Strasburg is a(n) (All-)Star
So apparently there is great debate over whether Strasburg should go to this year’s All-Star Game or not. Given the givens, I don’t understand why. He clearly should go. Let me ’splain:
At this writing, his YTD (and indeed career) stats: 5G (all starts), 2-2 W/L, 31.2IP, 2.27 ERA (183 ERA+), 1.011 WHIP, 48 K, 7 BB, 13.6 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 6.9 K/BB. Beyond the numbers: He is a star. Stars should be in the All-Star Game.
Let me address the “yeah, buts” that I’ve heard so far:
First, he hasn’t pitched enough. Well, IIRC, he would indeed have the fewest starts for an ASG starting pitcher. Okay, *somebody’s* got to - and this kid is clearly deserving of that “honor”. If the Nats weren’t holding him back in the minors simply to delay the arb clock, he *would’ve* had “enough” starts (whatever “enough” is). Next.
Second, he’s only a .500 pitcher. I trust I don’t have to address *that* idiocy in this forum. But just in case I do, I’ll simply say this. He’s .500 - and his team is 10 games under .500 when he doesn’t pitch. Next.
Third, a more-deserving player will be left home. Really? The fans vote for the non-pitching starters, and routinely choose “less-deserving” players. When MLB moves to a stats-based formula for deciding who is chosen to play in the All-Star Game get back to me. That hasn’t happened yet. Why has MLB not taken the vote from the fans (even though “the game counts”)? Because it is still an exhibition game… for the fans. The fans want to see this guy pitch (and rightfully so). Next.
Fourth, he’s not the most-deserving National. Heh-heh… that’s a good one. As we all know, at least one National has to be there. Spare me your Matt Capps and his 22 saves… cuz in 35.2 IP, he’s got a 3.28 ERA (126 ERA+), 1.43 WHIP, 31 K and 7 BB. And nobody else on this team is even remotely close to Capps as being “deserving”. Next.
Fifth, but… but… but… well, it’s *not* an exhibition. It has meaning. The winning league gets home-field advantage in the WS! Fine. Give me at least 12 pitchers that you’d rather have throwing an inning or two right now if you’re on the NL team. Hell… give me just half of that, give me six. Next.
Bottom line: The kid is one of those rare athletes who’s actually lived up to the seemingly unrealistic hype that preceded him. Understandably, Nationals fans show up in droves to see him pitch at home - but also, opposing fans show up in droves to see him pitch on the road. He’s a star. He is (and officially should be) an All-Star.
I have spoken.
July 6th, 2010 at 9:51 am
No, no , no.
Strasburg gives every indication of being a future star. But to date, his career consist of one good month. His performance has undeniably been impressive, but the sample size remains too small to rate him an all-star. Let’s see how he does on his second, third and fourth circuits through the league, after batters have had the same chance to dissect his performance as he has theirs. On paper, you’s have to conclude that he’ll fare well. But they don’t play the game on paper, they play the game on grass. Or artificial turf. But mostly grass.
July 6th, 2010 at 10:29 am
I understand that argument - I do. But, as expected (see above), the Nats closer, Matt Capp, was selected. In roughly the same amount of innings, Strasburg has out-performed Capp. I do stand by everything I initially wrote - but specifically, I’m saying that since we have the “every team has to be represented rule”, Strasburg indeed earned that selection as the Nats representative.
Can anyone tell me with a straight face that Matt Capp was more deserving of an All-Star selection than Strasburg? I’d truly love to hear that argument. Even if you insist that in a vacuum, Strasburg shouldn’t go due to small sample size - then at the very least, outside the vacuum, I submit you must concede that he’s a better choice than Matt Capp… right now.
July 6th, 2010 at 11:45 am
That’s a good point; I haven’t actually bothered to look at the Nationals’ roster, but its entirely possible that the biggest contribution they could make to an all-star team would be a bucket of balls. In which case, I wouldn’t object to sending Strasburg in place of an at-least-equally undeserving warm body.
July 6th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
And… if the NL (and AL) truly want to field a team that can win the game, and thus gain them home-field advantage in the WS (which I personally detest, fwiw), then isn’t Strasburg *far* more likely to help that effort than Capp?
July 13th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
If they want to continue to make the game a farce, then he should be chosen. But if they want to keep the integrity of the game (such as it is), they should show respect to the position players who have played in 80+ games (or starting pitchers who have made 14+ starts, or relievers who have been played a good number of games; you get my point). A guy with 5 starts isn’t an all-star. To your point, he probably will be. But not quite yet.
As an aside - if they really want to “make it count”, they should do away with the stupid rule of one player from each team. If the NL is truly trying to win the game, why should they have to have a fucking pirate on the team, over an otherwise worthy player from ATL, PHI, STL, etc?
July 14th, 2010 at 2:51 pm
And the inconsistency (or utter hypocrisy) with which this event is run only serves to buttress my general point: Strasburg should’ve been there. The All-Star Game has integrity? What gave you that impression? Kevin Youkilis will end up top-5 in the MVP voting, yet he wasn’t selected. Spare me the “integrity”. And Youk’s on my mind as a Red Sox fan, obviously. Annually there are *countless* examples of deserving players left off, and undeserving players going.
If Strasburg is “undeserving”, it’s only cuz his team was too cheap to bring him up sooner (i.e. delay the arb clock). Why should that be held against him? He would’ve helped the NL more than most pitchers selected - I don’t think that’s in dispute. He was a far better candidate than the Nats rep, Matt Capp - I don’t think that’s in dispute. The fans would’ve loved to have seen him, even for only an inning - I don’t think that’s in dispute.
Yes, I’m picking and choosing which “factors” to consider in asserting his All-Star status - and isn’t that the point? Until/unless they actually come up with a consistent (and fair) means of establishing what an “All-Star” is… Stephen Strasburg wouldn’t have even been *close* to the “most undeserving” All-Star this season, much less in history.
He should’ve been selected.
July 16th, 2010 at 9:13 am
Btw, saw articles noting that this year’s ASG received a very low viewership, and it was pointed out that the 1976 ASG was the highest-rated and most-watched. Left unsaid is what I believe to be the most likely reason for that: rookie pitching sensation, Mark Fydrich.
But, no… no… definitely would’ve been a “bad” idea to put rookie pitching sensation, Stephen Strasburg, in this year’s ASG. Right.