In case you haven't noticed, the Royals have a campaign going to get the whole starting lineup to be the Royals roster. Currently, they lead in voting of 5 out of 9 spots. The craziest is Omar Infante, who is batting .237, is leading Altuve. Personally, I hope they do it, so mlb will realize what a farce fan voting has become, and will change the rules.

At one point they were leading in 7 positions.

quote:

---

In case you haven't noticed, the Royals have a campaign going to get the whole starting lineup to be the Royals roster. Currently, they lead in voting of 5 out of 9 spots. The craziest is Omar Infante, who is batting .237, is leading Altuve. Personally, I hope they do it, so mlb will realize what a farce fan voting has become, and will change the rules.

---

There is literally not a single statistical category in which Infante is better than Altuve. It'll be asinine if he gets selected to start over Altuve.

It was better when they had 8 positions. I was honestly hoping they got it because the way the game is down now is just stupid.

I've never understood why they let "fans" pick the players.

It's nice to let them vote, but the outcome from the fans should have very little significance.
Especially now given the Allstar game determines home field advantage.

the commish needs to step in. Nobody wants to see a bunch of Royals on TV

Royals fans are absolute morons.

I get that you like your team and you want to show pride, but you're screwing your own team over with this voting. In no way is a team full of royals the best team the AL can trot out to face the NL all stars. Which should concern you quite a bit when the right to play game 7 of the world series at home is on the line.


Of course, the royals lost Game 7 at home last year, so maybe they figure "eh, what the hell".

This 'All-Star team' only got 4 hits and 1 run off a rookie making his 9th start last night.

quote:

---

I've never understood why they let "fans" pick the players.

It's nice to let them vote, but the outcome from the fans should have very little significance.
Especially now given the Allstar game determines home field advantage.

---

MLB teams are a bunch of for-profit entertainment "companies". They are trying to make money- and make a lot of it- by selling a product to the public.

That's why MLB involves fans. I'm sure the number of clicks on their website fan voting creates is extraordinary, and I'm not sure it'd be so if fan voting was superfluous to the process. Likewise, I wouldn't underestimate the all-around importance of the public feeling like they're involved and important in some way beyond their wallet with the league.

Does it lead to perverse results sometimes? Perhaps yes. In other words, is it best for the league as a whole that a bunch of Royals are going to be in the All-Star game? Perhaps not.

But at least in Kansas City, this effort is contributing to a resurgence of the franchise and helping the Royals consolidate the excitement brought forth from last year's World Series run. To lift an organization that has struggled for decades is a big plus for the MLB powers that be.

I think that is the theory behind it, at least.

As an NL fan, I'm torn. On the one hand, I'd be happy that the AL would be completely out-matched. On the other hand, the baseball gods being what they are, if I find too much amusement in the situation, the NL will probably lose anyway.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I've never understood why they let "fans" pick the players.

It's nice to let them vote, but the outcome from the fans should have very little significance.
Especially now given the Allstar game determines home field advantage.

---

MLB teams are a bunch of for-profit entertainment "companies". They are trying to make money- and make a lot of it- by selling a product to the public.

That's why MLB involves fans. I'm sure the number of clicks on their website fan voting creates is extraordinary, and I'm not sure it'd be so if fan voting was superfluous to the process. Likewise, I wouldn't underestimate the all-around importance of the public feeling like they're involved and important in some way beyond their wallet with the league.

Does it lead to perverse results sometimes? Perhaps yes. In other words, is it best for the league as a whole that a bunch of Royals are going to be in the All-Star game? Perhaps not.

But at least in Kansas City, this effort is contributing to a resurgence of the franchise and helping the Royals consolidate the excitement brought forth from last year's World Series run. To lift an organization that has struggled for decades is a big plus for the MLB powers that be.

I think that is the theory behind it, at least.

---

You're thinking WAY too much into it.

It's a ploy by the KC fans to get as many of their players in. Once everyone realized that it worked and it may actually happen then NL fans hopped on board and said 'Hey if we keep voting these chumps in we'll win the ASG'

It's a joke and an embarrassment to the game. The only reason I want it to happen is to bring light to the issue. It would be a HUGE eyesore and be the talk of every sports talk show nationwide. I actually hope it happens and they all only play the top half of the first. Oh OK well you started now you get yanked for the real All Stars.

It's got nothing to do with lifting up a team that's been down. MLB doesn't do that. Actually, they tend to stick with their big market teams and the little guys get the short end more often than not.

Mike Shannon and John Rooney (Cardinals radio PBP and color men) said during a broadcast a couple of weeks back that Cincinnati fans did the same thing back in 1957 and that MLB stepped in and replaced some of the starters with "more qualified" players. The one specific player I remember that they mentioned was Willie Mays... the fans didn't vote for him but MLB made him a starter. They mentioned another name or two but I don't remember who.

They (Shannon and Rooney) also said that MLB took voting away from the fans for a number of years after all of this happened.

Moose joins his teammates.