CtPG Staff Votes: NL Rookie of the Year

The first award to be released each year is the Jackie Robinson Rookie of the Year Award. Eight CtPG writers compiled top-three ballots, with a first-place vote valued at five points, a second-place vote valued at three points, and a third-place vote valued at one point. We released our AL Rookie of the Year votes here, and now we have the NL ones.

Players1st2nd3rdPoints
Jonathan India, Reds7138
Trevor Rogers, Marlins16124
Dylan Carlson, Cardinals169
Tyler Stephenson, Reds11
Combined Ballots

1. Jonathan India, Reds

150 G, 631 PA, .269/.376/.459/.835, 3.9 bWAR, 3.9 fWAR

Jonathan India took over the Reds’ second base job and never relinquished it, leading off over half the season for an explosive offense that featured Nick Castellanos and a resurgent Joey Votto. India did whatever it took to get on base for the sluggers, including walking 71 times and leading the league in HBPs with 23. He played competent defense, and his numbers led him to nearly a four-win season, showcasing some of the talent that caused the Reds to draft him 5th overall in 2018. India was a near-unanimous selection for our writers.

2. Trevor Rogers, Marlins

25 G, 133 IP, 2.64 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, 10.6 K/9, 3.3 bWAR, 4.2 fWAR

Trevor Rogers is just one of many impressive young arms for the Miami Marlins at the moment (Angels make a trade for someone??). After an unimpressive debut in 2020, Rogers returned in 2021 to make 25 starts, throwing sub-3.00 ERA ball and punching out hitters at a high clip. The Marlins had an anemic offense, meaning Rogers had a lot of high-stress innings because the offense wasn’t scoring for him. Although the quantity of innings wasn’t as high as some other top pitchers in the league, the quality was certainly there, which led him to get a first-place vote from Rahul Setty and seconds from basically everyone else.

3. Dylan Carlson, Cardinals

149 G, 619 PA, .266/.343/.437/.780, 3.2 bWAR, 2.8 fWAR

Dylan Carlson was a huge part of the run that St. Louis made to the postseason. Despite tailing off towards the end of the year, he managed to put up stellar numbers manning the corner outfield spots and center in a pinch. Carlson got on base at a reasonably high clip, and he showed minor pop, jacking 18 home runs.

4. Tyler Stephenson, Reds

132 G, 402 PA, .286/.366/.431/.797, 1.9 bWAR, 2.0 fWAR

Tyler Stephenson played a premium position for the Reds, and although his numbers or volume weren’t as great as the other contenders, catching has to factor for something, right? Stephenson demonstrated good plate discipline, striking out less and walking more than the average hitter, and he was especially good at not chasing pitches out of the zone. Charles Sutton gave him his lone third-place vote on the ballot.

Here’s what the actual voters thought.

You can see our full breakdown of ballots below. Let us know in the comments who you would have had in your ballot!

RankJessica DeLineRahul SettyH. T. EnnisJeff Joiner
1Jonathan IndiaTrevor RogersJonathan IndiaJonathan India
2Trevor RogersJonathan IndiaTrevor RogersTrevor Rogers
3Dylan CarlsonDylan CarlsonDylan CarlsonDylan Carlson
Individual Ballots, Part 1
RankJohn Henry WeitzelCharles SuttonRev HalofanRick Souddress
1Jonathan IndiaJonathan IndiaJonathan IndiaJonathan India
2Trevor RogersTrevor RogersDylan CarlsonTrevor Rogers
3Dylan CarlsonTyler StephensonTrevor RogersDylan Carlson
Individual Ballots, Part 2

Title Image Screenshot from MLB Twitter

6 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eric_in_Portland
Legend
2 years ago

you guys got this one right!

red floyd
Legend
2 years ago

But is it Steve Trevor or Steve Rogers?

Jeff Joiner
Editor
Legend
2 years ago

I thought this one was pretty easy. India was brilliant for the Reds, the other two were standouts but not to India’s degree.

Charles Sutton
Editor
Super Member
2 years ago

I guess I just had to draw outside the lines a little bit.

AnAngelsFan
Super Member
2 years ago
Reply to  Charles Sutton

When you throw in the “he was a catcher cred” it isn’t that outlandish.