Skip to content

Mike Scioscia doesn’t think Yasiel Puig is deserving of the All-Star team

Jul 5, 2013, 8:28 AM EDT

Yasiel Puig AP

Mike Scioscia is in line with Bruce Bochy and Jonathan Papelbon and all of the other old schoolers who think that there is some tenure requirement for the All-Star team. Here he is talking to the L.A. Times:

“I think he needs to go a little farther to earn it. If he’s not an All-Star this year, he’s going to be an All-Star for years to come. But I do think you have to play enough to earn a spot on the All-Star team.”

Scioscia went on to note that, yes, Puig is going to get a good hard look because “[t]here’s a pull to bring the best players to the game, because of the bearing it has on home-field advantage in the World Series.” Which is an odd way to put it. World Series implications or not, what kind of All-Star Game do we have some consideration other than “bringing the best players to the game” takes precedence?

My thinking on this has changed over the years. But where I am now is that — unless Major League Baseball wants to get serious and make the All-Star Game an actual Game — it should have players who are fun to watch. That’s it. They all have to be good players, but if push comes to shove, give me a guy who’s either exciting or is having some sort of crazy historic run or a neat rookie season or something. Make it friggin’ interesting. Puig is interesting. He should go.

  1. jarathen - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:39 AM

    Puig should be in the game. Period.

  2. blacksables - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:43 AM

    Why is it an “old school issue”? I’ll bet the fors and againsts aren’t drawn along those lines. I’m old school and my issue is always too many players from the coast teams. Less of anything to do whe the Dodgers is my hope.

  3. stex52 - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:48 AM

    Nothing wrong with putting him in the game. The game is a meaningless exercise for the fans anyway. Its main purpose is to tire out very good pitchers who are already pitching too many innings. I would say that the counter argument is simple. What if he had come up in April, hit .400+ for a month, and then dropped into the low .200’s? Happens all the time. Would we be considering him then? The sample size is awfully small.

    But the ASG itself is a popularity contest and a side show exhibition, so they can do anything they want. If there is a popular ground swell, then put him in the game.

  4. yahmule - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:52 AM

    I’ll bet Mike Trout would say let Yasiel play. Like Puig, he was banished to the minors to begin last season despite being the best player on his team.

    • flamethrower101 - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:16 AM

      Mike Trout I believe had an injury last season and that’s why he began the season in the minors. It was only because the Angels were so desperate for a spark that they brought him up.

      • Liam - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:31 AM

        Trout came down with a bad flu last year and missed most of spring training. Think he lost about fifteen pounds during the month, so it’s easy to see why the Angels figured he wasn’t ready to go to start the year.

  5. yahmule - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:54 AM

    I haven’t felt this strongly about a young person being allowed to play a baseball game since they chased the Bad News Bears off the field at the Astrodome in that shitty sequel.

    • mybrunoblog - Jul 5, 2013 at 10:55 AM

      “Let them play, let them play”

  6. stoutfiles - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:09 AM

    Okay, fine, but get rid of the other jokes then.

    1. Every team shouldn’t have a representative. Only the best players go.

    2. Every player shouldn’t be playing. If this game is important, then you put the best payers out there and keep them out there. The players at the end of the game are mostly the backups.

    3. Stop letting people vote for the same player thousands of times. The voting process is a disgrace.

    You get rid of these things and I might take this game seriously. Until then, who cares. It’s a sham game so whoever gets “voted” in or defaulted in by their bad team gets to go.

  7. flamethrower101 - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:14 AM

    I really have a problem with all the Puig bashing that’s been going on. It feels like they’re bashing him rather than just saying he’s not All-Star game worthy and I take issue to that.

    Is 1 month too soon to determine All-Star worthiness? I think so. But that’s not his fault. The Dodgers called him up in the hopes of providing a spark, and he’s done that and then some. If I’m Bruce Bochy I’m thinking about adding him to my roster. If I’m MLB he’s on the ballot for the ASB Final Vote.

    • scatterbrian - Jul 5, 2013 at 1:11 PM

      That’s exactly how he’s going to get on the team. He won’t be selected by Bochy or the players, but he will be on the Final Vote ballot and will get elected.

    • moseskkim - Jul 5, 2013 at 2:53 PM

      It’s interesting.. So if he played and batted .200 the first 1/4 of the season and went on this same tear, he’d be still over .300 with other goodies. That’s enough? He’s played so well that he deserves it. Pitchers tried to adjust but he did too and he’s still raking.

  8. mantastic54 - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:19 AM

    Rosters are so watered down with 34 players making it that I don’t see the harm in letting Puig play

  9. icanspeel - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:20 AM

    I don’t get why Puig isn’t a consideration? He doesn’t have to be the first of the reserves to be picked, but construct the team, ensure 1 player from each time is picked and that no one having a great year is shunned and if there is a spot left put him on.

  10. irishdodger - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:36 AM

    Scions a is being insincere, IMO, by saying they should prevent Puig this year but that he’ll have plenty of chances over the next 10 years. We all remember all the flashes in the pan that due to talent or injury never get back to that level.

    Puig was brought up for the same reason as Trout was brought up last year: to give their respective teams a spark. With LA being in a weak division, Puig has given them the spark needed to get back in the race.

    • flamethrower101 - Jul 5, 2013 at 10:22 AM

      Exactly. That’s like the Nats assuming they’ll be playoff contenders every year for the foreseeable future, and using that as justification for shutting down Strasburg.

  11. irishdodger - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:36 AM


    • jarathen - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:16 AM

      Close. But still wrong.

  12. skv7 - Jul 5, 2013 at 9:37 AM

    Puig should not be an all star, the sample size is too small. If Puig is in the game then his teammate Hanley Ramirez should also be in the game, as they have both played about a month this year, are hitting over 400, and have 7-8 HR in that month. Puig brings more defensively then Hanley. For my money, someone who has just over thirty days of big league experience has not earned the nod over others who have done it all year long.

    • ezthinking - Jul 5, 2013 at 12:35 PM

      Best point yet.

      29 89 20 36 8 0 7 19 7 12 4 0 .404 .443 .730 1.174


      29 114 23 49 7 1 8 19 4 24 4 2 .430 .455 .719 1.174

      People should figure out who is who and them make the argument why one should go and the other shouldn’t. And then they should look back at their postings about “narrative” in the Trout-Cabrera MVP debate or Morris v. Hall Voters.

      If he’s in, its because of his “story.”

  13. nbjays - Jul 5, 2013 at 10:28 AM

    So how long should a player need to play to be considered for the All-Star Game?

    • stex52 - Jul 5, 2013 at 10:51 AM

      There is no real answer to that one. The whole selection process is too arbitrary. 100,000 Dodger fans at 25 votes each could do it right now. It’s just a big, fancy popularity contest.

      • flamethrower101 - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:02 AM

        I like the fan voting aspect. At the end of the day it is a popularity contest and the fans are voting for the players they want to see. The only problem I have is that they’re voting for the “STARTERS”, as in the starting lineup. I think they should just get rid of that; let the fans vote for the players but let the managers decide the lineups. How has this solution NOT been kicked around MLB?

      • nbjays - Jul 5, 2013 at 12:31 PM

        True, hence Derek Jeter getting almost a million votes.

  14. thomas844 - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:23 AM

    Scioscia and Papelbon should be more worried about their own teams winning games than about what’s going on with Puig. Both the Angels and Phillies are sub-.500

  15. Steve A - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:48 AM

    My argument against Mike Scioscia’s view:

    Bryan LaHair – 2012 NL All-Star

    • hcf95688 - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:55 AM

      I don’t know what that means, but OK.

  16. hcf95688 - Jul 5, 2013 at 11:56 AM

    Scioscia is against it? That settles it – I’m for it.

  17. rcali - Jul 5, 2013 at 12:13 PM

    When Scioscia was asked what his team is lacking this year, he responded “Yasiel Puig.”

  18. andrewtoney22 - Jul 5, 2013 at 1:30 PM

    I agree with Craig that Puig should certainly be in the All-Star game, but for a different reason: The All-Star game has become a very important game because it can easily determine which league wins the World Series. Home field advantage is too important not to try to win the game.

    If I’m a manager, I want the best players on the field I can find (or the players that are performing at an elite level right now). Put simply, Puig gives the National League a better chance at winning the game than if he’s not on the team.

    It’s tough to think of another outfielder that does all the things he can do. His arm alone (or the reputation of his ability to throw out baserunners from right field) will have a direct impact on the game.

  19. mazblast - Jul 5, 2013 at 8:06 PM

    Scioscia is saying that it’s more important for fading stars to be on the All-Star team because they’ve been there for years than it is for the game to be played between the best current rosters (with the minimum-one-per-team provision, of course).

    I’m not saying that Puig should be an All-Star, but it drives me nuts when a deserving player who hasn’t been on the AS team gets left out because some 35-40-year-old who’s been an All-Star a dozen times gets named yet again despite hitting .240 with average power “because it wouldn’t be the All-Star Game without him”.

  20. gginbham - Jul 10, 2013 at 8:48 PM

    Puig after 34 games is not as good as Jeff Francoeur was.
    Puig = 1.101 OPS
    Francoeur = 1.128 OPS

Leave Comment

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

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. C. Correa (2494)
  2. G. Stanton (2484)
  3. Y. Puig (2469)
  4. B. Crawford (2357)
  5. H. Pence (2228)
  1. G. Springer (2197)
  2. M. Teixeira (2116)
  3. H. Ramirez (2104)
  4. J. Hamilton (2092)
  5. J. Baez (2070)