We Asked MLB Players about All-Star Voting and Whether an Exhibition Game Should Impact the World Series

When it comes to picking starters for the All-Star Game, Russell Martin has a radical idea. It is unlikely to gain much traction, but here goes.

"Maybe instead of voting for the starters, the fans could vote for the reserves, and have the players and coaches vote for the starters," said the Blue Jays catcher.

Martin has been to four All-Star Games, once as a starter, chosen by the fans, and three times as a reserve, chosen by players, managers and coaches.

Players know best who should start in the game, said Martin and several other players interviewed for this article.

"I feel like coaches and players probably have the best feel to know who is more deserving," Martin said. "Fans can be influenced by one of their favourites, and they just vote for their favourite, even if that guy's having an off-year. There could be somebody in a smaller market that's having a tremendous season and he doesn't really get much attention. You see it often. They usually end up going, anyway, but if someone on a smaller-market team has the best numbers that year, he's the one that should be starting."

Case in point: Washington Nationals' second baseman Daniel Murphy, whose .348 batting average leads the majors. The fan vote favoured Ben Zobrist of the Cubs, who is having a good year but clearly benefited from an aggressive voting campaign in the Windy City. Six Cubs won the balloting at their positions.

His peers voted Murphy onto the team as a reserve.

Every year, the All-Star Game brings out the critics in droves. The fan voting isn't fair, they say. Fans in some cities boost bloc voting (Cubs this year, Royals last year). Often, deserving players are snubbed, either by the fans or by the manager, who must make sure every team has a player in the game, deserving or not. The rosters are too big; this year 79 players, including injury replacements, can call themselves all-stars.

And why should a mid-summer exhibition game determine home-field advantage for the World Series?

I discussed these issues with six players representing three teams and a former MVP and manager who now works as a colour commentator.

If there was a consensus, it was that any voting system has its flaws and that the current scheme probably works as well as any. But while Martin offered several ideas for change that might be considered extreme, my interviews also revealed some nuanced appraisals of the current system.

Besides Martin, my interviewees were Josh Donaldson, Troy Tulowitzki and R.A. Dickey of the Blue Jays, Ian Kinsler of the Tigers, Eric Hosmer of the Royals and former player Kirk Gibson, a colour commentator on Tigers games.

Hosmer is a first-time all-star. Except for Gibson, all of the others have All-Star Game experience.

While those I interviewed generally agreed that the players are the most qualified to judge their peers' performance, they also acknowledged that fan voting is important.

"It brings a lot of attention to MLB and creates a lot of interest," Kinsler said. "Anything that can generate interest for the game is good."

At the same time, the players' vote creates a measure of protection against a standout player—Murphy, for example—being left out altogether.

"I think letting the fans do it is a cool thing," said Hosmer, who benefited from another robust response from Kansas City fans. But, he added: "The players should have some input. They're experiencing it first-hand."

To Martin's point about small-market snubs, Colorado Rockies fans offer third baseman Nolan Arenado as a classic example. He lost to the Cubs' Kris Bryant in the fan vote, although it's tough to mount a persuasive argument against Bryant. Arenado's peers made him a reserve.

Donaldson collected a record number of fan votes last year and started at third base for the American League, thanks in part to a vigorous cross-Canada marketing campaign by the Blue Jays. This year, without a similar campaign behind him, Donaldson was picked in the players' vote as a reserve after Baltimore's Manny Machado won the starting job.

Both Donaldson and Machado are enjoying banner seasons. Statistically, their race is tight, although Donaldson holds an edge in on-base percentage, homers and OPS.

Donaldson is not complaining. He agrees that the players themselves are the better judges of peer performance, but adds: "Players can be a little biased as well at times."

He explained: "There might be a series where somebody comes in and really does a number to our team, so you have a good memory of that. And maybe somebody who deserves to be on the all-star team came in and didn't have a great series, so they don't really stick out as much. I think you're going to find weaknesses in both systems."

Kinsler has been to four All-Star Games, each time as a reserve voted in by the players. This year, he lost out to the Jays' Michael Saunders in the final fan vote for the last AL roster spot.

Saunders had the Jays' #VoteCaptainCanada machine behind him. Kinsler had no such help from the Tigers, whose market size and proximity to other MLB cities would make it tough to mount such a campaign, anyway.

Sitting at his locker adjacent to Miguel Cabrera, an 11-time all-star and twice an MVP, Kinsler said the player vote is vital.

"Absolutely," he said. "I mean, Miguel wouldn't be on the team if there was no player vote. You have to leave some of the decisions up to the players.

"I think the system is OK the way it's set up. I've been left off the all-star team probably two or three times in my career. That's just the way it goes. I haven't played in a market as big as Boston or Toronto, where they have a whole country behind them, or New York. That's the breaks."

Cabrera lost to Hosmer in the fan vote for AL first baseman. Their statistics are similar, although Cabrera holds an edge in on-base and slugging percentages. One can't be certain, of course, but if players made the call, Cabrera would be the likely starter, based in part on his superb 14-year track record.

To that point, some critics say a player's body of work, not just his current year's statistics, should be considered when choosing an all-star.

"An All-First-Ten-Weeks-Stats Game isn't worth having, but it's what drives two thirds of the process now," wrote Joe Sheehan, a Sports Illustrated writer who also publishes a daily baseball newsletter.

Sheehan also criticizes the players for ignoring modern analytics when they vote.

"We get grown men using the best analytical tools of 1931 to make their selections," he wrote last week. "Until the process is made better, it is silly to argue against the outcomes."

Dickey, who pitched for the National League in the 2012 game, sounds like a player who is disinclined to argue about the process.

"I know the voting is not completely fair, based on statistical evaluation alone," Dickey said. "There should be some guys that make it that don't, and there's some guys voted in by the fans that probably wouldn't have made it otherwise. All that being said, I've always viewed the All-Star Game as a game that's specifically for the fans. Sometimes I don't think it's a collective of necessarily the best baseball players in the world."

Now, to that World Series connection, probably the issue that generates the most outrage from critics.

Before 2003, the game was an exhibition contest, pure and simple, and a manager's priority was to use as many players as possible, with the lesser lights on the field at the end. Then, the 2002 game had to be halted with the score tied because the teams ran out of players. Ergo, then-commissioner Bud Selig tweaked the rules and decided that the winner of the All-Star Game gets home-field advantage in the World Series.

Many baseball pundits find the policy irrational. I certainly do; an exhibition in which a manager cannot use his best players for the whole game—and in which pressure still exists to exhaust the 34-man roster—should not decide home-field advantage for the most important games of the year.

The players I spoke to did not share my righteous indignation.

For example, when I asked Tulowitzki—a veteran of seven All-Star Games—whether impacting the World Series that way is a good idea, he replied: "Sure, why not? I've played in some All-Star Games. When that rule came about, it brought a different element to that game where you took it more seriously. More strategy for the managers. It wasn't just try to get out of there with no one hurt."

Gibson, who hit an iconic home run in 1988 but never made an all-star team, has been involved in Major League Baseball in various capacities since 1978. During his playing career, the game was purely an exhibition. He likes the change.

"I like the way our All-Star Game is, in that there's competition and a reason that you want to win it," he said. "I personally like that a lot. The fact that something rides on it encourages the competition.

"You look at hockey, basketball and football. I just believe our All-Star Game is more competitive and I like that aspect of it. I'm not saying theirs in wrong. You make your choice of what you want to do."

Dickey's choice is a game where the competition begets a consequence.

"I happen to like that," he said. "I was part of the winning 2012 (National League) team. (Manager) Tony La Russa gave a pretty neat speech at the beginning of it, and that really helped to make it a competitive environment for us in what otherwise would not have been that. I think it makes it a more exciting, more meaningful competition."

Which brings us back to Russ Martin and his notion about the players picking the starters. If fans cast the most important votes, he said, then the game should not influence the World Series outcome.

"If you want to just make it for fun and get the fans involved, then don't make it meaningful," he said. "Keep it fun. I don't know why it needs to be that way."

But then he offered some ideas to make the overall all-star experience more fun.

"I'd like to see more skill challenges, like they have in basketball and hockey," he said. "Just show off guys' talents, like catchers throwing to second, outfielders throwing from the outfield, maybe the fast guys running the bases. That kind of stuff is fun."

What about the home run derby? Fun, right?

"It's too long," Martin said. "It could just be shorter. Give guys a couple rounds each and that's all you need to see."

Spoken like a lot of weary fans who press the mute button every time Chris Berman yells "back-back-back."

Never mind fun, GMs and managers are unlikely to support a skills competition because of the inherent injury risk. Already some sluggers refuse to participate in the home run derby for that reason.

Donaldson competed in the derby the past two years. On Monday, he will watch it from the sidelines after a series of relatively minor but irksome injuries. The risk, however small, isn't worth it.

"This year I've been kind of battling to stay healthy all year long," he said. "I feel like I'm starting to get there. I enjoyed the process in the past years' home run derby. I kind of just wanted to sit back and enjoy one versus always competing in it."

So, like the all-star voting, you won't always see the most prolific home-run hitters in the derby. As the players I spoke to said, every process has its flaws. Accept that, and if you don't like it, don't watch.