Comments on: An All-Star Weekend

By: The All-Star Week that Was | Whiteyball

The All-Star Week that Was | Whiteyball — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:54:37 +0000

[...] The game itself was tight, and had some great rallies in the beginning, but did not quite live up to the admittedly high expectations. It would have been nice to see a National League win, but the Carl Crawford catch was one of the best I’ve ever seen in person. He definitely deserved the MVP. The American League’s 3 headed closer attack of Joe Nathan, Jonathan Papelbon and Mariano Rivera is just too much if you are not winning by the 6th inning. That is a big advantage that I didn’t factor into my initial evaluation of the AL versus the NL. [...]

By: mriehn

mriehn — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:21:05 +0000

Nathan,

I agree with your sentiment 100%

By: Nathan Heimgartner

Nathan Heimgartner — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:36:03 +0000

My personal opinion is if their keeping score it’s a competion and I want to win. And the players should want to win.

The problem with the comparisons of the two lineups is that those players will most likely only play for about three innings. Going back to my first point if the Allstar game IS going to mean something, leave the best players in there for the game. None of this “let everyone play” stuff. Let the best players in each league decide who gets home field advantage. If someones feelings are hurt…too bad. If the World Series goes to a game seven the road teams players and fans are disappointed.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:16:49 +0000

It is an exhibition for the fans. That is why there is a representative from each team. I didn’t say that it shouldn’t be competitive.

It is by far the best of all the major sports all-star ceremonies. But to be honest, it has lost a little luster since interleague play began.

By: mriehn

mriehn — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 20:58:31 +0000

Why should everyone play? This isn’t T-ball! These are grown men and exhibitions are boring. Part of what makes baseball great is the competition.

I’d like to see it like it was back in the beginning of the All-Star games where the starters play more of the game. Being named a starter should mean more than getting the first at bat.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:06:21 +0000

I would like to see it just be an exhibition. Who cares if the teams tie? Let everyone play!

By: Jacob

Jacob — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 21:15:31 +0000

I personally would rather have the overall interleague play record decide world series home field advantage. But great post!

By: Brad

Brad — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:17:27 +0000

I just kind of thought Bartlett should have received the nod.

By: mriehn

mriehn — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:55:54 +0000

Brad,

I agree with you about the fan voting, but I don’t think it was a big deal this year (aside from Hamilton, and he isn’t east coast). Jeter actually deserves the all-star game this year (look at his competition). I don’t have a problem with any other position.

By: Brad

Brad — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:30:48 +0000

I don’t mind the All Star game deciding the World Series home field, but if that’s the case, I do have a problem with the “fans” voting for the All-Star game. The East Coast is always going to have more players (population and fan base alone gets them there whether it’s deserving or not). Also, when guys like Manny were in the running after playing a month of baseball and then being suspended for PED’s for 50 games. I love the Josh Hamilton story… if there’s ever been a guy I have rooted for and just wanted to suceed, it’s Josh Hamilton, but the man has had a rough season so far, and he’s been on the DL for half of it. Fans vote for their hometeam players, and recognizable names (*cough* Jeter *cough*). I think the coaching staff should be named, and then they should pick the teams.