Placido Polanco?

[scharf]

Why isn't he listed for the batting title?

[Providence A's]

Convienently this topic was covered by ESPN 2 days ago:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/column...son&id=2161116

OK, now. Check your official American League batting leaders. What do you find?

You see Texas' Michael Young is the AL's leading hitter. Ah, but what's his average? It's .328 -- which would be eight points lower than Polanco's according to our calculator. But it's a funny thing. Look up and down that leader board, and you couldn't locate Polanco with the Hubble Telescope.

Why? Because he had the nerve to spend his first 43 games this season playing for the Phillies. Who play in the National League. And that stodgy old American League refuses to acknowledge that any of the stuff he did in that other league should count.

Now maybe that made sense like 80 years ago, when these two leagues only met in months named October. But those days are now defunct. And Polanco's case is especially nuts, since he actually got traded from one league to the other in June -- in the middle of interleague play.

So he got three at-bats against AL teams while he was in the NL (and went 2-for-3). And he got 47 at-bats against NL teams while he was in the AL (and hit .383).

But while the AL will count all 47 of his at-bats against the NL while he was a Tiger, it won't count any of his 155 at-bats against the NL while he was a Phillie. And we ask you: Does that make any sense whatsoever?

Correct answer: Nooooooo. But we're stuck with this system, anyway. And since we are, we should let Polanco know he still has a chance to become the third player in history to lead the major leagues in one of the triple-crown categories -- without leading either league. Which is one tough trick.

The last time this happened, according to the Elias Sports Bureau's Ken Hirdt, was 1997 -- when Mark McGwire hit 34 home runs in Oakland, then hit 24 more in St. Louis and wound up as the phantom home run champ, with 58.