Sooga
09-05-2003, 09:09 PM
There were a few columns today about it on espn's MLB homepage, with Jayson Stark and Jerry Crasnick saying absolutely not. Stark contended that if you view Ichiro's years in Japan as part of his Hall Of Fame candidacy, then you should also count them when considering his Rookie Of The Year eligibility. I think that's baloney. Listen, I'm not saying that Matsui and Ichiro don't have an edge over Joe Schmoe coming out of a AAA farm team. The Japanese players are older and more experienced than some 20 year old rookie. But the Japanese players are still MLB rookies. Like the 20 year olds, they've seen absolutely none of the MLB pitchers before, EVERY park is a road park to them, and on top of that they have to deal with the obvious culture shock of moving from one country to another.
On the other hand, when you're looking at the HOF, Japanese stats should at least count for something. If Ichiro plays about 10 more years in the majors and ends up with a career avg of .320 (certainly not a stretch), with a buncha hits and stolen bases, not to mention his already legendary defense, at worst, he may be a marginal HOF'er. But when you then add in his ridiculous years in Japan, it has to push him over the top. Comments?
On the other hand, when you're looking at the HOF, Japanese stats should at least count for something. If Ichiro plays about 10 more years in the majors and ends up with a career avg of .320 (certainly not a stretch), with a buncha hits and stolen bases, not to mention his already legendary defense, at worst, he may be a marginal HOF'er. But when you then add in his ridiculous years in Japan, it has to push him over the top. Comments?