Is Major League Baseball in need of a face?

Does Major League Baseball have a face these days? Perhaps more importantly, do they need a face?

There are times when you can identify an entire era in baseball by making reference to a single player. Jackie Robinson. Joe DiMaggio. Hank Aaron. Babe Ruth. These men were the legends of their times, and they were the faces of the sport of baseball.

More recently, the “face” of baseball belonged to Derek Jeter. People who didn’t know anything about baseball hear the name Derek Jeter and instantly know he was a baseball player who played for the New York Yankees. That’s how “faces” work.

Whether you like the Yankees or not doesn’t really matter. Jeter is a likable guy who lampooned himself on Saturday Night Live. He was as interesting off the field as he was on the field. Jeter was baseball.

Two full seasons have passed since Jeter retired, and baseball has been without a headliner since. You can, of course, make the argument that baseball has some stellar players. Mike Trout. Bryce Harper. There are a bevy of pitchers whose names are already becoming the stuff of legend. However, one look at the numbers and you’ll see the players that come to mind are not necessarily the MLB leaders.

So who is the face of baseball?

The Kris Bryant Quandary

Sometimes the “face” of a sport isn’t necessarily the best player. Sometimes the face is characterized by a special, endearing, charismatic quality.

Kris Bryant didn’t dominate Major League Baseball statistics in 2016, but all things being equal, Bryant possessed a certain je ne sais quois* that makes him a worthy MVP. (*That would be French for “I don’t know what,” which is to say he has a certain something, a way about him, that makes him perfect. In this case, it makes him a perfect MVP.)

Bryant didn’t lead the league in any batting category in 2016. He was 37th with his .292 batting average and he was in a two-way tie for ninth with 39 home runs. He was also in a two-way tie for the 17th spot in RBI with 102, and his eight stolen bases didn’t rank in the top 50.

Though he isn’t at the top of the stats, Bryant is a likable guy. He’s a good player who knows how to hustle and come up big in clutch situations. For that reason alone, he makes a great MVP. He’s also personable, and he’s a good role model for kids of all ages. I can personally vouch for this — Bryant was one of my student-athletes at USD and he was as much a stand up guy then as he is now.

Of course, no one ever said that the MVP had to be a nice person, or a good role model (and we’ll discuss this later), but it doesn’t hurt. The last thing you want in a MVP is someone who rocks the PR boat.

Bryant could be the next Jeter and become the face of baseball. But he’s not there yet. He needs more time to show the kind of player he is.

For the sake of discussion, though, consider this: If not Bryant, then who?

Numbers and Faces

Ask anyone who follows baseball who the best player is right now, and you’ll probably get several answers. If you ask a Cubs fan, you’ll get one answer. A Los Angeles Angels fan will give you a different answer. A loyal Los Angeles Dodgers fan could go another route. It would seem that barring the next GOAT, the determining factor of who the best player in the MLB is depends upon who you ask and sometimes, by extension, who he roots for.

Some of the names you might hear are Madison Bumgarner, Mike Trout, Clayton Kershaw, Bryce Harper, Giancarlo Stanton, Noah Syndergaard. Yes, they’re crazy-good ball players, but did they make the list?

Looking back at last season, the leaders in batting stats were all different. Colorado’s D.J. LeMahieu led MLB players with .348 batting average and his teammate Nolan Arenado led with 133 RBI. Baltimore’s Mark Trumbo had 47 home runs and the Brewers’ Jonathan Villar was at the top of the board with 62 stolen bases.

How did Trout compare to the MLB leaders? He was 10th in average (.315), he was in a seven-way tie for 39th with 29 home runs, he was in a three-way tie for 20th0 with 100 RBI, and he was in a five-way tie for 10th with 30 stolen bases.

Last year’s pitching stats were just as varied. Kyle Hendricks of the World Series-champion Chicago Cubs led with a 2.13 ERA while Red Sox hurler Rick Porcello led with 22 wins. The Washington Nationals’ Max Scherzer had 284 strikeouts while the Mets’ Jeurys Familia led the league with 51 saves.

By contrast, Bumgarner was fourth in both ERA (2.74) and strikeouts (251), and was 18th with his 15 wins.

This tells us that the top players aren’t always the ones that we name, and perhaps the dissonance between the stats and name recognition are part of the reason there isn’t a face of baseball right now.

The TMZ Effect

The numbers don’t always dictate the face of a sport. Sometimes the face belongs to people we like to watch, people who dominate the game because of their grit and ability to grind. Sometimes we cheer for people who overcome a lot to get where they are.

However, it’s not always easy being the “face” of a sport. Players are already under microscopes, even more so since the advent of social media and cameras on phones. TMZ follows athletes around hoping for a story to break in front of their judgmental camera lenses. And they’re not always looking for the guys helping old ladies across the street-type stories. The paparazzi is looking for dirt, for something to tarnish a shining image.

Some star athletes, then, would prefer to fly under the radar as much as possible to preserve their privacy. Charles Barkley once famously denied that he was anyone that kids should look up to: “I’m not paid to be a role model. I’m paid to wreak havoc on the basketball court.” Barkley has since reversed his position, but his comments have always sparked lively debate on the subject.

With all of the intrusion into the personal lives of athletes, it’s not difficult to see why some players might not want to be out in front of an organization. They don’t want the intrusion. They don’t want to be under the microscope. It’s hard to ask someone to step up and be the face of Major League Baseball knowing the level of scrutiny he will face.

The Other Side Of The Coin

Moving forward, baseball needs to get back to the days of fierce battles for spots on the All-Star roster. The future of baseball is bright, with lots of young talent waiting to make a major league debut. But fans need names, and they need more than one-hit wonders.

Fans need to know their teams and the guy whose name is being embroidered on the back of their jersey is going to be around.

Another challenge is that some of the best players are on struggling teams, and that keeps them out of the spotlight. Mike Trout is in the “one of the best players around” category, but the Angels have been struggling, so no one seems to be paying the team any attention outside of the highlight reel.

The other side of the “baseball needs a face” argument is that baseball doesn’t need a single face at all to serve as an ambassador to the sport. After all, there is way too much talent out there to cherry pick just a couple of guys to represent the sport.

Next: Japan's Shohei Ohtani could challenge traditional MLB wisdom

Time Will Tell

The post-Jeter era has been characterized so far by ample talent, but no one clear leader of the pack. No one has become the face of baseball since he left. That would seem to be the bigger issue: Two seasons have passed, and no one has become “the next Jeter.” That says more than anything else. No one was waiting in the wings, and no one has stepped into the role.

Perhaps this is the biggest issue of them all, and one that should be addressed.