All-Star Voting and the KC Royals

[ScrapTheNickname]

I just finished voting for the Kansas City Royals at every position for the All-Star game. I did this to prove a point, and I hope others vote for an all-Royals starting lineup, too. The voting system is ridiculous. Vote 35 times. The voting, in my opinion, should be done by the players and coaches, perhaps with some minor input by the fans. Vote Royals and show the new commissioner that the system is broken.

[Old Twins Cap]

Imagine you are a National League fan.  You know the All-Star Game gives your team home-field advantage in the World Series.  Why wouldn't you vote 35 times for the worst players in the American League?

 

Not that the Royals aren't a quality bunch, actually, in terms of defense.   I believe they have top players at 6 positions.

 

But still, the point is:  if the All-Star Game matters, and it does, why would you allow it to be subject to mischief by openly allowing anyone with a terminal and a username to vote up to 35 times?

 

I have twelve devices, and many accounts.  I could possibly, if I worked at it every day, single-handedly elect a whole all-star team.  Maybe I will.

[formerly33]

I discovered last year that with private browsing turned on in Safari, you can vote, um, maybe 5,000 times in just an hour and a half or so by simply switching to a new window and typing in bogus email addresses. Let it be known that I do not take advantage of the system, but my point is that the online voting is such a joke that it doesn't even call for twelve devices and multiple accounts to stuff the ballot box. Why don't they at least make it so that you have to have an MLB account to vote? That would be a huge start (even though it would be possible to create a new MLB account, but at least it would slow the people down a bit), and I don't really care about how many times people are able to vote as long as they all get to vote the same amount of times.

[Willihammer]

Fan voting has been used to select players off and on (mostly on) since 1947. Its supposed to be an exhibition after all. You know, for the fans. They just need to tweak the system so to account for the fanatics who take the home field advantage angle way too seriously.

[ScrapTheNickname]

 

Fan voting has been used to select players off and on (mostly on) since 1947. Its supposed to be an exhibition after all. You know, for the fans. They just need to tweak the system so to account for the fanatics who take the home field advantage angle way too seriously.

But it isn't an exhibition anymore, as we know. The winner wins home field advantage for that league in the playoffs (which I personally think is absurd). Regardless, don't the fans really want to see the very best players playing on the field that day? On the other hand, who really gives that much of a hoot about an All-Star game?

[Willihammer]

 

But it isn't an exhibition anymore, as we know. The winner wins home field advantage for that league in the playoffs (which I personally think is absurd). Regardless, don't the fans really want to see the very best players playing on the field that day? On the other hand, who really gives that much of a hoot about an All-Star game?

Personally I like the ASG a lot. I think its cool to see all the best players on the field at once. IIRC the reason they connected the ASG to the WS was so that players would actually show up. I still consider it 99% an exhibition since the odds of the Twins going to the WS in any year are going to be small.

[nicksaviking]

The fan voting is a bit of joke.  Whether it's the Royals fans going crazy or it's your more traditional Big Market exposure votes, something always seems to be amiss.

 

That being said, I always have wondered if an All-Star team would actually beat your avereage MLB team in a one game situation.  There does seem to be something about chemistry that affects baseball despite my wish that the game could be broken down with science. 

 

Seeing how the trend now is to build from within and too often MLB teams that try mass offseason overhauls with high priced free agents fall short (see 2015 Padres and the 2013 Blue Jays), I'd probably put my money on the 2015 Royals over any group of NL players. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

It is what it is. I love the All Star game either way. A couple of those Royals probably won't play for whatever reason but prepare to see a lot of Royal Blue. I think the commish will probably step in and swap out the K.C. second baseman by force, if necessary, and I doubt anyone would push back too hard on that if he did. This would help Dozier's cause somewhat.

[James]

I have to admit that I also enjoy the all-star game.  It's fun.  I also think it should be a pure exhibition.

 

I understand why the MLB made it determine home field advantage, but I don't think most players really care.  Especially those all-stars from teams that are not likely to be on a team that makes it to the world series.

 

I also like that fans get to vote for players to be on that team, and that has been a part of the game for a while.  I don't fault the MLB for trying to make this accessible to more fans that can't make it to a MLB game to fill out a paper ballot, but clearly the implementation of this new system is flawed.  There are better ways that they could implement this, and I have a feeling that this will get solved. 

[Gernzy]

I'm glad this didn't happen last year. I be pissed if I spent all this money on tickets just to see the Royals play.

 

Something needs to change.