The MLB All-Star game is less than a week away and instead of focusing on who is going to Anaheim, all the talk is about who got snubbed. According to most writers, Joey Votto is Biggest Snub #1 while the phenom from Washington is Biggest Snub #2. Some say that Stephen Strasburg has to be there. Others question whether he deserves to be there given lack of experience. To me, the Strasburg argument results in two questions that must be answered. First - is he one of the 8 best pitchers in the league? Second - what is the purpose of the All-Star game?
I won't dive into the first question and instead leave that to the reader. I am going to assume for this argument that he is not (but in real life think he probably is, but not ahead of Mike Pelfrey who gets my vote as Biggest Snub #1). So if Strasburg was to make the All-Star Game and is not one of the 8 best pitchers, then he obviously is there because he is quickly becoming the biggest star in the game. That right there is my biggest grip about the All-Star Game. I'm not sure if the game is supposed to be taken seriously or if it is just supposed to be a glorified exhibition.
I am perfectly fine with the idea that the All-Star game decides home-field advantage in the World Series. I think it is an creative concept and is better than switching every year (rewards the best team 50% of the time) and better than using interleague records (best league does not imply best team) to determine home-field . The real problem lies in how the All-Star games rosters are determined. If this game is supposed to determine home-field advantage, then take it seriously and have the BEST players there. Not the most popular, the BEST. As it stands now, every team must be represented and fans get to choose the starters. The effects of twofold: 1. the Pirates will have an all-star at the expense of a better player on another team and 2. popular players may pass up more deserving players who don't have the same name recognition. If the Mets make the World Series and the NL loses the All-Star Game because Evan Meek, Arthur Rhodes, Chris Young or Matt Capps effed up, I am going to be pissed. If it counts, then have the best players there. Period.
If Strasburg can help the team win, then by all means, bring him to the game. But if he is brought simply for publicity reasons, then we need to seriously rethink giving the winner homefield advantage. This is too important to mess up. So here's my suggestion: get rid of fan voting and let the managers and players vote for who deserves to go. If this means only 10 teams per league are represented, then so be it. If you're angry because your team doesn't have an All-Star, I say - get better players. If we want a representative from the Royals or Orioles or Pirates to participate in the festivities, then how about they have players in the home run derby? Or, here is something radical - make an All-Star team of players from teams not represented in the game and have that team take on an All-Star team from AAA or Cuba or Japan. It sounds weird, but it might be cool and it definitely would help with the purpose of selling the game.
Whatever the solution is, one thing is clear - it needs to have a purpose. Either call the game an exhibition and relax the rules or have it contested as a real game and clean up all the garbage.
I say make it an exhibition game. That way the players can have fun swinging for the fences, the pitchers (maybe field players if "hurt") can be brought back on if the game goes to extra innings, and the fans can go see who they want to see even if that means the "best" players aren't there.
ReplyDelete-JWill