Skip to content

Too many All-Stars this year? Pshaw! Not enough!

Jul 11, 2011, 4:36 PM EDT

Participant

The dominant All-Star conversation for the past 48 hours or so has been about how there are too many of them. What with all of the substitutions and everything, there are 84 or 85 guys who can count them All-Stars, and that’s an outrage, right?

Maybe not!  Because according to Bill and The Common Man of The Platoon Advantage, historically speaking this may be low:

However, the truth is that that’s not out of line with where the All Star Game has been in the past. After all, there are almost twice as many teams playing today as there were in 1933, when the All Star Game debuted. Rosters are larger, and the changing nature of the bullpen means that more pitchers have been deemed worthy All Stars. We looked on Baseball Reference.com into every All Star Game from 1933-2010, to see exactly how much the term “all star” gets devalued when 84 players are so honored in 2011.

You’ll have to click through for the analysis, but as is always the case, TPA makes it worth your time.

Now: if they can explain how so many All-Stars — if not problematic on the merits of their selection — can possibly make the game halfway decent. Because that’s the real problem here.

But hey, we’re halfway there!

  1. halladaysbiceps - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:42 PM

    Here’s a novel idea. Let’s make every major league player an All-Star. Then, whoever wants to play in the game, we select those players based on a ping-pong lottery system. That way, everyone gets an award and is happy, just like they do in the little leagues for the last few years. There are no losers. Everyone is a winner.

    It’s basically no less fair/scientific then they do it now.

    • The Common Man - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:44 PM

      Again, the data suggests that the happy world you imagine where there were fewer winners and players just had to deal with not being picked, simply didn’t exist. Sorry to burst your bubble.

      • halladaysbiceps - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:54 PM

        On a different subject, Common Man, will you be watching the home run derby tonight? If so, did you perform a statistical analysis on who id likely to win? My money is on Bautista. Who do you think?

      • The Common Man - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:56 PM

        My money is on there being lots of baseballs becoming souvenirs, a bunch of little kids getting out-jumped for fly balls by awkward 13 year olds in the outfield, and me slitting my wrists after the 40,000th back by Chris Berman. Good times.

  2. elmaquino - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:42 PM

    Not really about the number of All-Stars per se, but the way they are selected is a totally messed up system. Fans have slotted in their favorite Yankees for years, but now the managers are messing up (See Bochy, Bruce). The one player per team thing is dumb, too.

    http://bit.ly/oysESA

    • clydeserra - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:56 PM

      I really like the one player per team rule. The only people “all-star” really means anything to are kids and whoever pays and receives the bonuses.

      We should keep the one player per team rule….for the kids.

      • The Common Man - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:57 PM

        You know…for the kids.

  3. skerney - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:43 PM

    Or we could just listen to a frothing Olbermann scream “Vogelsong? Not All Star!!” He sounds like my little niece when I turned on Nick Jr instead of sesame street and she screamed “NOT ELMO!”

    • The Common Man - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:44 PM

      That method seems scientifically rigorous! Let’s do it!

  4. spudchukar - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:45 PM

    Still seeing Scott Rolen in the NL starting line-up with his .241/.276/.675 with 5 HRs gives one pause.

    • The Common Man - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:48 PM

      Cal Ripken was at .240/.270/.324 in 2001 when he got the start. And he hit a homer. Seems like an ok thing to do for a guy who should be a Hall of Famer in a few years.

      • skerney - Jul 11, 2011 at 4:53 PM

        Mike Schmidt was elected starting 3B in 1989 and was hitting .203. Oh yeah, he was also retired.

      • Utley's Hair - Jul 11, 2011 at 5:15 PM

        Michael Jack was also a Hall of Famer in waiting who was NOT retired for most of the season during the ASG voting.

      • halladaysbiceps - Jul 11, 2011 at 5:21 PM

        Hair, in fairness, Schmidt retired in May, but I remember the fans kept voting for him anyways. I look at it objectively. He was not an All-Star that year just like Derek Jetter is an All-Star this year.

        This is coming from one of the greatest Mike Schmidt fans of all time.

  5. natstowngreg - Jul 11, 2011 at 5:46 PM

    How much would it cost you to get an official Certificate of All-Stardom, signed by Bud Selig?

    $200? $100? $50? No, you can get it for the low low price of $19.95. And if you call in the next 5 minutes, you can get a handsome wood-grain frame and a dozen Sham-Wows for free!

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Teams searching for trade deadline impact
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. H. Street (3770)
  2. C. Lee (2967)
  3. H. Ramirez (2746)
  4. T. Tulowitzki (2714)
  5. Y. Puig (2602)
  1. C. Headley (2528)
  2. T. Walker (2484)
  3. B. Belt (2416)
  4. M. Trout (2225)
  5. D. Price (2186)