that voted him first over Soto just isn't taking his privilege seriously.

What dick writer wrote that? I am not arguing that Votto should have won due to the difference in position expectations, but finishing above Soto in most offensive categories I think makes it perfectly fair for him to get a first place vote or two.

[cjkalt]

Was Soto that much better than Votto that he deserved a unanimous vote? I don't think so

[HollywoodLeo]

Originally Posted by ljshorty89 I dunno if I'd give it to him unanimously, but I do agree Lincecum should probably be the winner. If he gets screwed over, I think the most likely option would be Johan Santana. He had the best ERA, the most innings pitched, and was top 5 in K's, and managed 16 wins despite the bullpen blowing 7 of his starts. Plus, he has the NY Media thing behind him. I could see him winning, and it wouldn't be undeserved....I just think Lincecum has a slight edge.

Webb finished 2nd in the voting.