KC is making MLB all star a bigger joke

[yanks12025]

The Kansas City Royals and most of their fans are making this all-star game a even bigger joke than it already is. First off like most people agree, fans shouldn't decide who goes to the game.

But how in the world are these players so far leading the votes at their position.

Mike Moustakas batting .318, 5 homers and 20 RBI. While Josh donaldson is batting .315 with 17 homers and 45 RBI.

Lorenzo Cain batting .284 with 4 homers

Omar Infante batting .204 with ZERO homers

Alcides escobar batting .255

[Econteachert205]

Maybe now they'll fix this terrible system.

[Jim65]

The Commissioner should step in, it really is ridiculous.

[bnorth]

It is no bigger joke than when(insert you favorite players name) played in several towards the end of their HOF career that did not belong there.

[packs]

Yeah I don't see the issue. Plenty of HOFers were placed on all star teams at the twilight of their careers just to be there.

[bn2cardz]

There is a huge difference between HOF players playing after their prime vs what is happening here. Those HOF players had a career and fan base to make it more of an honor towards a veteran's career. These are young players that don't even career numbers to warrant their inclusion.

I really don't have a huge problem with Mike Moustakas as he is having a good season with the same OBP as Donaldson. And someone that can be in the same conversation as their counterpart isn't a big deal to me.

Yet when you look at Infante he has a 14 year career that isn't a HOF career and this season's numbers aren't even good enough for KC to avoid looking for a replacement and has a negative WAR number thus far this season.

[Beatles Guy]

While I agree that the voting is a joke and there are several Royals that do not deserve it, would your opinion be the same if it were all Yankees? This is similar to the complaints we hear from both coasts when there are teams from middle of the country playing in the World Series (boring, nobody will watch, etc). Was Jeter playing last year a problem even though he clearly didn't deserve it?

[packs]

When you say things like the HOFers is different, I can't help but think: no it's not. We're talking about players on a team that is supposed to be made up of the best players in both leagues that don't deserve to be there.

[clydepepper]

Please...let me step in as a neutral voice:


Stop your dang wining and VOTE!


Amen

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

When you say things like the HOFers is different, I can't help but think: no it's not. We're talking about players on a team that is supposed to be made up of the best players in both leagues that don't deserve to be there.

One of the things that makes it different is that the HOF players at the end of a career may be less than they were simply because the season is long and after 15+ years they just aren't able to be 100% for a full season, but most could most likely step it up for a special game. So A guy who used to hit .320 with 30+HR but is hitting say .280 and on a pace for 15-20 HR might still have a great game.


While someone who has never been all that great and currently isn't doing well.....Even if they pick it up for the one game a .250 hitter with no power will be just that, a good player but very average.

Even if they did poorly, who would you rather watch?

steve B

[chaddurbin]

Im gonna go to the beach right now, feel free to vote some more for all your players kc fans, i dont care enuff to debate or vote.

[packs]

Originally Posted by steve B

One of the things that makes it different is that the HOF players at the end of a career may be less than they were simply because the season is long and after 15+ years they just aren't able to be 100% for a full season, but most could most likely step it up for a special game. So A guy who used to hit .320 with 30+HR but is hitting say .280 and on a pace for 15-20 HR might still have a great game.


While someone who has never been all that great and currently isn't doing well.....Even if they pick it up for the one game a .250 hitter with no power will be just that, a good player but very average.

Even if they did poorly, who would you rather watch?

steve B

Your argument is based on performance earning you a spot on the team, not fan popularity. But what you're saying is fan popularity is relevant sometimes but not other times. That argument doesn't hold water if what you're saying is that the best players should be chosen for the team.

[yanks12025]

Alex Rios is leading the vote for the 4th outfield spot and he has played in 19 games total. Real all star right there

[packs]

It's an easy fix for fans who are upset. Go to the website and vote. But if you don't vote, then how can you be upset?

I'm not upset because I'm not voting. I could care less if a Yankee makes the team and clearly, the rest of us Yankees fans feel the same way. If we felt different, you'd see a team full of Yankees.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

It's an easy fix for fans who are upset. Go to the website and vote. But if you don't vote, then how can you be upset?

I'm not upset because I'm not voting. I could care less if a Yankee makes the team and clearly, the rest of us Yankees fans feel the same way. If we felt different, you'd see a team full of Yankees.

+1

Regretfully, the All-Star game is not what it used to be. The idea that every single team must be represented has long since lost its charm. As expansion took hold, the representatives came almost twice (30 as opposed to 16) teams.

Another reason the All-Star game (IMHO) has lost its real attraction is inter-league play. It was better when the very best had to adjust to unfamiliar pitchers and hitters on the spot.

I also feel that the same inter-league play that we all seem to enjoy, detracts from the World Series for the same reason of familiarity.

Such is the price of free agency & high salaried players who, while accepting selection (seemingly) only if their current contracts include a bonus not just for the selection, but for playing in the 'exhibition'. Bud Selig got a lot of grief for his World Series home-field advantage as a way to recover some of the reverence for this game, but, honestly, can any of you come up with a better plan?

[steve B]

So that got me wondering just how some of the great players did in their last AS game. I looked at the list of players on the roster the most years and stopped at the 12 time all stars - for no reason other than I got tired of typing. Very few did well at all of 38 players only 5 had even an ok game. And there was a load of 0 for 1 as a pinch hitter.

A few players had their last AS game while they were still doing pretty well and well before retirement.

Aaron 0 for 1
Mays 0 for 1 struck out
Musial 0 for 1
Ripken 1 for 2 - HR
Carew 0 for 2 1 SO
Yastrzemski 0 for 1 struck out
T. Williams 0 for 1
Rose 0 for 1
Mantle 0 for 1 struck out
Berra 0 for 1
Kaline 0 for 1
B.Robinson 0 for 3
Gwynn did not play
O. Smith 0 for 1 3 assists - had to include that, as he was more a fielder than a hitter
Spahn did not play ----1n 1963 a season where he was 23-7 102 SO 2.60 ERA !
Bench 0 for 1
B.Bonds 0 for 2
R Jackson 0 for 2 1 SO
Jeter 2 for 2 1 run
A.Rodriguez most recent 2011 did not play
I. Rodriguez 1 for 2 last AS 4 years before retirement
Brett 0 for 1 last AS 5 years before retirement
DiMaggio did not play
K.Griffey jr 1 for 2 2 RBI 1 SO in 3 PA
M Rivera 1 inning allowed nothing.
Clemente did not play
N. Fox 1 for 3 1 strikeout
F. Robinson 0 for 1
R. Alomar 0 for 2 last AS 3 years before retirement
Boggs 0 for 3
Larkin 0 for 1
McGwire did not play
Ott 0 for 1
Piazza 0 for 2 1 strikeout
M.Ramirez 0 for 2 1 strikeout (Last AS 4 years before retirement)
Schmidt didn't play - retired and refused the spot but is still listed
1987 1 for 2 caught stealing
Seaver 1 inning, 3 hits, 1 error 1 hr 1so 1 run (last AS 5 years before retirement)
Winfield 1 for 3 run scored (Last AS 6years before retirement)


Steve B

[packs]

Yeah but what is your point exactly? Should fan popularity factor into all star game voting? If yes, then there's nothing to complain about. If no, then you can't argue that a HOFer in their final twilight years who is having a terrible season (see Willie Mays 1972 & 1973) belongs on the team.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

Yeah but what is your point exactly? Should fan popularity factor into all star game voting? If yes, then there's nothing to complain about. If no, then you can't argue that a HOFer in their final twilight years who is having a terrible season (see Willie Mays 1972 & 1973) belongs on the team.

I know everyone wanted Mickey to be there in '68! The great ones deserve a final bow!

[packs]

I agree. That's why I think fan voting is best. Give us something that's just for us.

[nolemmings]

I know everyone wanted Mickey to be there in '68! The great ones deserve a final bow!

The problem with that statement is that a) the fans did not vote for the 1968 All-Stars; and b) Mantle did not retire until the Spring of 1969, with no "farewell tour" the year prior, so it wasn't certain that the '68 AS game would be his final bow in any event. Just sayin.

[nolemmings]

You do know that this same thing happened in 1957 with Reds fans stuffing the ballot box, right? That led to fans losing the privilege to vote for a dozen or so years. So various approaches have been tried. I'm with those who believe one should rally the vote if it's that important to him/her.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by packs

Yeah but what is your point exactly? Should fan popularity factor into all star game voting? If yes, then there's nothing to complain about. If no, then you can't argue that a HOFer in their final twilight years who is having a terrible season (see Willie Mays 1972 & 1973) belongs on the team.

That was sort of my point. I had expected that more of the really great players would have done well despite being past their prime, some well past. So I figured I'd try to look it up quickly. And what I found was--------

that with few exceptions a great player towards the end of their career wasn't used the way a younger player would be - Most were used as pinch hitters if they even got into the game. Making the roster spot sort of ceremonial rather than competitive.

That even very established players who'd been all-stars regularly didn't do all that well.

That there's a pretty solid indicator of how the game has become more of a marketing exercise that an actual competition. Can you imagine having a guy with an ERA under 3 who is headed for 23 wins and yet he doesn't even play? That was Spahn in 63. Today not only does every team get someone on the roster, there's a serious attempt at playing everyone.


And since it's a marketing exercise - and at least in part has been since the 70's and probably before (Who didn't grab a fistful of those computer card ballots and spend part of the game punching out all the home team players?)
I'm not sure if the selection of those towards their career end was done by the fans or by the manager picking them as reserves. Probably the manager for most of them.

It's all about the money, sure having the best at each position for that year would be more correct, but with the people who may only watch the AS game on TV and that's their one game for the year it's more about marketability.
For myself, I'd rather see Reggie strike out one more time or see Ozzie Smith make a few more plays than see some guy I've never heard of get a hit when he's only there because while mediocre he's the best player on a very average team.

Now if they backed the roster down to the same as a normal team has during the season so the spots were actually the best players I might think differently. (To say nothing of not using a player because he might have to pitch within the next week or two)

Steve B

[digdugdig]

Originally Posted by packs

I agree. That's why I think fan voting is best. Give us something that's just for us.

Home field advantage in the W.S. goes to the winning league of the all-star game, does it not??

[clydepepper]

I just voted several times: The first ballots I voted a straight Oakland vs. Milwaukee (except Jason Rogers* taking cheater Braun's slot), then I voted for Twins vs. the home team Reds who actually have some legit candidates.

Now if the Reds had eight voted in, that would be cool for the home team.

*- played at the same college I did

I'm just being creative and the fact that I DID actually vote, allows me to have a legit voice in the argument.

[frankbmd]

Controversy surrounded the 1957 outing as the fanatical Cincinnati voters stuffed the ballot boxes and elected nearly their entire team (minus first baseman George Crowe & the batboy) onto the National League's starting roster. This upset Commissioner Ford Frick greatly and he responded by removing Gus Bell and Wally Post from the starting nine. He also transferred the responsibility for All-Star voting to the players, managers and coaches the next year.

The fans did not select the All-Stars in 1958.

History does indeed repeat itself.

[FenwayFaithful]

You can't have fans voting for starters AND make the game mean something (home field advantage in the World Series).

It's an awful, awful, AWFUL system.

[freakhappy]

I think what's happening this year is a blessing. Let them f it up so bad and force the commissioner's hand. Can ratings be up from this sort of thing? Possibly, but I doubt it. Plus many people will be upset at stupidity happening, that you'd think something will inevitably change. It's not an all-star game, it's a popularity game...a bias one at that. I haven't watched an "all-star" game in years and definitely won't start this year.

And just because someone didn't vote, doesn't mean they can't call out an obviously flawed system when they see it...Omar Infante...that's as obvious as it gets!

[majordanby]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

I think what's happening this year is a blessing. Let them f it up so bad and force the commissioner's hand. Can ratings be up from this sort of thing? Possibly, but I doubt it. Plus many people will be upset at stupidity happening, that you'd think something will inevitably change. It's not an all-star game, it's a popularity game...a bias one at that. I haven't watched an "all-star" game in years and definitely won't start this year.

And just because someone didn't vote, doesn't mean they can't call out an obviously flawed system when they see it...Omar Infante...that's as obvious as it gets!

I'm curious as to how you define an "all-star?" Is an all-star someone who puts up the best numbers for half a season? Someone who has put up the best numbers over the past X years? Or is it someone who fans want to see, which may or may not be independent of his numbers, hence it being a popularity contest? or some combination of both?

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by majordanby

I'm curious as to how you define an "all-star?" Is an all-star someone who puts up the best numbers for half a season? Someone who has put up the best numbers over the past X years? Or is it someone who fans want to see, which may or may not be independent of his numbers, hence it being a popularity contest? or some combination of both?

Mostly what they are having now is called a fan game, not an all star game. Can anyone believe that people actually want to see Omar infante in the all star game? Not a chance...I highly doubt kc fans want to see him.

What I would do is have the players with deserving numbers make the all pro team and then have a random fan game for the fans. But then again I'm sure it wouldn't have the allure that the all star game has.

[bn2cardz]

MLB has cancelled aprox 65 million votes

http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/stor...aud-fake-votes

[steve B]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

Mostly what they are having now is called a fan game, not an all star game. Can anyone believe that people actually want to see Omar infante in the all star game? Not a chance...I highly doubt kc fans want to see him.

What I would do is have the players with deserving numbers make the all pro team and then have a random fan game for the fans. But then again I'm sure it wouldn't have the allure that the all star game has.

I would personally LOVE to see Omar Infante in the ASGame.

But then, I'm the sort of person who likes when sports gets strange or promotions go horribly wrong.
Like Eddie Gadel
Or Disco Demolition Night

Or pretty much anything that MLB might decry as "making a travesty of the game"

Steve B

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by steve B

I would personally LOVE to see Omar Infante in the ASGame.



But then, I'm the sort of person who likes when sports gets strange or promotions go horribly wrong.

Like Eddie Gadel

Or Disco Demolition Night



Or pretty much anything that MLB might decry as "making a travesty of the game"



Steve B

I want to see him get in, but only to make baseball realize the "all star" game is a joke and realistically only has a handful of deserving all stars. I guess I don't really care in the grand scheme of things, but I hate when it's obviously stupid and nothing is done about it.

[packs]

I've seen a lot of people suggest weighting the voting differently and including players and managers along with the fans. If they make a change I still think the fans should have a say since the spirit behind the game seems to be a fun game for the fans to enjoy.

[chaddurbin]

the fans voting all kc players just prove these allstar games are meaningless, whether it's mlb nfl nba or nhl. where baseball got it wrong was attaching home field advantage for the winning side. manfred should reverse that decision, that'd be the easiest solution and get this game back to "exhibition" status. kc and st. louis got nothing going on, let them vote all royals and cards for all i care.

[nolemmings]

I don't have strong feelings about your solution Quan, but I have a hard time understanding why people feel that way. Before this and for years--basically forever--the home team for the World Series alternated every season between National and American League cities. It didn't matter what your record was, who won what game or games, etc,; the AL hosted in odd years and the N.L in even years. I don't remember anyone EVER caring, and there was no serious if any complaining or lobbying for a change. Teams were just happy to be in the World Series.

Now there is this wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth as if way too much is riding on a silly exhibition game. Why? Hey, at least the Royals have a legitimate chance of being the AL representative in the World Series and thus have every incentive to fight hard for this now oh so strategically important advantage. Still, if it's really so troublesome to folks just put it back the way it was, I guess, so people don't get their blood pressure all cranked up over something that never mattered for decades.

[barrysloate]

If fans were somehow only allowed to vote once, the system would probably work. But there are ballot stuffers who vote hundreds of times. Most people don't have the time or inclination to do this. As such, fan voting is not a good way to go. Let the players vote once, and you will end up with the best ones on the field.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

If fans were somehow only allowed to vote once, the system would probably work. But there are ballot stuffers who vote hundreds of times. Most people don't have the time or inclination to do this. As such, fan voting is not a good way to go. Let the players vote once, and you will end up with the best ones on the field.

I agree with you, but doesn't every team have fans that are 'ballot stuffers'? I don't think any one team has more 'ballot stuffers' than another, so really doesn't it all balance out?

[barrysloate]

Every team's fans ares free to stuff ballots, but they don't all do it. I think groups in certain cities get together and try to find as many people as possible to vote as often as possible. So somehow or other the voting gets skewed.

I do believe the players have a better understanding of who the best performers are than most fans. It's nice to vote for your home town team, but there are certainly some better players in other cities around the league. The game should really feature the best players, not the most popular ones.

[Runscott]

When I checked the voting yesterday, Toronto was right behind Kansas City. There was obviously something awry in both of those cities.

I agree that the fans should not be allowed to vote.

The comment that if it were your team leading in such a way, you would be happy, is disappointing. This is about KC finding a way to cheat the system in a way that was never intended - not about what other people would do if some hypothetical circumstances existed in their city, that doesn't.

I might vote for some Seattle and Houston players, but if either of those cities was doing what KC is doing, I would not vote.

[Runscott]

This kc and toronto crap will have mlb taking a look at fan 'voting'

[packs]

What's wrong with Toronto's voting? Donaldson was the only one to start and he's the best third baseman in the AL in my opinion.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

What's wrong with Toronto's voting? Donaldson was the only one to start and he's the best third baseman in the AL in my opinion.

Look at the rest of the voting - not just the starters.

[packs]

The reserves are chosen by the players, right?

[clydepepper]

The players should choose the starters, the managers the pitchers, and the fans the reserve position players.

See: Problem solved!
.
.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by packs

The reserves are chosen by the players, right?

Right, which is why the reserves selected did not reflect the votes garnered by the non-starters.

Packs, I'm guessing you have not seen the voting other than the results for the winners. The 4-deep results were published in our local paper and it was clear that something funny was going on in KC and Toronto. I have no idea what sort of publicity stunt they had going on in those two cities that skewed the results, but even if it was just that KC and Toronto have over-exuberant voters, it still isn't working having the fans voting under the current system. Altuve and Cruz were almost beaten, and I'm thinking the only reason they weren't is that fans in other cities saw the weird KC/Toronto thing and put the kibosh to it.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

The players should choose the starters, the managers the pitchers, and the fans the reserve position players.

See: Problem solved!
.
.

Haha. The collective unconscious of the U.S.A. disagrees with you.

[steve B]

There's an outside chance that it's not even local fans messing with the voting.

In 2012 A rapper who goes by the name pitbull had a deal to visit a Wal-Mart that the fans voted for by liking the store on facebook. A writer from the Boston Phoenix started a campaign to send him to the farthest Wal-Mart they could. They got to around 70,000 likes, for a town with around 6000 people.

I must say I developed some respect for him when he took it really well and went to the Kodiak Wal-Mart. Pretty cool, and apparently the locals were very happy since nobody plays Kodiak.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/exilepitbull

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROoLGbqvLbM

Steve B