Nov
14

Nova finishes fourth in AL Rookie of the Year voting

By

Jeremy Hellickson was named the AL Rookie of the Year today, receiving 17 of 28 first place votes. He is the third starting pitcher to win the AL award since 1969, joining Dave Righetti and Justin Verlander. Hellickson finished the season with a 13-10 record and a 2.95 ERA, though his 4.44 FIP is much more of an eyesore.

Ivan Nova finished fourth in the voting behind Hellickson (102 points), Mark Trumbo (63), and Eric Hosmer (38). He received one first place vote, five second place votes, and ten third place votes, which adds up to 30 points. The full voting can be found on the BBWAA’s site. Craig Kimbrel won the NL award unanimously.

The AL Cy Young Award will be announced tomorrow at 2pm ET, and I’ll be surprised if Justin Verlander doesn’t win. CC Sabathia is a pretty safe bet for a second straight top three finish in the voting.

Categories : Asides

45 Comments»

  1. Robert says:

    I really thought they were going to give it to Trumbo. Logic prevails!

  2. Matt DiBari says:

    As expected

  3. Jesse says:

    Nova should have got it. He had the most wins.

    /Kay’d

  4. DERP says:

    Not that it matters, but I think Ackley should have finished higher and had a good case to win it.

  5. Grit for Brains says:

    Love that Nova got that first place vote…You know the writer was screamin BUT TEH WINS!!!1!!!

  6. Kosmo says:

    I thought Hosmer would win it with Nova and Hellickson 2 and 3.

  7. Doug says:

    Was Alexi Ogando not eligible? Because according to Fangraphs he had the highest WAR amongst AL “rookies”

  8. Plank says:

    I wonder what the correlation between ROY success and career success is.

    Have you ever seen a study looking at this? I’m guessing it’s not very high. The test is a measure of the best player who played nearly a full season.

    Some players like Ackley this year get ruled out because they were brought up mid-season.

  9. IBelieveInAJ says:

    For what it’s worth, Nova didn’t lose a single game the entire second half of the year. I understand the baseball writers obsession with sabermetrics, but just look at Nova’a numbers from the middle of June on. Early in the year his ERA was hovering around 4.70 and he ended at 3.70, and had 16 wins. Furthermore, he was an absolute rock for the Yankees down the stretch but that stuff never counts for crap…

    • Nick says:

      Unfortunately he did lose once…game 5. womp womp lol

      • IBelieveInAJ says:

        Cool story, bro.

        If that’s your argument then Chris Carpenter should win NL Cy Young. Awards aren’t based off playoffs.

        • Nick says:

          I wasn’t basing anything any awards on the playoffs, you said he didnt lose in the 2nd half, and i said unfortunately for us (as fans) he lost in game 5. way to act like a 5 yr old though. keep it up!

          • Nick says:

            ignore the anything*

          • Jesse says:

            Why’d you bring up Game 5 in the first place when it had nothing to do with the voting? Game 5 is irrelevant in the voting process, or any playoff game for that matter. Just a simple question, not trying to “act like a 5 yr old”.

            • JobaWockeeZ says:

              Really? He’s saying that Nova did lose after the fucking second half. Unless they changed it the postseason is after the first half of baseball. He lost the biggest game of all.

              • Nick says:

                Lol, thanks. I was just stating it matter of factly. Wasn’t commenting on how it was voted on. Just saying, unfortunately he did lose. As Maurica would say… DAS IT.

    • FIPster Doofus says:

      If the baseball writers were so obsessed with sabermetrics, Hellickson wouldn’t have won the award and Trumbo wouldn’t have gotten any first-place votes.

    • Jumpin' Jack Swisher says:

      I agree with you. I really thought that second half, and the trust the team showed in him in the playoffs, would result in the better showing. Hellickson was certainly worthy, though.

    • “I understand the baseball writers obsession with sabermetrics…”

      This is a sentence which has never before been written.

    • William says:

      Of course not. Nova had lots of runs support. I guarantee you, if Hellickson played for the Yanked he’d win 20 games,

  10. Mike D. says:

    Speaking of the AL CY Young Award to be announced tomorrow, I took a look, purely statistically, at how Sabathia lined up with the other candidates: Verlander, Weaver, Shields, and Beckett.

    And yes according to the evaluation I did, Sabathia is the best choice for #2, behind Verlander.

    http://yankeesfansunite.wordpr.....didates-2/

  11. Doug says:

    Top rookie batter in the AL according to fWAR? Brett Lawrie in only 171 PAs

  12. Jonathan says:

    Jesus…who voted for this? Whoever was on the BWAA in 1950 and is still alive?

    hellickson 1.4 WAR 2.95 EAR 4.44 FIP 189 IP
    trumbo 2.3 WAR .291 OBP 573 PA
    hosmer 1.6 WAR .334 OBP 563 PA
    nova 2.7 WAR 3.70 ERA 4.01 FIP 165.1 IP
    pineda 3.4 WAR 3.74 ERA 3.42 FIP 171 IP
    ackley 2.7 WAR .348 OBP 376 PA
    jennings 2.4 WAR .356 OBP 287 PA

    Two 1B who had almost an entire years worth of PAs, one a bad fielder and both with low OBP and walk rates go 2nd and 3rd while Jennings and Ackley finish like that? I dunno who I’d go with between Jennings and Ackley but it would have been one of them. And Trumbo wouldn’t have even been on my ballot. .291 OBP at a purely offensive position!

  13. Urban says:

    How does Trumbo have a higher WAR than Hosmer when they have a similar number of PAs, they both play first, and Hosmer has a 40 point advantage in OBP?

    It is also interesting that Nova has a much better WAR and FIP, but none of the sabermetric types came to his defense. Does that only work for non-Yankees? Pineda had a better year than both.

    My ROY, prior to the vote, were Pineda and Ackley.
    H

  14. Steve says:

    Why is FIP even important here? Yeah it shows us who is lucky who isn’t, gives us an idea to predict the future, etc. etc. but it is not what actually happened. ERA is what actually happened based upon the actual game played on the field. In this case aren’t they awarding the ROY based upon what actually happened?

    • Urban says:

      Okay, under that scenario, we should give the award to Nova since he won more games. That fits under the “it’s what actually happened” banner.

      Seriously, I don’t have either Hellickson or Nova in my top few, and I will give Hellickson points since he has more innings than Nova, but it’s really not as clear cut as the accepted narrative:

      Stats: FIP /xFIP /BABIP/GB%/K%/fWAR

      Hell Boy: 4.44/4.72/.223/ 35%/5.57/1.4

      SuperNova:4.01/4.16/.283/52.7%/5.33/2.7

      If Yankee fans are going to be so quick to dismiss Nova for his old-school stat wins, let’s also do the same with Hellickson with his old-school ERA and look at other other stats that says Hellickson was lucky. He should NOT have been voted ROY.

      3.43

      1.00

      .223

      82.0 %

      35.0 %

      8.1 %

      2.95

      4.44

      4.72

      1.4

    • FIP is what actually happened, too.

  15. Pat D says:

    Tomorrow’s AL Cy Young vote will actually show whether or not Verlander has a shot at MVP. I know it will be different voters for the two awards, but if he somehow isn’t a unanimous Cy Young winner (which I think he will be), he’s got no chance for MVP.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.