Does the allstar game really matter now?

Thinking about the allstar game this year. Glad AL won in case the home town team pulls off a miracle and goes that far. Unlikely but better than knowing you will be road team.

But there were some interesting choices made during the game that showed it is still really just an exhibition and a time for the best players to all get together and be seen on one night.

Bryant playing his 4th game ever in LF? Really? With all the players in the NL you could not fashion a roster with 2 guys who could play LF? Did I really see a pinch runner for Trout? Now neither of these ended up hurting their respective team but do not tell me you are making a serious effort to win with moves like these.

If it is going to count the method of selection has to be designed so the best players are there. Sorry fans that means not using popular fan vote on internet. If it is going to count the best players need to start and they need to play entire game. Game needs to be scheduled so there are at least 2 days after the last game is played so you don't get aces like Scherzer eliminated from the game.

I've always thought van voting was stupid. It reduces what was once an honor (being named an all-star by your peers) to a marketing ploy and popularity contest.

the 1 player from every team is nonsense

But there were some interesting choices made during the game that showed it is still really just an exhibition and a time for the best players to all get together and be seen on one night.

The all-star game has pretty much been that since I was a kid. Considering I was a kid in the late 70's, it's been that way for a long time. So, to complain about it as a recent occurrence doesn't make sense. Also, unlike the players in the NFL Pro Bowl, at least most MLB players do put out considerable effort.

If it is going to count the method of selection has to be designed so the best players are there. Sorry fans that means not using popular fan vote on internet. If it is going to count the best players need to start and they need to play entire game.

This makes no sense and goes against the entire purpose of the All-Star game. The All-Star game is primarily for the fans. To take away fan votes on the internet when a large percentage of fans mostly watch games on TV or the internet would take participation in that game away from them, when fan participation is a primary purpose of the game. Secondly, the other primary purpose is for MLB to showcase its greatest players--who will get chosen by managers and players--and most popular players and increase its fan base and fan engagement. If the game played the 9 best position players the entire game and cut off internet fan voting, both those goals would be stifled.

the 1 player from every team is nonsense

The 1-player-from-every-team isn't "nonsense." It allows fans from every team, particularly the young ones, to see one of their best players at the All-Star game. Again, this is a game for all-fans, including the possible, new, and un-informed ones...not just the knowledgeable fans. Many fans wouldn't watch, care about, or enjoy the game if one of their own wasn't out there. so MLB is being both smart and fan-friendly with the 1-player rule.

I've always thought van voting was stupid. It reduces what was once an honor (being named an all-star by your peers) to a marketing ploy and popularity contest.

The all-star game is and has been for the fans, so fan voting isn't stupid; it works towards the whole purpose of the game. It makes the fans active participants in the game and lets the fans pick whom they want to be in the game. Also, being picked by the fans is a huge honor for the players, and many of them have said so. Not only that, many players still receive the honor of being picked by their peers, as many are. As to it "once" being different, as I said above, I voted as a kid in the 70's, so voting by the fans has been the norm for a long time.

Also, a big part of the game is marketing. It is an excellent means for MLB to show/market it's "product" to current and possible future fans and to reward current fans with a special exhibition of that product. So, fan voting isn't a "marketing ploy," it's an important part of a the vital marketing strategy the All-Star game partially is.

The 1-player from every team is nonsense. We all know the purpose, but it creates a bloated roster with marginal all-stars.

The 1-player from every team is nonsense. We all know the purpose, but it creates a bloated roster with marginal all-stars.

Since the 1-player rule has a logical purpose, and it does, it isn't nonsense. It certainly isn't nonsense for young kids to see one of their favorite players at the game, and not just many players they don't know. I'll take--and MLB will definitely take--an inflated roster with some marginal all-stars in exchange for the happiness and enjoyment young (and even older) fans get from seeing one of their own at the All-Star game.

I haven't watched an all star game in years. Prefer real baseball.

I haven't watched an all star game in years. Prefer real baseball.

Ditto. Same goes for every sport.

Thinking about the allstar game this year. Glad AL won in case the home town team pulls off a miracle and goes that far. Unlikely but better than knowing you will be road team.

But there were some interesting choices made during the game that showed it is still really just an exhibition and a time for the best players to all get together and be seen on one night.

Bryant playing his 4th game ever in LF? Really? With all the players in the NL you could not fashion a roster with 2 guys who could play LF? Did I really see a pinch runner for Trout? Now neither of these ended up hurting their respective team but do not tell me you are making a serious effort to win with moves like these.

If it is going to count the method of selection has to be designed so the best players are there. Sorry fans that means not using popular fan vote on internet. If it is going to count the best players need to start and they need to play entire game. Game needs to be scheduled so there are at least 2 days after the last game is played so you don't get aces like Scherzer eliminated from the game.

No it doesn't matter. It is a relic of days gone by with fewer teams and games not available on tv. It's all marketing gimmicks now instead of real stars playing a real game.