Examining a Red(man) Hot Issue

Major League Baseball has been taking some major league slams since the All-Star teams were announced Sunday night. In addition to the usual snubbed lists, sportswriters are throwing a fit because of the selection of the Royals' Redman.

This has caused for many to rise up against the rule that there needs to be one player in the ASG from each team. I highly disagree with this, and I feel that I come from a standpoint that allows me to speak about this rule with experience: I'm an Indians' fan.

Over the last decade the Indians have gone through times where they've had a handful of guys play in the ASG and there's been years where they had one. Last year Bob Wickman got his first and only All-Star appearance because of the one-rep rule.

I can honestly say that if the Indians didn't have a player in the game, I wouldn't watch it.

Word of Warning: Xinoph if you're reading this, skip the next paragraph or you may just blow right up.

I think I speak for most baseball fans when I say that I do not want to watch an AL team made up of all Yankees and Red Sox vs an NL team made up of all... oh wait... the NL would still be pretty much the same. I'm not saying that because I think the Yankees and Red Sox have the best 30 or so people in the league, I'm saying that because that's what it would end up being because that perception exists - just look at the voting.

Every team has at least one player that is worthy of the All-Star game. It's professional baseball, it's impossible that that it wouldn't happen. Adding that one shred of interest for teams like Tampa, KC, Pittsburgh and last year Cleveland allows thousands of more people enjoy All-Star game festivities.

All of that being said, I understand why this uproar has happened. Redman was not the right choice for a rep from KC. It should be Sweeney or Berroa. Those two players - while not having spectacular seasons themselves - mean a whole lot more than the team than journeyman Redman.

I think the blame needs to not be placed on the rule, but on the manager who was in charge of making the picks: Ozzie Guillen.

Knowing Guillen's history of causing trouble for no good reason, I have a very strong feeling that Guillen made this pick just to cause problems for MLB. He was put in a position where he could make the league look bad and he took the opportunity. I'm surprised that the media - who's made Guillen second to only Mark Cuban as their favorite target - hasn't caught on to this quicker.

Date

Mon 07/03/06, 6:28 pm EST

Enable Comment Auto-Refresher

ASwaffAll-American

1243 days ago

Score 1

Every single year their are fits of rage over the one player per team rule, but the rule never changes, because almost every team has a year where they only have one rep. And the rep isn't always as bad as Redman, but there are years where a team has only one player that, while good, probably wouldn't have made it on strict comparison to another player.

While I agree that Redman shouldn't have been the choice, my agreement with you pretty much stops there. Much as I dislike Guillen, I don't think he's just trying to cause problems for the MLB. I think he's a dufus that made a bad pick. I also don't think it should have been Sweeney. There would have been even more outrage over the selection of a guy that has 68 at-bats and a .176 average, particularly playing a position like first base where the AL is so deep (Ortiz, Konerko, Thome, Hafner, Giambi, Teixeira, Shelton, and so on). Considering the lack of depth at second base in the AL, I maintain that Grudzielanek would have been the best pick. DeJesus has better stats, but again, it's so hard to take an outfielder in a league that is so stacked with outfield talent.

Permalink | Reply

CoreyisarealboyMajor Leaguer

1243 days ago

Score 0

I think the one-rep rule would work spectacularly if the voting weren't a popularity contest. There are probably a couple guys on the All-Star team that arguably shouldn't be there vs. some guys that were left off that should be. The Redman selection was caused by the ridiculous popularity voting. If some undeserving people wouldn't have gotten voted in, then that opens up the spots for the deserving people and the one-rep people. Now some All-Star caliber talent is going to be watching from their televisions because most fans are ignorant and greedy.

Permalink | Reply

ASwaffAll-American

1243 days ago

Score 2

Well, a little cronyism by Guillen also contributed to it. I think people would be complaining a little less about Redman being on the team if Liriano, Schilling, Mussina or Verlander had been selected over Buehrle.

As for Guillen's cute "play better next year" comment, how about picking players who are playing better THIS YEAR!? This is what bugs me about the guy. People are asking why people didn't get selected, and he's mocking them as if it was their level of play that prevented them from making it to the All Star Game. Seriously, he wants Verlander, Liriano, Mussina and Schilling to play better next year? Shouldn't he be telling Buehrle right now that HE should play better next year?

Permalink

ASwaffAll-American

1243 days ago

Score 1

I also have to contribute it a little to the players voting on Troy Glaus. What do they see in him? His 22 HR and 57 RBI? Sorry, but I'm gonna have to say big whoop, when the guy is batting .247, has 73 strikeouts and already has more GIDPs than he did in any of the last three seasons (11).

Permalink | Reply