What would be worse in an all-star game? - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2015 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to Baseball Leftovers

What would be worse in an all-star game?

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

What would be worse in the all-star game?

To have position pitchers pitch?
3
6%
To have a tie?
45
94%
 
Total votes : 48

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:01 am

The worst is the possibility of a matchup like Brian Wilson facing Dioner Navarro while Christian Guzman mans the hot corner with home field advantage in the World Series on the line. The fact that this game determines something as potentially important as that is a travesty.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby acsguitar » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:10 am

Art Vandelay wrote:The worst is the possibility of a matchup like Brian Wilson facing Dioner Navarro while Christian Guzman mans the hot corner with home field advantage in the World Series on the line. The fact that this game determines something as potentially important as that is a travesty.



Hahah Clint Hurdles whole "We are playing to win" Went right out the window when Brian Wilson entered with the game on the line. Funnily enough though he did well and then Billy blew it.
I'm too lazy to make a sig at the moment
acsguitar
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Graphics Expert
Posts: 26722
Joined: 7 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Back in General Talk WOOO!!!

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Matthias » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:22 am

Art Vandelay wrote:The worst is the possibility of a matchup like Brian Wilson facing Dioner Navarro while Christian Guzman mans the hot corner with home field advantage in the World Series on the line. The fact that this game determines something as potentially important as that is a travesty.

Actually, I would say that the World Series Home Field was a nice addition. This year was the best ASG I've seen in a long while and I have to imagine that the home field advantage is at least partially responsible.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Chicago RedSox » Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:56 am

Matthias wrote:Actually, I would say that the World Series Home Field was a nice addition. This year was the best ASG I've seen in a long while and I have to imagine that the home field advantage is at least partially responsible.


I agree with you. Before the tie game a few years back, the ASG was turning to the MTV Rock and Jock Softball game. Nothing but fluff. Now the players seem to be excited about it, I saw lots of emotion on the field on Tuesday. And for a change, I was actually excited about the game. I took my gf to the bar with me to make a night out of it.
I think the problem is the ASG is in the middle of an identity crisis. In some ways it seems like an exhibition game, like only having pitchers throw one or two innings so everyone gets to play and the fans can see their favorite players. On the other hand, the game has huge playoff implications (at least for two teams). As long as the game tries to be both, we're going to run into issues like this. It doesn't help that the fans get to vote in the players. I love Varitek as much as anyone, but he's not an All-Star. Having him out there doesn't help the Red Sox get home field advantage in the playoffs.
Play Ball
Chicago RedSox
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar

Posts: 1436
Joined: 30 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: SanDiego

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Matthias » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:05 pm

Chicago RedSox wrote:
Matthias wrote:Actually, I would say that the World Series Home Field was a nice addition. This year was the best ASG I've seen in a long while and I have to imagine that the home field advantage is at least partially responsible.

I agree with you. Before the tie game a few years back, the ASG was turning to the MTV Rock and Jock Softball game. Nothing but fluff. Now the players seem to be excited about it, I saw lots of emotion on the field on Tuesday. And for a change, I was actually excited about the game. I took my gf to the bar with me to make a night out of it.
I think the problem is the ASG is in the middle of an identity crisis. In some ways it seems like an exhibition game, like only having pitchers throw one or two innings so everyone gets to play and the fans can see their favorite players. On the other hand, the game has huge playoff implications (at least for two teams). As long as the game tries to be both, we're going to run into issues like this. It doesn't help that the fans get to vote in the players. I love Varitek as much as anyone, but he's not an All-Star. Having him out there doesn't help the Red Sox get home field advantage in the playoffs.

Yah. That strike McLouth threw to Martin who had set up perfectly to block to plate to tag out Navarro... it wasn't quite the same level as Pete Rose bowling over Ray Fosse, but it was some good baseball.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:09 pm

Matthias wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:The worst is the possibility of a matchup like Brian Wilson facing Dioner Navarro while Christian Guzman mans the hot corner with home field advantage in the World Series on the line. The fact that this game determines something as potentially important as that is a travesty.

Actually, I would say that the World Series Home Field was a nice addition. This year was the best ASG I've seen in a long while and I have to imagine that the home field advantage is at least partially responsible.

I'm not against the idea of having the all-star game tied to home field advantage necessarily, but I am against the way it's currently being operated. You can't have an exhibition game while simultaneously making the result important. If they want to continue giving home field advantage to the winning league, they should get rid of the rule that says every team has to be represented and simply take the best players and they should stop trying to get everyone in the game all the time. They could get most of the players at least an at-bat or half inning in the field and still get a majority of the pitchers some time on the mound without having the problems that we saw this week.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Matthias » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:22 pm

Art Vandelay wrote:
Matthias wrote:
Art Vandelay wrote:The worst is the possibility of a matchup like Brian Wilson facing Dioner Navarro while Christian Guzman mans the hot corner with home field advantage in the World Series on the line. The fact that this game determines something as potentially important as that is a travesty.

Actually, I would say that the World Series Home Field was a nice addition. This year was the best ASG I've seen in a long while and I have to imagine that the home field advantage is at least partially responsible.

I'm not against the idea of having the all-star game tied to home field advantage necessarily, but I am against the way it's currently being operated. You can't have an exhibition game while simultaneously making the result important. If they want to continue giving home field advantage to the winning league, they should get rid of the rule that says every team has to be represented and simply take the best players and they should stop trying to get everyone in the game all the time. They could get most of the players at least an at-bat or half inning in the field and still get a majority of the pitchers some time on the mound without having the problems that we saw this week.

I understand your point but I think it's a little overstated. Some of these guys (Varitek) really shouldn't be All Stars and if you're playing to win, you should limit their playing time. But most of them are all players performing at a very, very high level. So sure I'd rather have Pujols over Howard at bat if something is on the line, but over the 1 or 2 at bats that Howard is taking, will it really make that big of a difference? If you had to pick which All Star would have hit the lone HR, would it have been J.D. Drew?

Not trying to be nit-picky, just saying that I don't think that getting most of the players in for a couple of at bats is really incompatible with winning, since the differences between most of the players there is really at the margins. The more important thing is how all of the players approach the game mentally.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby great gretzky » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:26 pm

Tie would be worse.

That being said, the All Star Game is a little unfair on the face of it, as the NL has to field two crummy players the AL doesn't, since it has two more teams and every team gets one All Star. The NL would have been much better served if Hamels, Rollins, Howard, Teixera, Reyes, Beltran, Carlos Lee, Derek Lee, or someone else (I obviously am forgetting someone) rather than guzman and wilson, that's just fact. If it counts, then I think the rule should be dumped that every team gets one player, but make a way so it doesn't become only boston, ny, chicago fans having disproportionate pull at the same time.

I also agree that reserves are reserves, and "everyone gets to play" hasn't been in effect since Little League for a lot of these guys.

they should probably allow free hitting substitution and have some ratio for starters, like the top guy gets 3 innings, the next best 2, then another starter either 1 or 2, then the pen comes in, meanwhile leaving some starters in reserve, just in case. Then the hitters can come in and out freely, so long as they aren't used as a sub for the hitter, in which case, the hitter can't come back in if he is taken out.
great gretzky
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafeholic
Posts: 3769
Joined: 3 Jun 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Washington, DC

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:31 pm

My gripe with that isn't necessarily that slightly inferior players are getting more at bats, it's that it leaves the manager essentially unable to manage in a manner that is most likely to result in a win. When you are trying to get everyone involved, you are more likely to use up resources too soon and less likely to be able to take advantage of matchups as situations later in the game dictate...not to mention the possibility of having to play guys out of position like we saw on Tuesday. Instead of approaching the bench as a nuisance that gets in the way of proper management, they should be able to use it as a tool to optimize their chances of winning.
Image
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: What would be worse in an all-star game?

Postby Matthias » Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:35 pm

Fair enough.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Matthias
General Manager
General Manager


Posts: 4860
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact