He Warmed Up Six Times!
I had something else planned for tonight, but in light of learning about Brad Lidge having to warmup on six different occasions over a two-hour span last night, my anger at this ridiculous game had to be expressed. First, a question: WHY does this game count? Why does this exhibition game, in which the rosters are not always indicative of the best players in each league, in which each team is required one representative meaning that other deserving players are excluded, in which players rarely last more than three or four innings, determine which league gets home field advantage in the World Series? Honestly? Can someone please answer this for me?
“Well, Cubs, you had a tremendous year, winning more than any other team in the whole sport, scoring more runs than everyone else as well, but you won’t have home field advantage in the World Series because your league failed to win the All-Star game.”
Say that a couple of times and let it sink in. I’m very confused why this game was made to be the determining factor of home field advantage in the World Series and doubly so why more stipulations were not made clear with regards to how managers must utilize players or how roster spots should be filled. The first basic point that needs to be fixed if this game is going to remain as “important” is that people who can actually play need to be selected. I don’t care how good Brandon Webb or Scott Kazmir have been this year: if they cannot pitch or just pitched a couple of days prior, they serve no purpose to the team. They are taking up a roster spot, risking injury and should not be participating.
Those actually capable of pitching should be selected, and for the sake of honoring those deserving, regardless of whether or not they can participate, why not just come out with some type of list, citing the best players of the first half, not necessarily intertwined with the game? That way a guy like Kazmir could be recognized for his first-half performance but not be subjected to what happened last night. Imagine if Corey Hart didn’t throw like a nine-year old girl, as Dave Cameron noted, and the game continued. Kazmir was on a strict pitch count and Francona would have no choice but to forfeit the game.
Or if Lidge could only go two innings last night, apparently David Wright was going to be his replacement. That would have been spectacular. The AL could have garnered home field advantage by hitting a home run off of a third baseman. And if Wright gets hurt pitching, I would have to imagine it would be mighty tough to justify his usage on the mound due to the game “counting,” to the thousands of Mets fans excited at the possibility of overtaking the Phillies in the NL East.
Either the game counts and the rosters should be populated by those capable of pitching, regardless of whether or not they are Jeff Suppan, Jamie Moyer, et al, or the game reverts to exhibition/fun nature and after a certain period of time, say 11-13 innings, it is called regardless of score. Pitchers should be required to go for at least one inning, with no platoon or LOOGY moves and, if the game “must be decided” as the commissioner’s office informed Francona, why take so many closers? Honestly, did the AL need anybody other than Mariano Rivera, Jonathan Papelbon, or even Francisco Rodriguez? It could have been Zack Greinke, not Joakim Soria, and then Greinke could have gone a few innings.
It just really irks me that the sport I love could be so stupid and naive with a tradition such as this. If you want to have a competition between the leagues to determine home field advantage in the world series, why not make a balanced interleague schedule and whichever league wins gets the advantage. That way it’s more than just one meaningless game acting as the determining factor.
Overall, IF the game supposedly counts:
a) No more fan voting
b) No more requirements about representatives from each team
c) Pitchers who can actually pitch are selected
d) More starters than closers
e) Pitchers have to go at least one full inning
If it doesn’t count, do whatever you want. It’s a fun game, there should be no real rules other than to have fun. Or, what I would ultimately suggest, is that all of the aforementioned suggestions be disregarded and just let Tim Wakefield make the team every year, with the clause that he can pitch for both teams.
36
I cannot agree more.
I cannot agree more with Joe not agreeing more.
The only way I see this game meaning anything is if it is used to be the tie breaker between the two world series teams provided they have identical records.
Otherwise it should not count and they should let the players have some fun. It would have been nice to see Jeter leave the game and A-rod just slide over to short. Or watch batters try and bat from the “wrong” side of the plate or see a guy that normally throws a 95mph heater toss an eephus pitch.
I cannot agree more with Corey not agreeing more with Joe…or something like that.
Anyone notice the average leverage index of the game?
It was 2.19. This was the 10th highest leveraged index game (not including playoff games) dating back to 1974.
I’m definitely in the it should not count camp, but we certainly witnessed quite a baseball game last night.
Yeah, it definitely held my interest level for the most part, especially that one inning from Aaron Cook.
David, I noticed that as well. I didn’t realize it was that highly “ranked,” but since I didn’t see the entire game I was doubting the people who said it was a great game (I figured they meant it was a great event)
Cook worked himself out of some serious jams, in all three of his innings! It was pretty unlikely the game went on as long as it did considering there were several occasions when both the AL or the NL was expected to score at least one run in an extra inning, sometimes even 2, only to not score at all.
I wonder if there is a way to make the game “matter” to the players but not in such a ridiculous way. Doesn’t the winning team get more money than the losing team? I guess it’s probably not enough to make a whole lot of difference to most of the players, but right now it’s a lot more fun to watch than say, the Pro Bowl.
Why does it “count?” Cash grab. i.e. Keep the ratings up for this exhibition game. I watched 2/3 of an inning and have no regrets about missing a “classic” exhibition game.
I don’t understand the outrage over the All-Star game determining home field in the World Series. For home field advantage to be any advantage at all the series has to go to the seventh game. Here are the number of times the World Series has gone to seven games in the last ten years: 3 (’97, ’01, and ’02). That’s out of the last ten years. In the last five years: none.
Maybe more importantly, why is the old way of just handing home field to each league every other year any better? Its essentially a coin flip now and it was a coin flip then. The way they do it now is certainly no stupider than it was before.
If they really want to be fair about it they need to go back to even schedules and then give it to the team with the best over-all record. But that’s not going to happen. Just giving home field to the team with the best record isn’t fair either because teams don’t play the same schedules.
It counts because the players seem to completely agree with the assumption of the people here – that the ONLY thing that matters in baseball is the World Series (1 True Goal). That means that the regular season only exists to fairly choose teams for the playoffs, and that a single regular season game matters because of that. Given that a pure ‘exhibition’ game wouldn’t matter toward the 1 True Goal, then the game wouldn’t matter at all – and that’s what we saw in the past, players horsing around (Randy and Kruk’s AB from a few years ago) or players leaving early, etc. So, to make it matter to everyone with 1 True Goal, it must count toward that. Seems logical to me if you and the players agree on the fact that nothing matters except the World Series.
Personally, I’m a Mariner’s fan, which means I don’t agree with the 1 True Goal, otherwise I’m a fan of something that has never mattered :).
The biggest problem, in my mind, is that the game is NOT played to win. The managers are in the difficult position of trying to get everyone in the game, but still win. If you were trying to win, would you ever take ARod out for Crede?
That’s the problem with the pitchers. Guys are throwing 1 or 2 innings a piece, because the manager wants to get all of them in. Obviously this is the biggest difference from a “real” baseball game. Then, we see what happens – it’s a tied in the 15th inning and there are no pitchers left because guys that could have pitched all night only pitched the top of the 3rd.
Pitching is just something that doesn’t “work” with midseason exhibition games. You could say that the game could be treated as a real one, with a starter who should go about the same amount as he would in a normal game, but what team would want their ace to pitch 5+ unnecessary innings and screw up the rotation on top of that?
I like all your solutions. One additional one would be to not have a strict cap on the roster size. I mean, when you’re basically obligated to take Albert Pujols out of a one-run game in the 8th inning, isn’t that a bigger hit to your chances of winning than having an extra 30 players would help?
I say let the fans vote and select 5 or 10 “reserve pitchers”. They’d be there so this can’t happen Then maybe before the game, the manager can designate which of the normally-selected pitchers can pitch and which can’t (eg. Kazmir would be on the can’t-pitch list). Then you’d say the reserve pitchers can only enter the game after everyone NOT on the can’t-pitch list comes in.
I don’t know, something like that. But you’re right, it’s a joke. And for the record, I too watched about 1 inning, and could not care less about missing the rest. I have no interest whatsoever in the game.
It is so idiotic to have an exhibition game determine home-field advantage in the most important series of the year.
MattyMatty: home field advantage does not “only” matter if the series goes seven games. Having the first two games and home and having the opportunity to go up 2-0 in the series is a tremendous advantage. The series can be pitched/played differently if you have a 2-0 game lead.
I think that the best regular season record should determine home field. If you play the best baseball, regardless of schedule, over six months, you should be rewarded with home field. They don’t play the same schedule in any sport but in every other sport the best record determines home field. Why is this so difficult?
The decision to have the All Star Game determine HF Advantage has been debated heatedly over the radio here in Chicago, and the only reason anyone who liked the idea had was that it gives the game meaning. True, the game does have meaning, but does the end justify the mean? I mean, there is no logical basis for the decision. How about this for meaning: The manager of the losing team gets fired and/or executed. It can’t get more meaningful than that. The All Star Game determining HF Advantage is one of the most idiotic, mind blowing concepts I have ever seen and Bud Selig ought to be fired over it, seriously.
I agree that best record getting WS home field would be better. Best record getting all 5 or 7 or 9 home games in each playoff series would be better than that. Expanding with 2 more teams in Brooklyn and New Jersey, realigning to a 4 team divisions and eliminating the wild card would be even better than that. Dividing into MLB I and MLB 2 with promotion and relegation each year would be best.
However, It is what it is. This was a reaction to the tie. The right thing would’ve been for Torre to tell Brenly back in ought-two: ‘too bad, you forfeit, we win.’ Instead they cried to Selig. Bud caved and inexcusably changed a rule mid-game. I was hoping Francona would be forced to forfeit. Then mgrs would learn NOT to use the whole roster. Play Utley. Bench Uggla, etc.
To put it in perspective, ALL games are exhibitions. It was a great game. I like the rule. It’s not perfect, but it’s better than what it was.