This time it counts! But nobody cares!
By a margin of 56 percent to 42 percent, fans said the All-Star game shouldn't be used to determine which league's champion gets to open the World Series at home . . . In other poll results: More than half of fans said every team shouldn't have a guaranteed spot on the All-Star rosters. Eighty-two percent said players penalized under MLB's drug policy shouldn't be allowed into the All-Star game in the year they are punished.
Can't say I disagree with any of that. Of course, as the article notes, there's no getting around these silly rules until at least 2011, which is when the new collective bargaining agreement will be negotiated. And call me crazy, but I think the union and the owners will have higher priorities than the construction of the All-Star Game.
Personally, I'd settle for no rules changes if a manager would simply announce ahead of time -- like, before the voting even gets seriously underway -- that he has no intention of making sure every player gets in the game and that, instead, he plans on managing to win the game. Doing such a thing would eliminate the problems of marginal All-Stars mucking up the game and making a mockery of the putatively high stakes.
Leave a Comment:
Saving...
My feelings on managing the All-Star game are similar to yours. If it's a fun exhibition game, then by all means see to it that everybody gets to play. If it's a meaningful game that has something other than pride at stake, then manage to win and only use your best players.
And between the two, I'd much rather it be a fun exhibition game.
Exactly, what's wrong with having a fun exhibition game and seeing a mediocre Pirates player take the field for a couple innings?
On another note, I heard the other day that in the ASG, catchers are allowed to re-enter the game should it go into extra innings, which seems like a great idea to me. Why not do the same thing with a couple of the pitchers also? Prior to the game, the managers could respectively designate one or two of their pitchers for eligibility to re-enter the game should it go into extra innings. That way, we get to see all of the pitchers throw, and you avoid fiascos like tie games and position players taking the mound should the game go to 15 innings.
I don't know Mike. If I was a manager I would not be happy to see my all star pitcher get re-entered into an all star game. I don't know how much the chances for an injury would increase, but it doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I suppose it could be an unmitigated disaster injury-wise. But these guys are throwing less than 2 innings to begin with, and I'd like to think Zach Grienke could throw the 3rd inning and then the 10th, 11th and 12th, but perhaps it's wishful thinking. Maybe it all works out best if the managers save a starting pitcher for the extra innings. And hey, it could be fun to watch Ichiro pitch in the 16th inning to an all-star lineup.
It depends on the type of game, Kramer. If it's a silly exhibition game, I wouldn't expect the pitchers to be throwing the high heat, and there probably wouldn't be as much of a risk of injury. And if it's this type of game, I heartily endorse Mike's idea of allowing (some) players to re-enter the game to avoid the tied game fiasco.
If it's the "this time it counts" serious game, then they would be pitching harder, and the risk would be greater.
Like I say, it'd be nice if MLB would make up its mind on which kind of game the All-Star game should be.
Very well put - agree completely.
needs more first basemen
We need to decide if the game counts for something or not. If it does, no guaranteed spots. If it doesn't, the only ones who care are the players and their fans who were more deserving and didn't get on the team because someone else was rewarded for mediocrity.
Why does a team like Milwaukee, in a smaller market than Pittsburgh, consistently do better and compete? Why is Pittsburg's payroll so low compared to a team like Milwaukee? How much is their payroll after the luxury tax check they receive from the league?
Every year I root for the all star game to go 16 innings, and have the managers hands forced into doing something that will ultimately jeopardize the players' health. It is the only way that this nonsensical game will ever go back to being relevant. It's supposed to be fun, meaningless. Who cares who wins the game, to allow the winning league to have home field is preposterous. I also root for someone to repetedly kick Selig in the head on national TV.
I think the current setup is fun. Unlike the NBA ASG...talk about boring!
It is absolutely asinine that an exhibition game is used to determine home field advantage for the World Series. It should be fun. It should be a celebration of the talents of those selected. It should not be used to determine, even if in a a small measure, the championship of the sport.
How about we let the players, managers, and coaches pick the players. This way we'll get the best players instead of the usual popularity contest that the fans make it
It's not even a popularity contest. It's American Idol. Who can create the most ID's and cast the most sets of 25 ballots? Not remotely resembling a legitimate vote.
It'll never make people happy. To win a game, a team needs catchers, shortstops, talented infielders--defense. I mean you don't HAVE to have them--you can play any kind of silly game, but it's nice to have something to distinguish it from the Home Run Derby and to force managers to play real baseball rather than the "fun" (?) of watching Papi on the same team as ARod.
Playing for homefield advantage makes the ASG worth playing and watching. The players and managers should pick the AS players, with no guaranteed spots for every team. Why reward mediocrity for "fairness"? If your team has no talent, and your ownership and management doesn't care to fix the problem, let it be glaringly apparent.
I have no problems with the fans picking the rosters, since if most people watching are Boston or Yankee fans, then they should get the teams they want. Drive revenue. Brilliant.
I have no problems with the game determining home field for the WS. With a build-up of talent on Boston or the Yankees, and them pounding each other senseless, the best team likely won't have the best record due to some weak division in the national league. That, and it makes the game important, so it will drive revenue. Brilliant.
What is utterly retarded, and what I DO have a problem with, is both of those things together. You want the fans to make it a popularity contest and not based on sheer talent (small market teams with little attention have great players trampled to death by Yankee and Boston fans), then don't make the game worth home-field. If you want to make it worth home-field, then have non-idiots select the squad (current coaches, not allowed to pick their own team members).
One, or the other. Not both.
Just a thought: if the Home Field Advantage Rule had been in place during the sixties and seventies, I'd have probably hated it because I'm an American League fan and back then my team almost never won. I wonder how many of the folks who complain about it now are Senior Circuit devotees...?
As for who should pick the All Star teams and how: there's ample evidence that none of the previous systems have been infallible. Selections made by fans, players, and sportwriters have all been roundly criticized in the past, probably beginning with the 1934 game when the novelty of the Midsummer Classic had worn off. Nadine-724022 is right: it'll never make people happy--not everybody anyway. Sort of like national elections or most Trifecta picks....
The problem is conflicting goals. Are you trying to win, or trying to get everyone in the game?
If the game counts, then you should play to win. If you're playing to win you use the best players and leave them in, except when game strategy legitimately says to use the bench. ("Now, pinch-hitting for Albert Pujols, Justin Upton." WHAT?????)
If, on the other hand, you're playing Little League, where everyone gets to play, then you don't let it count for anything. Might as well use softballs.
Conflicting goals is the apparent reason. To my knowledge, however, the selection process pertains only to the selection process, neither to who plays nor for how long.
If I were to offer a suggestion, it would be to expand the rosters to fifty (30-35 position players, 15-20 pitchers), promote the contest being as the among one-hundred best players in the majors, select a representative from each team, allow only the starting pitcher to bat after the second inning and then only once.
In this way, everyone gets to see a player from their team on the All Star Team (thereby giving them a reason to increase television ratings and advertising rates), more players collect their bonuses, lesser luminaries do something useful by batting for pitchers, and no one gets over-used.
And we play to win. If someone doesn't get in the game, there's always next year's fifty-man roster....
I agree. I don't think any player from the Pirates has any right taking the field this year.
I don't think any player from the Pirates has any right taking the field this year.
And someone from the Cubs does?
A lot of Pirate-hating on this board--several ex-Pirates will be playing (including two from the beloved Sawks), and McLouth could be there, too. Just hate the management and the organization, not the players.
The All-Star game shouldn't mean anything. Especially since everyone gets a representative like this is tee-ball or something. Why would Freddie Sanchez and Zach Duke care who wins this game (no Pirate since 1992 deserves it)? They aren't going to be in the World Series. They shouldn't be there. Well....I doubt either will be Buccos by the game, or at least soon after. But if it is to mean anything, all the teams that are under .500 should be excluded, barring actually getting voted in. I haven't paid much attention to the Pirates for a while now (we have other teams here that actually care about winning), but I assume that Duke and Sanchez were voted in because there are two of them. I don't know who voted them in unless some fans here stuffed the ballot, but it is ridiculous. They may be stars on the Pirates, but they are average at best on any other team.
Playing for homefield advantage makes the ASG worth playing and watching. The players and managers should pick the AS players, with no guaranteed spots for every team. Why reward mediocrity for "fairness"? If your team has no talent, and your ownership and management doesn't care to fix the problem, let it be glaringly apparent.
The 'Home Field Advantage Rule' is the pinnacle of Selig's Douchebaggery. This guy has no business running a small market team, let alone be the commish of the league.
It needs to go back just being a fun exhibition game for the fans.
The voting should be divided between the fans, the players and managers. If fans know that the players and managers are voting too, this will probably slow down ballotbox stuffing as they know their vote only counts for 1/3 now.
And once they make it into an exhibition game again, they could implement a rule that if either or both sides runs out of pitchers they put the pitching macine out on the mound.
Anybody remember when they used to have an old-timers game, without lame "celebrities" you've never heard of? I guess someone decided that replacing it with a rip-off of the MTV rock-n-jock softball game was a good idea? And then someone decided it was a good idea to include some D-list celebrity bimbos who have clearly never even picked up a bat or glove in their lives? The whole disaster has become absolutely unwatchable.
Turn it back into an exhibiton game and cut this home field advantage crap!
Does Selig have embarrassing photos of all the owners? How else can he keep this job?
Pare down interleague play and increase the number of division games to around 24. I want to see my team play it's rivals and not some out of market, NL team tat noone cares to see.
Craig, I wish you and Celzic stop saying fans do not care. Well we DO care so I wish you all would stop playing that card. The steroid thing as well when Celzic keeps saying fans do care if a player is on steroids or not. GIVE US SOME CREDIT, we don't like cheaters