All-Star Game Open Thread

by tgirsch

July 15th, 2008

digg asks, and he shall receive.

Categories: MLB/MiLB, Sports |

18 Comments

Ted July 15th, 2008
Is Josh Hamilton a freak or what?
tgirsch July 15th, 2008
No kidding. And he completes a recent trend, where the big “wow” guy burns himself out in the first round and winds up losing.

Morneau may have gotten the trophy, but Hamilton “won” in my book.
Ted July 15th, 2008
I was thinking in the second round, he should have bunted his first pitch. And how about a 71 yo dude throwing that many pitches in that short a period? That’s impressive itself.
tgirsch July 15th, 2008
Bunted, or turned around and hit from the other side of the plate.
Ted July 15th, 2008
Drew goes deep! Red Sox (I mean AL) might pull this one out).
Ted July 15th, 2008
I’ll bet $100 that there are at least 10 ASG headlines that read: “Uggly!”
Ted July 15th, 2008
Nevre mind. Jumped the gun on that one. But that was materiql for that “wanna get away?” commercial. GIDP in the top of the tenth and then consecutive errors to start the bottom.
tgirsch July 16th, 2008
I was just logging on to suggest that Uggla should be the AL MVP.

Also, does anyone else think this umpire’s strike zone is ridiculously low?
tgirsch July 16th, 2008
Man, makes me wish Lidge was still with the Astros…
digglahhh July 16th, 2008
Man that was a marathon game, huh. I was watching it at a bar with my buddy, I thought we were going to close down the place. Good thing I had taken today off of work in advance for unrelated reasons, I was not capable of being productive a 9:00 this morning…

Hamilton is insane. He may be the most naturally talented player I’ve ever seen. I mean, he’s not A-Rod or (even pre-roids) Barry Bonds good, but think about the context. How do you go from playing 50 rookie games in four years, because you got hurt and subsequently developed a crack and heroin addiction, to strolling into “the show” and being one of the best doing it.

There’s really no way of quantifying what is more impressive, being A-Rod good, or being Hamilton good under those circumstances, but could A-Rod take four years off to smoke crack and come back cold turkey and be that good? Who knows, and comparison isn’t the point anyway, just trying to put what Hamilton is doing into perspective.
Ted July 16th, 2008
True dat. Junior Griffey might be the most talented player I have ever seen. Overall talent. However, he did not have a “talent” for staying injury-free (part of which is luck, part of which is psychological, part or which is physiological), nor did he have a “talent” for making the best career moves. (I talk of him in the past tense because he either lacked the longevity gene or his injuries have taken a permanent toll on his game, and he is no longer an elite player.)
tgirsch July 17th, 2008
In case anyone is still reading this, did anyone else watch the AAA All-Star game? It was actually a much better game than the pro one.
Ted July 17th, 2008
Didn’t watch. I thought the big league game was pretty good. Four plays at the plate in extra innings? That’s pretty good.

However, the game did come within an inning or two of turning into a farce, pitcher-wise. I think there needs to be about four more pitchers on each team. Long men. Maybe second tier status. They don’t get to play unless everyone else is used up, and they are expected to eat innings (not to excess, but three or so). Heck, if the big league clubs don’t want to subject their long relievers to that much (potential) use in an all-star game, get ‘em from the minors.

I’d even consider allowing re-entry of position players if the game goes into extras. The benches are intentionally shortened as the game goes on to give everyone a chance to play, but that can turn an extra-inning game with injuries into a joke. Shouldn’t have to happen.
tgirsch July 17th, 2008
I’m not saying the major league game was bad, just that the AAA game was better. Including a lot of ninth inning drama and heroics.

As for the main All-Star game, I think too much credence is given to the idea that everyone who’s named should get a chance to play, particularly with the bench players. I can understand limiting the pitchers, because they’re important to their teams and can’t play every day, but not the bench guys. Manage the game to win, not to get everyone playing time.
digglahhh July 21st, 2008
AAA game was cool. My girlfriend was there; she did the live MILB Gameday datacasting too.

I’d support re-entry (once per pitcher), I guess. Expanded rosters would be okay too.

Not having all the guys play seemingly contradicts the player representative from every team clause. Although, we’re mostly in agreement that clause is stupid, as long as it exists you’d expect managers to act within its spirit.
tgirsch July 21st, 2008
I dunno, even being named to the All-Star team is an honor of sorts, whether or not you actually play.

Of course, if getting everyone some playing time is your objective, then maybe you change the rules so that every position player must exist after one at-bat, but after everyone’s had an at-bat, players can re-enter. Again, though, you’d have to do away with the idea that the game “counts.” Even as it is, the “let everyone play” contradicts the “play to win” idea.
Ted July 21st, 2008
Even as it is, the “let everyone play” contradicts the “play to win” idea.

True at a conceptual level, but given these are all excellent players, combined with the sporadic nature of baseball performance, I think “everyone plays” is less contradictory to “play to win” than it might seem.

Also one must play to win within the constraints of the runs. The rotation scheme in volleyball requires that a team field its players in a suboptimal configuration for part of the game (when setters rotate to front, spikers rotate to back, servers off the back corner). But that in no way results in volleyball teams not playing to win (at least at certain levels).
tgirsch July 21st, 2008
I don’t like the volleyball example. You still have all your best players on the court, even if not in their ideal positions. That’s different in kind from being required to make substitutions.