All-Star Selections

You've got Matt Holliday where I think you should have Matt Kemp.

Nevermind, I realize now that list is based on the current fan votes.

Your ballots are refreshing when compared to the popularity contest that is current fan voting, which in turn is determined by market size.

How can anyone not choose Jose Reyes for starting shortstop in NL.

The one choice I'd like to see defended here is Ryan Roberts at 3B in the NL. Roberts has a slash line of .251/.339/.433 playing in one of the best hitting environments in baseball. Chase Headley, the more popular BP choice, is at .299/.394/.403 playing in MLB's most-pitcher-friendly ballpark. Unless there is a chasm of difference defensively, and I don't believe there is, Headley is heads above Roberts.

I was looking forward to Jason Parks' vote for R.A. Dickey. I guess he didn't get a ballot this year.

A local sports talk show was debating who the Padres' all-star would be a few weeks ago and they were debating Heath Bell vs. Mike Adams. Headley never got brought up. He's the stealth candidate even is his own home town. In fairness, he's been on an absolute tear since that show was on, but still...

My recollection of the All-Star rosters of the 60's and 70's is that they were composed of players whose selections were based on their "bodies of work." Players were considered to be All-Stars based on their relative performance at their respective positions over their entire careers and not just the first 75 games of the current season. For example, Johnny Bench was an All-Star from 1968 through 1980. Yet, his performance in a couple of years -- 1971 and 1976 (age 28 season) -- were less than Bench-like. Still, I expected to see him starting for the NL since he was the best catcher of his generation. That's what I remember. As I enter my mid-50's, it's possible that my memory is fading or that the purpose of the All-Star Game has changed.

Wait a minute, Brennan Boesch is an All-Star according to Corey Dawkins? This needs some major explaining.

You should have a composite ballot based on your internal voting.

With a tip of the hat to Jason Collette....

Who Am I?

I have just a bit less WARP than Justin Upton in over 100 fewer PA and a TAv six points higher than Ryan Braun. If I qualified for the batting title, I'd be 4th in baseball in wOBA this year. Nothing new, since I'm 7th in wOBA since entering the majors in 2004, just a point behind both Miguel Cabrera and one of my current teammates. And I'm having the second best season of my career, a couple minor injuries aside, which will probably mean by season's end I'm the fifth best hitter in the last eight years.

Sadly, I'm underrated everywhere. Despite being the 7th best hitter in baseball the last 7.5 years, I was drafted, on average with the 18.6th pick in ESPN fantasy leagues this season. And the hometown fans under-appreciate me because I'm not a certain someone I hit behind. I'm underrated at BP, too, where I didn't get a single vote.

Huge Indians fan here....but not sure I buy all the Asdrubal love.

Jhonny Peralta has him beat in BA (meaningless though), OBP, SLG, and OPS. He's up in wOBA and RC+. He's tied in HRs and in WAR (fangraphs).

And you can't really use defense since Jhonny is tied or better in pretty much all defensive rankings.

Would like to know why Cabrera is getting all the love at SS in the AL.

I assume the people selecting Kershaw over Halladay to start just want some fresh blood and are trying to not pick "chalk"

I love Kershaw. But why on earth would anyone except Halladay start the ASG? I mean, no one on here would actually pick Kershaw over Doc to pitch Game 7 of the WS, would they?

I miss Joe Sheehan's take on the all-star stuff, better than this

The ASG is about who is having the best year to date, not who you would start in game 7 of the WS.

With that being said, why is there no love for Jurrjens? He has the lowest ERA in the major after last night and is tied for most wins. Yeah he's not the K's pitch like Halladay and Kershaw, but you can't argue with the results.

I'm not saying that he should be the one to start the ASG, but just wanted to know why he wasn't even considered as the starter by anyone. Any thoughts?

With the entire BP staff split amongst a bunch of third A.L. outfielders not named Josh Hamilton, they are, imo, putting way too much weight on first half 2011 performance. Hamilton is going strong and deserves that third spot as the mass of fans recognize. One for the masses over the elites. (Usually I side with the elites.)

The all-star game is a great honor. It is a measure by which we rate the greatness of players. It seems a shame to use only the first half of a season to decide who deserves such an honor. It is also more in the spirit of an all-star game to see the best vs. the best, rather than the hot vs. the hot.

rob, rob, rob

Danny Espinoza over Weeks ??? Puhleese!!

All-Star games are like fireworks displays. They can be very pretty to watch for a few minutes, but ultimately tend to get boring and repetitive, and they don't really mean anything.

I'd have enjoyed watching one of Braun/Berkman/Holliday play center field for a few innings, had that fan vote played out.

I used to like the All-Star Game. Johnny Callison hitting a homer in the 9th was exciting. Pete Rose crashing into Ray Fosse was memorable. Contrasting American League powerball vs. National League speed was interesting to watch. Willie Mays getting four or five ABs against AL star starting pitchers held my attention. Now, with players changing leagues all of the time, pitchers in for just one inning, nobody playing more than half a game....I just wish that they would put the All-Star game out of its misery. Same for the interminable Home Run Derby. Now that the game "means something", it's the suckiest event of the baseball calendar.
Why anyone should expect the public, who make Lady Gaga a superstar and "Meet The Fockers" a movie franchise, not ot mention electing certain nameless political leaders, should be expected to show intelligence in vting for an All-Star team is beyond me.
That's my 4th of July address.

Re: hot vs. hot (here because my Post Reply doesn't work) - going by the players who produced the best stats during the first two or three months of the season doesn't even do a good a job of getting you the players most likely to play the best at the all-star game. It has been shown right here in Baseball Prospectus that if a player seems to be on a hot streak, it doesn't increase his chances of continuing hot the next game. Unless you have a case where a player learned a new trick or is suffering an injury, the player's who's mean production is greater (considering context) over the last couple years (not lifetime) is more likely to do better at his next game than the player with a lower mean but coming off a hot streak.

Derek Jeter hasn't been hot since the Bush administration. But the media tells us that he's got edge, and the sheep follow.

A good half-season is not a "hot streak" Russell Martin had a hot streak in April and now he's in the .220s. Andre Ethier had a hot streak in April and now his production is mediocre at best for a corner outfielder. I mean, to produce over an 80-game period deserves more respect than calling it a hot streak. It's called the 2011 All-Star Game, accent on 2011. If I cared at all about this over-hyped, insanely-managed exhibition game, it's the players having a great 2011 that I want to see. History belongs in museums.

Skip if you are sick of this arguement - not really adding anything new here - just clarifying my point and refuting a part of dodgerken222's: Well, the "best" players do change from year to year. I also want to see the best players "now" - or for the year in which the game is played. I accept your point that 80 games is more than a streak. However, a) most votes are made long before that 80th game; b) 80 games is generally not as good as 180 games at determing who is best. Although, I agree the most recent 80 games should be worth more than 80 games from last year, but only about the same as the previous 160 games and about the same as the previous 320 games before then. There are authors here who can do the math more precisely, but my point is, getting the players who are the best right now - by whatever is the best way of measuring - is preferable to getting the guys who happened to produce the best stats in the first half of the all-star year. I would be very surprised if the odds are greater that Alex Gordon, Jacob Ellsbury, Adam Jones, Brennan Boesch (what?), Carlos Quentin, Matt Joyce, and Brett Gardner will have a better July than Josh Hamiliton. Odds are they won't even end up having a better 2011 - and that's what you want don't you - the best players of 2011? Derek Jeter is a straw man arguement. Off the top of my head, I support Asdrubal Cabrera's or Alexei Ramirez's or Yunel Escobar's selections over Jeter at this stage of his career.

It's sometimes quite amazing how much a player can decline from one year to the next, particularly in the twilight of his career. I recall one year when Mike Schmidt, the greatest third baseman ever, had such a terrible start in April and May that he retired before June. Then he was elected to the All-Star team. The problem could be solved if certain players (Hi Derek, Hi Russell) would simply announce that they do not deserve to be All-Stars in a particular year and decline the honor, even if elected. Oh, Selig and the media jackals would bray on about how the game belongs to the fans ad nauseum, but I think it would show great class on the players' part and set a great precedent. We finally have players and skippers going public about the pathetic quality of today's umpiring; the joke that has become the All-Star game should be next addressed.