CENTER FIELD :: Tuesday Curveball

« Josh Beckett's New BFF | Main | Stork's A-Coming! »

Tuesday Curveball

Every Tuesday, I'll post a discussion topic or question for everyone to think about and then discuss in the comments section. Tuesday is always one of the most difficult days of the week to get through - you don't have the afterglow of the previous weekend's fun any more, and yet you're still days away from the next weekend. This should give us something fun to do to pass the time.

Tuesday Curveball - Week Nine
Even though there's no real baseball on, tonight will bring the All-Star Game and all the surrounding pageantry and hoopla. David Neal of the Miami Herald wrote a very interesting article filled with ways that MLB could shake up the ASG and make it more exciting. What, if anything, would you change about the All-Star Game? How would you change the selection process? The event itself? Not this year, but overall.

As discussion starters, here were some of David Neal's thoughts:

* Not only make all fan voting online, but limit it to one vote per e-mail address. Also, this way, you could require each voter to pass a poll test. I know this has bad precedent in this country, but it would be nice if voters demonstrated more knowledge about the current season than ``Hey, Derek Jeter! I've heard of him!''

* The fan voting wouldn't decide the starters -- it would decide, hopefully, who will decide the game. Fan favorites would play the last three innings after managers figure out how to get everyone else in the previous innings.

* Here's another way to liven up those late innings. There's little riveting about the winning league getting the home-field advantage in the World Series. Give the winning league's fans 10 percent off on all stadium food, beer and programs for the next month and you better believe there will be some serious fan energy off which the players will feed. Folk heroes, which the All-Star Game doesn't make anymore, could be born.

* I'm also for changing the American League vs. the National League format. With so much talk about money in the game today, how about breaking up the teams by salary? Select the players then split them into teams that are economically equal one year, then, the next season, Richer Men vs. Not Quite As Rich Men.

As always, you don't have to be a fan of the Red Sox to get in on the discussion. All baseball fans- even Yankee fans- are welcome.

Comments (11)

[ Texas Gal ] says:
on July 15, 2008 12:32 PM

The idea of requiring fans to display a modicum of baseball knowledge before being allowed to vote makes me happy. Even though it is so un-American. Still.

[ kevin r ] says:
on July 15, 2008 1:12 PM

We could ask something like "What does VORP mean?" and then we'd be able to exclude Joe Morgan, too.

[ Rachel O ] says:
on July 15, 2008 2:50 PM

I would definitely get rid of the home field advantage aspect. It's an exhibition game for a reason! I'm a National League fan but I like most of the American League players which makes rooting for the other side diffcult when so much is at stake.

[ Liza ] says:
on July 15, 2008 3:34 PM

I agree with Rachel--having the winner of an exhibition game decide home field advantage makes no sense at all. Why can't they do it similarly to the ALDS/ACLS formats, where the team with the better record gets the advantage?

But about the ASG specifically, why not have managers and coaches vote for the players who get onto the teams? They wouldn't be allowed to vote for players on their own team. It would eliminate both the "oh-well-I've-heard-of-him" factor and the popularity contest factor (see: casual Yankee fans voting for Derek Jeter).

[ Jessi ] says:
on July 15, 2008 3:35 PM

I second that Rachel. I would love to just sit back and enjoy this game, but I know I will be disappointed if the AL doesn't win. Home field advantage is such an important thing to give to the winners.

[ Danielle ] says:
on July 15, 2008 3:43 PM

Bud Selig said yesterday on Mike & Mike that having the ASG determine home field advantage is the only realistic and fair thing to do. If that's the case, the fan voting aspect has to be altered. Since I will admit, that for certain selections, it was not completely about stats, and does the casual fan know that the winner determines home field advantage, I doubt it. I don't think though that anyone can say that home field advantage is nothing and arbitrarily switching bach and forth between the two leagues to determine home advantage is not a fair way either. How about giving it to the team with the better record between the two World Series teams.

[ Rachel O ] says:
on July 15, 2008 3:50 PM

I agree with Daniele that homefield should definitely go to the team with the better record. I also think there should be a limit to how many representitves a team can send. It's a little much seeing half of the field covered by players from one team (cough cough Cubs!)

Likewise, why should every team need to be represented if they clearly do not have a All Star-caliber player? How many fans only watch the game to see that one guy from their team? People watch this event typically because they're a fan of the game period, so I doubt they would lose many viewers.

[ Piney61 ] says:
on July 15, 2008 5:16 PM

My ideas

*Ditch the home field advantage thing. This is an exhibition and shouldn't be taken seriously at all.

*Allow the fans to vote, but don't let them vote the starters. You'll have a pool of fan votes and player votes put together with some of the manager's choices. The manager will be the one to make the lineup to his best ability. Give the manager a little more to do you know.

*I'm torn on the one player for every team rule, I do think it'd be fair for every team's fans to have a player from the team, but at the same time if a team is like teh Nationals and have really no players that deserve to go, then they shouldn't. However, it must be required that the hometown team of the city that is hosting should be represented even if they are horrible.

*Only allow one player for his own team that the manager can freelance pick. We've seen this backfire many times before with Joe Torre taking his entire team at some points in the late 90's which kind of screwed over all the other managers after him.

[ Anonymous ] says:
on July 15, 2008 5:17 PM

How about giving it to the team with the better record between the two World Series teams.

Danielle beat me to it. What is so hard about the team with the best record getting home field advantage? It *is* a big deal in the WS.

I'd also change the voting. The ASG is too much of a popularity contest. Exhibit A: Jeter. Liza has an excellent idea regarding voting: coaches and managers. Give fans *one* vote and have the fan vote have some impact (realistically, the marketing department at MLB will never give that up.)

[ Lovesoxforever ] says:
on July 16, 2008 11:21 AM

I know I'd like to actually see the teams be based on skills and stats. Some guys were there just because they're popular with the public...

[ Frank Patterson ] says:
on July 16, 2008 1:54 PM

From Jayson Stark re: the HR Derby:

Step 1: Go right from Round 1 to the finals. It's that middle round that drains all the momentum from this event and wears out the contestants. So bag it. Eight guys wail away in the first round. Then only the two best wailers advance. It's easy.

Step 2: Turn the finals into a true Duel of the Mashers, with a back-and-forth nine-inning "game." The first finalist gets three "innings" (or, as we used to know them, "outs"). Then it's the other finalist's turn.

They go back and forth for nine innings until somebody wins. And the result: Real, live drama as opposed to the current anticlimax delivered by the misguided 10-outs-apiece format. Let these guys alternate hacks and you'll get the same mano a mano ebb and flow that the Slam Dunk Contest is so famous for -- not to mention the same feel that a great baseball game is famous for.

online