On a related note, the All-Star selections were announced on Sunday, and not surprisingly three Twins made the team. Morneau, Joe Mauer, and Joe Nathan were selected, with Mauer being the only one of the three to be voted in by the fans. All three players are much deserving of being on the team, and I don't think any Twin was really snubbed by Joe Maddon, either. Dan Gladden and John Gordon were making the case that Kevin Slowey's trip to the DL may have cost him a spot on the All-Star team, but they fail to notice that the guy has a 4.86 ERA and his ten wins were mostly due to the overwhelming run support that he's had the benefit of pitching with. The American League roster, and Joe Maddon's selection of the reserves, reminded me a little bit of Tom Kelly in that Maddon rewarded quite a bit of his players from last season's World Series team with an All-Star selection this year. Yes, Ben Zobrist has amassed some great numbers this season (2nd in the league in slugging and OPS -- what???) but the guy's only been a starting player for about a month, and I'd like to know how many people outside Tampa-St. Pete that actually know who Zobrist is. Jason Bartlett and Carl Crawford also were selected by Maddon, and Evan Longoria was voted in at third base. Granted, all of those players are having good seasons -- it's not like Tom Kelly selecting Tim Laudner for the '88 All Star game -- that was ridiculous. Charlie Manuel didn't display as much nepotism as his American League counterpart, as Ryan Howard was the only Phillie that he selected himself; Chase Utley and Raul Ibanez were voted in as deserving starters.
The problem, however, isn't the managers selecting the reserves. The problem is that the All-Star game selection process is the same that is has been for decades, while the scope of the "exhibition game" is now greatly expanded. What's at stake is homefield advantage in the World Series, and the fans are voting in the starting players? That means that the Yankees and Red Sox, due to their huge fan base, will always have a couple players in the starting lineup no matter what their statistics are. People will say that the game is for the fans -- well, not if the game actually means something. If you're going to attach a ridiculous prize to an exhibition game, then you let the manager select every player. And that also means that you eliminate the old "every team gets at least one player on the All-Star team" crap. Remember when the Twins really sucked in the late nineties? I'm sure Joe Torre groaned every year at All-Star time because he had to put someone from those teams in an All-Star game. Ron Coomer made an All-Star team for crissakes. If the game means that much, you want the best of the best, not the best of the best, and Andrew Bailey of the Oakland Athletics.
MLB can have it one of two ways -- make the All-Star game decide home-field advantage for the Fall Classic and thereby strip the fan's vote and get rid of the rule that stipulates that every team needs to be represented. Or, keep those rules and make the All-Star game an exhibition game like it should be. The way it is now, MLB is way behind its time and is appearing as slow to change as the Catholic Church. Here's an idea to decide home-field advantage for the World Series: award the league who has the best overall record in interleague-play with the advantage, or better yet, whoever has the best record between the two teams in the World Series gets the home-field advantage. If you step back for a second and realize how MLB is handling that situation, you shake your head and can't believe that insanity. You might as well use spring-training records to decide home field advantage of the World Series.
No comments:
Post a Comment