HORRIBLE All Star Rosters

[free2131]

Yeah, I almost didn't include him, but since my list turned into all AL catchers, I figured I might as well add him in.

Besides, I'd still put him in over Tek .

[HoustonGM]

The game is all-star game, not best-player game. Jeeze.

And that is entirely dependent on what you think an "All Star" is.

I think an "All Star" is one of the best players in the league.

[free2131]

The game is all-star game, not best-player game. Jeeze.

Fine, then make the game a meaningless exhibition game.

Until that happens, only the BEST players should be in.

[filihok]

I'd agree with this if the All Star Game wasn't used so heavily in Hall of Fame cases

Don't blame poor HOF voting on the All Star game. That's a HOF problem, not an AS problem.

AND if it didn't have meaning. As it stands, it's more than just an exhibition game. It's a game with meaning that is treated like a popularity contest. If it's going to be a popularity contest, get rid of the meaning of it and go back to when it was solely an exhibition game.

A regular season game has meaning right? You don't think that teams make personel decisions based on player popularity? Barry B*nds, for the most blatant example. The Giants knew B*nds wasn't condusive to winning last season but they sure had him on the team.

I don't understand all this hoopla over the AS team. I'm fairly certain the during the W.S. no one is going to be calling out VTek if the NL wins the series in the bottom of the ninth at home

[HoustonGM]

Don't blame poor HOF voting on the All Star game. That's a HOF problem, not an AS problem.

I know, which I've acknowledged in this thread.

Barry B*nds, for the most blatant example. The Giants knew B*nds wasn't condusive to winning last season but they sure had him on the team.

When it comes to on-field wins, Barry Bonds is very condusive to winning.

I don't understand all this hoopla over the AS team. I'm fairly certain the during the W.S. no one is going to be calling out VTek if the NL wins the series in the bottom of the ninth at home

True. It's just something to talk about for a few days.

[filihok]

When it comes to on-field wins, Barry Bonds is very condusive to winning.

In a short-sighted statistical way, yeah. In a he tore the team up from the inside way, I don't think so.

[belial]

And that is entirely dependent on what you think an "All Star" is.

I think an "All Star" is one of the best players in the league.

Star usually means popular. Is it possible what you picture an all star is isn't really accurate?

[HoustonGM]

In a short-sighted statistical way, yeah. In a he tore the team up from the inside way, I don't think so.

There's no evidence that Barry Bonds was the huge clubhouse monster that the media makes him out to be.

Star usually means popular. Is it possible what you picture an all star is isn't really accurate?

No, because there is no one definition of an "all star" when it comes to sports. Seriously, can't you just accept that there are differing opinions? It's not something with a yes/no answer. It's entirely dependent on each individual person's idea of what makes an all star player.

[filihok]

I would say there is some evidence.

The Giants as an organization haven't exactly said one word otherwise. Nobody's sticking up for him that I've heard.

I think I recall it being known that the Giants didn't want him back this year. Not didn't want him back at $20mil or $15mil or $10mil or $5mil or $1mil. Didn't want him back. At all. That's some evidence.

[HoustonGM]

I know. And no other team has signed him for even the minimum. I think there's collusion going on, because Barry Bonds can pretty obviously help a number of teams, especially if it's for the major league minimum. The MLB doesn't want Barry Bonds in baseball anymore. They've already reaped the benefits of his monstrous peak, and now want him out so that they can look like the good guys in the steroid mess, since nobody will hold them accountable for the role they played in creating and fostering the steroid-driven environment.

It has little or nothing to do with his popularity or his effect on the clubhouse, and everything to do with making a statement.

[koolzach1]

You know... Now that you look at it, Varitek's defense is enough to justify his .218 batting average, 7 homers, 27 RBI's, .300 OBP, and .358 SLG%.

I mean, did you know that he catches runners stealing 18% of the time? I mean, sure he maybe tied for LAST, but oh well... he's a stud defensive catcher. I mean, sure... His catcher ERA is only middle of the pack, but oh well... he's a stud defensive catcher. I mean, sure he has ALWAYS had experience, and great talent throwing to him from the pitchers mound, but ya know... stud defensive catcher. Though, judging by stats, he isn't quite the best defensive catcher, a good one, but nothing special, even so... he belongs in the Hall! He also has these intangibles that NO ONE else has!!!!!

-Sarcasm ended-

[metsguy234]

I know. And no other team has signed him for even the minimum. I think there's collusion going on, because Barry Bonds can pretty obviously help a number of teams, especially if it's for the major league minimum. The MLB doesn't want Barry Bonds in baseball anymore. They've already reaped the benefits of his monstrous peak, and now want him out so that they can look like the good guys in the steroid mess, since nobody will hold them accountable for the role they played in creating and fostering the steroid-driven environment.

It has little or nothing to do with his popularity or his effect on the clubhouse, and everything to do with making a statement.

I love how the MLBPA, which Barroids refused to join, sued MLB for him because of collusion.