Should All-Star Voting Be Taken Out Of The Hands Of The Fans??

Question

I don't think most fans are smart enough fo this privillege. They vote stupidly. Lets look at the A.L.
Catcher-Ivan Rodriguez is the leader. Why? He is doing nothing. Jorge Posada and Victor Martinez dwarf his numbers.
Outfield-Manny Ramirez? Manny always got my vote in the past-but his numbers are lousy this year. Ichiro is another overrated pick-then take in the fact that Johnny Damon's name is even mentioned. Magglio Ordonez-Grady Sizemore-these guys should be in there closer then Damon or Manny.
1st base-Konerko has more votes then Hafner (DH primarily)??
Youkalis should be in this mix somehwere too. This guy is a masher.
If this game "counts" and effects the outcome of the W. Series homefield advantage--fans haven't shown the smarts to have earned a right to vote in my opinion. Stats--pure simple stats should be used to make the decision. Then the best players are All-Stars-fans get the best--like it or not. Agree or disagree? I mean who really wants to see a .250 hitter??

Answer 1

I totally agree with you 100%. I mean most people vote for there favorite player from the previous year if they were good, but dont even consider how they are doing this year. I am totally for the stat idea. Another example is I saw Sammy Sosa in the all-star voting ballot, and he has a good amount of homeruns and rbis, but his batting average is horrendous.its somewhere around .250 like you said.

Answer 2

No. The ASG is an exhibition game for fan entertainment, and the fans only select the 16 starting position players (plus the DH in AL-hosted years). That's only one-fourth of the entire AS team rosters. I think we can trust the fans to do a reasonable, if imperfect, job with that small amount of the involved players.

Besides, there is NO fixed criteria for selecting All-Stars. Some people go by current-year stats, a method I find amazingly flawed, as it leaves no way to recognize anyone who had a big second half last year. Some go by name familiarity, which is why so many starters repeat. Some go by their home team favorites. And some go by wanting to see an old veteran or two have one last spotlight game (for 2007, this is probably Biggio, who really is stinking up the joint).

It's one game, it's for fun (oh, Seligula would have you believe winning HFA for the WS is important, and that is a real outcome benefit, but it's not that big a deal). Vote however you think best.

Answer 3

The AL and NL All Star Teams are chosen, badly or well, by judgment. There are three judgments involved--even if the voter followed his own judgment instead of voting for a home-town fellow, not one.

1. What are the criteria in prioritized order than define a great/very good baseball player?
2. What sort of year did a player have last year?
3. What sort of year has he had up to now, if healthy, and n any case assuming he stays healthy what sort of numbers will be be able to put up by the year's end?

Looking at amateurs as estimators of ability, they have somewhat failed to answer question one, may not take the time to consider question two, and do not begin to think about question three.

Would a team chosen by let us say professional baseball men be better than the fan's voting? I say undoubtedly, as to a starting team even more so. But it is the irresponsible voters who are the problem. This isn't new. Cincinnati's fans were encouraged to stuff the ballot box in 1956, for a very good hitting Reds team then; ever since then, the vote has been more and less farcical.

The answer to question (1) is--on base percentage, plus
power or speed, modified by defensive capabilities. Forget he gaudy average; look at on-base percentage, power and/or base stealing; then ask is the man a good fielder, how's the arm, how does he hit with men on base, etc.
Just do that--and I'm willing to let amateurs spoil a game I claim to know professionally. It matters; as a symptom of what's wrong with the leaders and other minds in this country, who refuse to or cannot think in terms of categorizing definitions such as the one I just offered as science.
But assuming the definition were accepted, ask yourself how many would vote their conscience, any more than elected political power-mongers do in Washington? Until individuals at all levels are compelled to take responsibility for their actions, sorry, it won't be an All Star baseball game any more than the Oscars are about great acting or the elections we stage as a bribery-hyperbole-and-slander joke every four year are about intellectual qualifications to be president.

Answer 4

I think that maybe baseball should start doing the voting like the NFL, where the fans only make up 1/3 of the total vote, and players and coaches make up the other 2/3. Now for MLB, fans should probably get 50-60% of the vote, but players and coaches should definitely get a say. Especially since the All-Star Game now decides home field advantage in the World Series, we can't have fans voting in guys with off years and blowing the game.

Answer 5

I don't think that fans should be able to vote all stars in but just looking at numbers is a mistake too. I think the manager should be the manager to the team with the best record in their respective league at the break and he should choose no more than three players from his own team and the rest of the all stars that he feels he will have the best chance to win with. At the break the manager is the one person with the most to gain from the game. About the numbers, would you keep a clutch player like jeter out because of a bad start or would you put a choke artist like arod in because his numbers are great when it doesn't matter? I wouldn't.

Answer 6

No matter who votes you're going to have someone left off that someone else thinks deserves it more than the other guy. Keep it in the hands of the fans but change the name from All-Star Game to Fan-Favorite Game.
The game is also tainted because there MUST be a representative from every team. What if that team's leading batter is batting 232 and their best pitcher has a 5.50 era with a 2 and 7 record....ALL STAR???? Nope, change it to Fan Favorite's game. Sounds better all the time. lol

Answer 7

People pick them because they just want to see players that always play get more playing time and the fantastic players that don't get in just sit watching it. People should look at the stats not the all time record of homeruns or steals because they need to show new players like Jhonny Peralta, Travis Hafner, and Grady Sizemore

Answer 8

I'm torn on this issue. We, the fans, are the ones paying the money to see these players so why shouldn't we get to pick who we want to see play in the AS game? But I also realize that most people who vote are complete morons. Pudge? Cano? Ramirez? How are they in position to start. Posada and V. Martinez being 4th and 5th is ridiculous. So is Upton being 4th. But like I said it is the morons who are paying to watch, so they deserve to pick the starters at least. Luckily it's not solely based on the votes so those who deserve it can [hopefully] make it.

Answer 9

Until the MLB does something the majority of the All Stars will be from the Yankees, Red Sox and Mets. It's frustrating that even when players from these teams have a down season they still make the All Star squad.

Answer 10

There incredibly isn't a critically extra efficient answer, as 0.5 of the suggestions that the coaches make are not precisely stellar the two, and that that they had be those finally determining who performs. you purely have them verify the completed roster quite of purely the reserves. particular, gamers like Joe Johnson and Danny Granger could be there, particular gamers like Tracy McGrady and Allen Iverson do not inevitably deserve each and all the votes, yet, some participant is going to get snubbed. additionally, there is the subject of basing the call purely on data, for one, not each and all the gamers play a similar form of video games, secondly, not all gamers make contributions statistically. ok, enable's assume which you have faith approximately injuries, so if a participant averages like 28 factors yet that's through fact he purely performed 2 video games he would not count huge form, yet nonetheless, data could nicely be deceiving. Troy Murphy is averaging 12.a million factors, 11.5 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 0.9 steals, 0.4 blocks, and a million.9 treys according to sport, Kevin Garnett is averaging sixteen.3 factors, 9.0 rebounds, 2.6 assists, a million.2 steals, and a million.2 blocks according to sport. who's to declare which cat we count huge form extra? through fact that Garnett would not ought to concentration on offense, does that mean we penalize him? Arguably, in case you seem at the two, they are notably comparable in terms of overall performance, particular you lose some blocks and a few factors with Murphy, yet you get extra rebounds and 3 factor taking photos. in case you go with for Garnett, would not that mean that he's purely "extra familiar" through fact extra human beings be conscious of Garnett than Murphy? there is already sufficient tinkering with the vote casting as is (Chris Paul did not get a million.5 million votes interior the process below each week and the completed Yi Jianlian getting third concern is likewise fishy). real, data do lend credence to communities with sturdy gamers that are crappy, yet nonetheless, there must be some supply and take there.