All Star IGT 7/12/16

[batmagadanleadoff]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: And if he is managing to win, they why is he holding back a Cardinals rookie for a key, late-inning situation? He was swinging wildly up there. It seems like in these close games -- and many recent games have been close -- World Series advantage is not being decided by the best players, but the player representatives for the bad teams. Don't be wasting any of your brain cells analyzing "this counts" -- probably the dumbest baseball thing ever foisted on the game and its fans. The only reason it even exists is as a knee jerk reaction to when ASG managers were too fcking dumb to save players for extra innings in SeligTown. You know what else? If it weren't for this counts, we wouldn't hava had last night's ridicluous spectacle of the NL wearing road unis in an NL host stadium.

Of course, yesterday's managers saved players for extra innings. Namely, every single eligible Met.

[Guest cooby]

bmfc1 wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Freaking Torre would fill his roster with Yankees and we can't even get Terry to insert one Met into the game. Right. Even as an "adult", I'm pissed. Put Colon in early--how many more of these will he have? Get your closer some action if only to get his work in (now, he will pitch Friday regardless of the score). Show some pride for your team being the NL Champs. Terry was more concerned with satisfying the fans of every other team but his own.

Amen

[Guest cooby]

d'Kong76 wrote: I didn't watch, did Buck blow Torre on camera or was it behind the scenes? Would have been nice to give Uncle Bartolo an inning, but having trouble getting why everyone is seemingly pissed off about lack of Metly game time. Thursday off-day is stupid. (have to say it at least once)

Amen

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

I'm not as upset about the road uniform thing. If you're going to do a bunch of NL stadia in a row you have to do something, and I think they have a streak Cincy last year, San Diego and then, I think, Miami and Washington.

Is there another new AL stadium besides MFY III? We don't want the game headed back there any time soon.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I think the host city acting as a visitor was the single dumbest thing about it, and it could easily have been addressed if the dopes on Park Ave. only planned for it better.

If the AL doesn't want their parks to be home fields then they're not. Solved it!

[Edgy MD]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Is there another new AL stadium besides MFY III? We don't want the game headed back there any time soon.

Newness isn't everything. Oldness is good too. Middle-agedness isn't so bad, come to think of it.

Hey, I fixed it, too!

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Edgy MD wrote: Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: Is there another new AL stadium besides MFY III? We don't want the game headed back there any time soon. Newness isn't everything. Oldness is good too. Middle-agedness isn't so bad, come to think of it. Hey, I fixed it, too!

I'd like it back in Cleveland!

[ashie62]

I'd prefer it be eliminated altogether.

[Lefty Specialist]

I'd prefer that it didn't count for anything, like every other exhibition game.

[Centerfield]

My suggestions:

*All Star Break does back to being 3 days. Monday HR Derby. Tuesday All-Star Game. Wednesday Futures Game. Thursday everyone goes back to work.
*Alternate AL/NL ballparks. Home team is the home team. Can't believe I even have to type this.
*Ditch the home field advantage thing. Let's acknowledge that it's an exhibition by the fact that we can't pick the best players anyway because of the "every team gets an all-star" rule. The team with the better record gets HF advantage in the World Series.
*Ditch the "every team gets an all-star" rule.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Centerfield wrote: *Ditch the "every team gets an all-star" rule.

I'd modify this one so that it's mandatory that the host team have at least one all-star selection.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Disclosure: It's probably been about 25 years since I've watched an All-Star Game. I lost interest in the game even before the 1994 strike.

The home-field advantage thing is one of the more stupid ideas that baseball has come up with in recent years. Return it to being an exhibition game, then there's no problem with having at least one representative from each team.

I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I don't mind the four-day All-Star break. (Although 30 years ago I know I would have hated it.)

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

The ASG began as an event to raise $$ for player pension funds. That's no longer needed with advances in the player's union.

To make the game "count" and still serve the masters of commerce, sell the naming rights to a corporation that in turn puts up big stakes for charity. Have the managers of the respective clubs choose a charity to play for, with the winner getting a bigger slice of the pool 65/35 or whatever. Encourage fans to also contribute to their chosen charities as part of their ASG voting (click box to contribute $1 or $10 to AL or NL charity).

I think the clubs need a break more than the fans and am beginning to come around to Edgy's "Baseball Week" idea. Why not kick off the event with the Amatuer draft?, then also do the AAA ASG, the Futures, the HR contest, the ASG and maybe a return of Rock-n-Jock softball.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I'm sure I'm in the minority here, but I don't mind the four-day All-Star break. (Although 30 years ago I know I would have hated it.)

I'm with you. So it's at least a minority of two. In fact, a five-day break, to Saturday, wouldn't bother me either even though that's not happening, mainly because it'd mess with the structure of the most profitable three day Fri-Sat-Sun weekend series.

[Ceetar]

I think they should all go back to work on Thursday and move that off day to early April and try to set it up so all teams can go twice, or more, through the pitching rotation with everyone on an extra days of rest. Maybe the slower ramp up in the colder months will help with injuries.

(I know scheduling doesn't always make this easy to work)

Otherwise do whatever. Hell, go back to rotating WS home field. Give it to the league not hosting the ASG. whatever. Just don't go to record because the AL has a slight advantage due to a regular DH (or do this and get the DH in the NL). Or make the first decider head to head record. There's a reasonable chance the teams have played already that season.

[batmagadanleadoff]

My understanding is that MLB can't award WS home field advantage based on head-to-head or best overall record because, for planning purposes, it needs to know which league will have that home field advantage months before the WS.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Why would they need to know the league months in advance? Either way, the cities aren't determined until a few days before.

But I do understand that they'd like to narrow down the possibilities. For example, going into the LCS last year, they knew that the Series would open in Kansas City or Toronto. If team records were a factor, then those two possibilities would have been four, with New York and Chicago included. So they'd have to block out hotel rooms in four cities instead of two.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: My understanding is that MLB can't award WS home field advantage based on head-to-head or best overall record because, for planning purposes, it needs to know which league will have that home field advantage months before the WS.

I've heard that, too. It's the toughest championship to deal with logistically.

MLB had to "make it count" after the Milwaukee fiasco, in part because starting players were begging out early to catch flights to the ESPYs. (And I can't believe I even had to type THAT.) Shame on the managers then, and now for seeing that close games are decided by the last guys on the bench. I'd rather have someone like Bryce Harper at the plate with the game on the line and not that Cardinal rookie.

I don't have a problem with the representation rule. I like having a Met there no matter what.

Better planning could still have the NL/AL rotation. Or, consider the game a "neutral site" like it was this year. That didn't upset me as much as it did other folks. I think the challenge is that teams have to want the game and apply for it, which is why the Mets went 49 years between games and why Pittsburgh gets it a lot. I don't know how steep the competition is, or whether that many teams really want to tussle for it. It's a lot of work. I don't know if the Rays have ever hosted. But MLB might not want a showcase in that ballpark.

[Ceetar]

It's 2016 and the league is freaking loaded. Not enough to actually pay minor leaguers, but to pre-book some hotel rooms? come on. You guys always stay at the same hotels anyway, you don't think if Milwaukee gets a playoff berth that downtown Hyatt isn't going to damn well make sure they have the rooms available for the AL team whether it's 1267 or 345?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Why would they need to know the league months in advance? Either way, the cities aren't determined until a few days before. But I do understand that they'd like to narrow down the possibilities. For example, going into the LCS last year, they knew that the Series would open in Kansas City or Toronto. If team records were a factor, then those two possibilities would have been four, with New York and Chicago included. So they'd have to block out hotel rooms in four cities instead of two.

It's more than hotel availability. Among other things, it's also coordinating with the NFL and its TV schedule. It used to be tougher before this era of single use baseball stadiums, when baseball and football teams from the same city would typically share the same stadium. Remember when you'd see football yard lines painted on baseball fields beginning in late August through the end of the season? I think that the only teams that share a stadium like that today are the Oakland A's and Raiders.

[Edgy MD]

If we do Baseball WeekTM, we can have three games.

If we have three games, we can get everybody in and give them meaningful time without an impossibly dizzy parade of changes.

If we can get everybody in and give them meaningful time without an impossibly dizzy parade of changes, we can continue to have every team represented without farce.

• Every offensive player would start at least one game.
  
• Three worthy starting pitchers would get to start for each league, instead of one.
  
• Starters would go around five innings instead of two.
  
• Offensive and defensive substitutions would otherwise occur only as the game dictates.

If we can continue to have every team represented without farce, the games will be both competitive and fun.

If the games are both competitive and fun, the profile and quality of the All Star [crossout]Game[/crossout] Series will be raised and the World Series link won't be absurd.

Bonuses

• Injured and hurt players will have time to heal.
  
• Healthy players, even All Stars, will get some R&R with their families
  
• If the league elected, three teams (possibly within a train ride of each other) would host each year, instead of one), keeping a fan base from having to wait 30 or more years for an All Star Game.
  
• Fans can build mid-season travel plans around either the break in the schedule or, alternatively, a full week of baseball pilgrimages.
  
• Fans of even (or especially) the worst teams would enjoy the emotional reset of a second opening day.
  
• Teams would enjoy the big gate and the big publicity of a second opening day.
  
• Days taken from the schedule would be made up for by the return of a handful of Sunday double-headers.
  
• And that's all without mentioning all the other cool stuff going on during Baseball Week that a cleared schedule will focus more light on.
  
  • Charity events
    
  • The Hall of Fame Game
    
  • The Hall of Fame Inductions
    
  • The Civil Rights Game
    
  • Cracker Jack Old Timers Game
    
  • The Stupid Draft
    
  • The Futures Game
    
  • Expanded Skillz Competitions
    
  • Rock 'n' Jock, hell yeah

[Frayed Knot]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: My understanding is that MLB can't award WS home field advantage based on head-to-head or best overall record because, for planning purposes, it needs to know which league will have that home field advantage months before the WS.

That was always Selig's argument - that they needed to know in advance if they were going to need late October hotel rooms in say Boston/Cleveland on Tuesday-thru-Thursday and in San Fran/St.Louis on the two surrounding weekends, or the other way around. So, yeah, while you wouldn't always know specifically what city until the last minute, they'd be in a state of pre-reserved if/when you did.
The NFL and their neutral site doesn't have this problem and hoops/hockey (at least according to Sir Bud of Wisonsonia) aren't nearly as large a traveling circus.

[Frayed Knot]

Mets Guy in Michigan wrote: MLB had to "make it count" after the Milwaukee fiasco, in part because starting players were begging out early to catch flights to the ESPYs.

And because MLB/FOX were worried that ASG ratings weren't the monster they once were.
In fact I think this was the bigger reason and that the tie-game kerfuffle just gave them one more reason for the added gimmick.

[Centerfield]

Well, ratings are sagging everywhere as a result of having 1000 channels to watch. But part of the reason the ASG lost some value (I imagine) is interleague play. All of a sudden it's not interesting to watch and AL pitcher face an NL slugger. It happens every night.

I can't imagine why they need to know which league will host the first 2 games months in advance if the team itself isn't determined until a few days before, but whatever.

I think letting it determine home field is dumb. They should just say the winning team gets to bang the wives of the losers.

[Frayed Knot]

Centerfield wrote: Well, ratings are sagging everywhere as a result of having 1000 channels to watch. But part of the reason the ASG lost some value (I imagine) is interleague play. All of a sudden it's not interesting to watch and AL pitcher face an NL slugger. It happens every night.

As you say, there's a whole host of reasons. But this started back when the idea of rating for an 'Event' starting to erode was still sinking in and when MLB & FOX were fairly new to each other. And so I suspect both sides were looking for a twist both to goose ratings and distract from the tie game scenario until someone said; Hey, what if ..."

Personally I've always thought the home-field thing was silly although not as criminal as most seem to find it. Probably that's because I never had a problem with the alternating years schedule and because I think that HFA is probably THE most over-rated sports issue of the 21st century. There, I said it.

[Edgy MD]

Centerfield wrote: I can't imagine why they need to know which league will host the first 2 games months in advance if the team itself isn't determined until a few days before, but whatever.

I imagine they start putting down deposits for hotels around September 1 for all teams that are still in contention and then start withdrawing them as the possibilities get whittled down.

Centerfield wrote: I think letting it determine home field is dumb. They should just say the winning team gets to bang the wives of the losers.

And you're against posting innocent pictures of prom dates and their cats.

[Guest cooby]

Prom dates and cats? What did I miss?

[Benjamin Grimm]

Brandon Nimmo took his cat to his Junior Prom.

[Guest cooby]

My kind of guy!

[seawolf17]

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Brandon Nimmo took his cat to his Junior Prom.

Well, there aren't many girls in Wyoming. You do what you have to do.