Every year, we do this. We all know the MLB all-star selection system is inequitable and unfair. We all know players got snubbed. So why write yet another article griping about it?
Here's why: the debate is important. It shakes fans out of the tunnel vision that can result in them missing emerging players having phenomenal seasons. Even if they don't make the roster, the Joey Votto's of the world get recognition they would have never gotten without the All-Star Game.
I play fantasy baseball. I know who Joey Votto is. I know he's a great up-and-coming hitter. But it somehow escaped me that he was having perhaps the best offensive season in the National League. Top OPS in the Albert Pujols-inclusive National League. Top-three in slugging, OBP, HR, and RBI. Top-five in runs and average. On the negative side, he is tied for 11th among NL first basemen in kittens saved from trees, and hasn't cured a major disease all year. But aside from that, his record is unassailable.
Of course, I don't feel bad about not knowing the extent of Votto's excellence because apparently neither did the fans, players, or even NL manager Charlie Manuel, all of whom had a chance to give Votto his due. Never have I seen a player this dominant offensively left off an all-star team entirely. (Of course, if the last-man vote goes as it should, he won't be left out.)
But at least we are talking about him. And at least we are talking about some of the other snubs having great seasons. So here's a rundown of players that should be in, and equally important, who should be left out. It's easy to list off players having good seasons. But we are looking for 34 all-stars. It's supposed to be difficult to make this team; those calling for more spots would merely dilute it further, and we'd have more John Bucks on the squad, and more players not getting to actually play.
So we stick to the one-for-one basis, for each guy I say should go in, we need to find whose spot he deserved, starting with the National League.
(Assumptions: must keep with one-player-per-team rule, which I like, and that the key is making the team. Who starts is immaterial when compared with making sure the most deserving players are at least rewarded with a trip to the All-Star Game.)
In: 1B Joey Votto; Out: Other last man vote candidates
This one doesn't even merit further conversation. Votto could conceivably win the MVP if he duplicates his first half. If he's left out, the All-Star Game should feel empty to us all. I didn't even look to see who else was on the ballot.
In: OF Josh Willingham; Out: OF Matt Holliday
Matt Holliday is a great hitter. He gets on base, has power, and drives in runs. But Josh Willingham simply cannot be left off this team. Aside from a slight short in batting average, Willingham has Holliday beat in most major statistics. And he's done it without the help of Albert Pujols hitting next to him in the order. Pujols, by the way, is the only NL player to match Willingham's .413 OBP. Oh, and just for kicks, Willingham has also stolen seven bases without being caught.
In: CL Billy Wagner; Out: CL Matt Capps
Now that Willingham is on the roster, we can jettison Washington's token mediocre closer. Capps may be second in the league in saves, but that's a function of opportunity, not skill. Wagner has been scored on in only four appearances. His 1.35 ERA, 0.98 WHIP, .165 opponents average, and 52 strikeouts in just 33.1 innings all scream best closer in the NL, not all-star snub. Meanwhile, Capps has what for a closer is a poor ERA (3.19) and even more shaky WHIP (1.39). Hardly a beacon of dominance.
In: OF Colby Rasmus; Out:OF Jason Heyward
I'm okay with Stephen Strasburg not making it. But the Rookie Hype Machine did strike the fan voting in the case of Heyward. I love the kid, and he's got a great future. But the future of Colby Rasmus is right now, a time where he has Heyward beat in average (.278-.251), homers (16-11), OPS (.916-.821), and steals (9-5). Comparable RBI, runs, and OBP leave little argument; Rasmus has outperformed Heyward. And while Holliday gets help for hitting next to Pujols, Rasmus often hits down the order from the fastball/baserunner generator (depending on if you are hitting in front of or behind him).
In: 3B Ryan Zimmerman; Out: INF Omar Infante
Infante is a nice utility guy that plays multiple positions and is hitting over .300. He's also logged just 165 at bats in 57 games, has no power, and isn't a threat to steal (3-for-5). He's like a more boring Placido Polanco. Meanwhile, it again just doesn't pay to be a National. Zimmerman's 14 homers and .376 OBP have him a clear-cut third behind all-stars David Wright and Scott Rolen. I understand why a utility guy like Infante is useful with just one second baseman and one shortstop on the bench. But this is an AL park. There aren't going to be a bunch of double switches. Another thumper like Zimmerman will be much more useful than Infante. Not to mention more exciting and more deserving.
In: SP Roy Oswalt; Out: RP Evan Meek
I have no problem with getting great setup men on the team. Dominant ones have an underrated value, and they can help an all-star team win by taking their usual role rather than having a closer come into an unfamiliar role. That's why I left Arthur Rhodes, and I chose him because he's the only lefty reliever. Meek's having a great season. But Oswalt is a great pitcher who has deserved better this year. His 5-10 record includes seven losses in which he gave up three runs or less. Nine times in 17 starts, his team has scored two or fewer runs. Meanwhile, Oswalt has struck out 104 hitters in 111 innings, kept a 3.32 ERA and 1.11 WHIP. Give the guy a break. He's been too good for too long to be left off for a setup man having a nice year.
In: OF Andrew McCutchen; Out: OF Michael Bourn
More importantly, Oswalt's inclusion allows us to take out Bourn's token bid and include a Pirate with a lot more cache and talent than Evan Meek. McCutchen is Bourn with actual elite hitting skills. Bourn has five more steals, but has no power and doesn't get on base particularly often (.336), limiting his value. There's a 140-point OPS gap between the two. If a Pirate should make it, it should be its most productive player, especially when he's also the organization's most exciting young talent.
In: CL Carlos Marmol; Out: CL Brian Wilson
I'll be honest. This is a slight downgrade. But Marmol is downright unhittable (.152 average against), and has a better WHIP than Wilson along with a comparable low-twos ERA. If you need the bases-jamed-with-less-than-two-out strikeout, Marmol can get it (69 strikeouts in 38 innings). He just might walk the guy, too (27 free passes). But again, with just three blown saves in the paltry 18 chances he's been given by the Cubs, you don't lose that much in reliability, consistent as Wilson has been (22 saves in 24 chances).
In: 1B Prince Fielder; Out: OF Marlon Byrd
This is why we shoved Marmol through; it's always helpful to get a masher like Fielder the nod (a very slight one over Adam Dunn). The offensive outputs of Byrd and Fielder don't even compare, so I won't even bother listing them. The main argument against this Byrd/Wilson for Fielder/Marmol trade would have to be an OF/1B balance. Yes, there will be five first basemen with Votto voted in at the top, and three on the squad. Except that, as mentioned, this game is at an AL park. In theory (5 at-bats per slot), there are going to be 10 at-bats to distribute to first basemen and DHs. There will be 15 for OF. So what's the big deal with having a total of seven OF and five 1B? Is that really disproportional at all? The ratios are actually the same, right? Why not take the best hitters you can find?
In: Mat Latos; Out: Tim Lincecum
Wait, I'm dropping who from the team? You read right. Look at the numbers. I get why a Lincecum got the nod over a Latos. Reputation. Pedigree. Cy Young awards. Both of these last two picks are ones where you could argue that the established pitcher should get a benefit of the doubt. But Latos' numbers are simply better. ERA? Advantage Latos, 2.62 to 3.28. That's a big gap. WHIP? Bigger gap, with Latos' dominant 0.96 lapping the Cy-winner's pedestrian 1.30.
For whatever reason, Lincecum hasn't been as dominant, despite sporting a higher strikeout rate than Latos. But with more wins and significantly fewer runs and baserunners allowed, Latos has been the better pitcher. Unless admittance to the All-Star Game is a popularity contest rather than a slot that can be earned with a great season. Which some would argue is the case.
In: Jaime Garcia; Out: Chris Carpenter
It's a pretty remarkable statement of what kind of pitching there's been in the NL that guys like Carpenter and Lincecum have had good first halves, and I'm booting both. But again, this is a case of my belief that the better season gets credit over reputation if the difference is clear-cut. Yes, if you gave me even odds on who would be better over the next half, I'd say Carpenter.
But his teammate, Garcia, has the second best ERA in baseball at 2.10, better than Ubaldo Jimenez. His WHIP (1.22), K/9 (7.35), opponents BA (.220), and pretty much all of his other numbers are rock-solid. If he had the hype of Strasburg coming into the season he'd have been on this team before you could say Yovani Gallardo. But instead he remains an obscure afterthought no one could find a slot for.
Carpenter has been fine, although, like Lincecum, not his usual dominant self. He has an ERA over a run higher than Garcia's. He gets workhorse credit for more innings pitched, and posts more dominant strikeout numbers. And it might border on nitpicking in this case. But I consider stature a tie-breaker at best, and with the ERA gap this one wasn't a tie.
Check back later this week for the American League version!
Leave a Comment