Quote:
Originally Posted by egri
A thought I had the other day was that with this change, a lot of rookie of the year recipients, like Jackie Robinson, Sam Jethroe, and some others I can’t think of off the top of my head, weren’t rookies when they won the award. I’d like to see what the consensus is here about whether the awards should be left as-is or be redone? Certainly the winners today would be different than if the voting had been held in the late 1940/early 1950s under those circumstances; the writers today value different stats, including some that didn’t exist at the time.
|
I don't think that would be necessary. It's not a rewriting of history. The seasons played stand. The purpose is to recognize the players and highlight their achievements after ignoring them for so long. It's about inclusion in history, not rewriting it.