Master Index of Archived Threads


The All Star Game

Like it?

The Midsummer Classic	3 votes
Well, This Time It Counts!	0 votes
Just the Home Run Derby, please.	0 votes
It's okay.	10 votes
When does real baseball resume?	15 votes

Vince Coleman Firecracker Jul 15 2008 04:39 AM

Don't get me wrong, I love punching the little holes out of the ballots and I love getting all worked up about various snubs (mostly Met-related), but the break is like 72-hour forced rehab for me and I couldn't care less for the actual game. The whole thing just seems like a vestige from a time before web gems and fantasy leagues (which is probably exactly why some people like it), and it can't be over soon enough for me.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 15 2008 05:13 AM

Not gonna watch. Haven't watched since the early 90's.

themetfairy Jul 15 2008 05:45 AM

In general I love the All Star game, at least the player introductions. But this year the MFY slant is ridiculous (it's an All Star game, not a MFY game!). So I'm not going out of my way to watch it. I'll have the Wolfs at my door for dinner instead, which will certainly be a much better experience :)

holychicken Jul 15 2008 06:23 AM

Remember, metfairy, the all star game is all about the stadium it is being held in.* *expires 01/01/09

metirish Jul 15 2008 06:32 AM

I've said I won't watch but I will tune in , I will try and miss the AL introductions and watch the NL introductions .

themetfairy Jul 15 2008 06:39 AM

holychicken wrote: Remember, metfairy, the all star game is all about the stadium it is being held in.* *expires 01/01/09 Mark my words - when CitiField hosts its first All Star Game, the MFY brain trust will whine until the event honors both New York teams.

cooby Jul 15 2008 06:48 AM Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jul 15 2008 06:53 AM

I loved it when you had to find a Gillette display to even vote, then I would fret that they would notice that I voted more than once. I voted in proxy for my whole family, plus my pets. I loved it when it was a three hour event, not three days. I loved it when a Met was a hero. I loved seeing players from other teams, even if it was just to see what Orlando Cepeda or Richie Allen or Ron Cey looked like. I loved the All Star two page section in the Mets yearbooks back in the day, with pictures of friendly players from both teams sitting around talking, and the big All Star Team picture with everyone wearing their own team's uniform. I loved it when the biggest stars of all actually showed up and played and didn't have mysterious weekend before injuries. Tonight, I'll probably take a walk then sit on the couch and read. Boy am I crabby.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 15 2008 06:51 AM

I'm with cooby. It used to be must-see TV for me, but the magic is gone for good.

metirish Jul 15 2008 06:55 AM

Cooby does a great job of describing an All-Star game I never knew , nicely put Cooby. Local people here in the Bronx are pissed that hardly any festivities are held in the borough .

Frayed Knot Jul 15 2008 06:56 AM

I generally watch - but it's not like I hang on every pitch. After the intros and first inning or so it'll become sort of background sound unless and until it gets tense at the end.

AG/DC Jul 15 2008 07:06 AM

The problem is that, at that juncture, which may or may not arrive some time in the 2 o'clock hour, there's nobody left but trainers and ballgirls. Check out that first All-Star Game. http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/1933/B07060ALS1933.htm No pitcher carried a heavy workload, but the winning AL team only made two pitching changes and one defensive replacement (for Babe Ruth). They still managed the cool feat of having a Hall-of-Famer named Lefty get the win and another Hall-of-Famer named Lefty get the (three-inning) save. Two hours, five minutes, and Bill Klem umping first. Hell, three of four umps were named Bill. That's economy!

soupcan Jul 15 2008 07:09 AM

I'm DVR-ing it for my 11-year-old who is at sleep-away camp. I'll probably watch it because of that, but if I wasn't doing that I'd most likely flip back and forth. In general I do not dig the All-Star break. I need Met games during the summer and while I can deal with the occasional off-day and rain-out, this 3 day break is just a big pain-in-the-ass.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 15 2008 07:12 AM

I don't really mind the three-day break. Since I got Extra Innings in 2006, I'm seeing a LOT of Mets baseball. A three-day lull isn't so bad. I just wish it didn't put a 9-game winning streak on hold. Hopefully they'll get right back into the swing of things and sweep the four games in Cincinnati.

bmfc1 Jul 15 2008 07:15 AM

I used to love the game because it was fun and didn't matter. Now, with something at stake, i.e. Mets home field advantage in the WS, I care, and I only want to care about the Mets. I don't want to root for Chipper Jones (despite the nice things he said about Shea and D-Wright in The Daily News today) or Chase Utley, but we have to. The game also begins too late (about 8:30) and probably won't end until around 12 which is too late for a non-Mets game. Finally, we have the egotistical Joe Buck at the mike and it has been established that he doesn't like watching baseball so I have trouble listening to someone that is being paid to watch something that he doesn't like when we love it and do it for nothing. And then there's the MFY and YS stuff. I'll watch, but if my wife wants me to switch to "My Boys", I'll do it. And if the Wolf's come over (hello, themetsfairy), forget it because that's when the fun starts.

themetfairy Jul 15 2008 09:05 AM

They'd better come over - I bought a ton of food!

attgig Jul 15 2008 09:18 AM

the 'this time it counts' thing pisses me off and is retarded. Yet Another one of Selig's retarded decisions. and just cuz they do that, doesn't mean that a game will not end up in a tie. Alternating home field, though also stupid, is better. And letting the best record host, it the best solution. I've been more turned off to the all star game ever since it counted.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 15 2008 09:38 AM

Yeah. I have a reason to root for the NL to win, but not a reason to watch. I'll just be either more pleased or displeased by the result when I learn the score on Wednesday morning

bmfc1 Jul 15 2008 10:56 AM

Here's a good reason to root hard for the NL: so Rivera can't triumphantly take the mound for a save.

Benjamin Grimm Jul 15 2008 10:59 AM

Or he can make the triumphant walk to the mound and blow the save by allowing a David Wright homer. Then Billy Wagner can come in and get the save.

bmfc1 Jul 15 2008 11:15 AM

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Or he can make the triumphant walk to the mound and blow the save by allowing a David Wright homer. Then Billy Wagner can come in and get the save. Perfection.

metirish Jul 15 2008 11:20 AM

A big stink hyped by the Snooze today, Papelbon said he should close being Champions and all that , . Rivera said he should close and K-Rod said look at the numbers and he should close.

Frayed Knot Jul 15 2008 11:26 AM

I love the media types who trumpet the importance of the ASG by blindly citing empty stats like; 'the team w/the home field advantage has won X of the last Y times' ... - as if the recent 4-game sweeps ('04, '05, '07) had anything to do with who had Game 7 in their park, - or thinking that the '96 WS helps prove the theory even not only did Game 7 never happen there either but that the home team lost 5 of the 6 games that were played.

TheOldMole Jul 15 2008 11:48 AM

Somehow I'd have to vote for all of them. It is the midsummer classic, I do like it, but I'm impatient for real baseball to return.

themetfairy Jul 15 2008 08:38 PM

The Wolfpack did come to our door, and we had a lovely time hanging out with them. Mini Wolf is truly adorable :) Thus, we skipped the pregame festivities and the beginning of the game. I'm sure that our time with the Wolves was far more enjoyable than the Cathedral lovefest couldl possibly have been.

Nymr83 Jul 15 2008 09:13 PM

Benjamin Grimm wrote: I don't really mind the three-day break. Since I got Extra Innings in 2006, I'm seeing a LOT of Mets baseball. A three-day lull isn't so bad. I just wish it didn't put a 9-game winning streak on hold. Hopefully they'll get right back into the swing of things and sweep the four games in Cincinnati. thats about how i feel, i generally dont care one way or the other about the all-start braek but it came at an inconvenient time for a hot team

Frayed Knot Jul 15 2008 09:17 PM

Tomorrow's the tough day. A day off Monday is kind of normal and the ASG Tues is at least something different even if you're not a fan ... but by Wed morning there's been no real games to talk about for 2 days and you still have 1-1/2 days to go (2-1/2 for some teams) until the next one.

Elster88 Jul 15 2008 09:22 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: I love the media types who trumpet the importance of the ASG by blindly citing empty stats like; 'the team w/the home field advantage has won X of the last Y times' ... - as if the recent 4-game sweeps ('04, '05, '07) had anything to do with who had Game 7 in their park, - or thinking that the '96 WS helps prove the theory even not only did Game 7 never happen there either but that the home team lost 5 of the 6 games that were played. I feel ya somewhat. But getting some wins under your belt at home in games 1 and 2 can be big too.

Nymr83 Jul 15 2008 09:31 PM

Elster88 wrote: I feel ya somewhat. But getting some wins under your belt at home in games 1 and 2 can be big too. but taking even one of those game on the road shifts the homefield to you, and then you look to win 2 of 3 at home which send you back needing only 1 win in 2 games... i dont think homefield means alot in a 7 game series

Frayed Knot Jul 15 2008 09:41 PM

MLB teams win about 54% of the time at home - a figure that's been pretty consistant over the years in both reg & post season - so there's only so much of a advantage it can be. The thing is, home field edge in post-season baseball was rarely discussed until the Wild Card era started. It's at that point that, for the first time, teams were allowed into the playoffs who were, by defintion, inferior to other teams and now suddenly everyone seemed to want to rig it so the better team had every edge you could give them short of a 2-run lead to begin every game (and I even heard THAT one suggested once). Personally, I never minded the alternate-years set-up that was standard practice for 8 decades or so.

Elster88 Jul 15 2008 09:51 PM

54% is non-trivial over such a huge sample size. I think a more telling stat to look at is % of WS won by the team with homefield advantage. I'm definitely too lazy to look that up.

Elster88 Jul 16 2008 07:09 AM

Just a thought here: Many people say the game means nothing and is just an exhibition. I wonder how many of those same people say it would be a travesty if the game ended in a tie. Can't have it both ways. If the game means nothing then it doesn't matter if it ends in a tie.