Should Bryce Harper and Mike Trout be All-Stars this year?
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Should Bryce Harper and Mike Trout be All-Stars this year?
Collapse
X
-
As of today. Trout definitely. Harper no, but very close.
If you based being an All-Star on how one plays the game, then they should be the top vote getters!
I don't see how anyone can justify trout not being an All-Star with his numbers and defense. Dude is the best player in MLB for the last few weeks."I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."
Comment
-
As a fan, I took a much longer time horizon and would have argued that Harper and Trout in no way deserved to go to the All-Star game this year. Now that baseball consumes my day-to-day world, I can relate much better to the perspective that wants to see the best stars of RIGHT NOW, even if they don't have the track record or may flame out tomorrow without leaving much of an impression. When you are thinking about this stuff so much every day, a month or two seems like an eternity."Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.'"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mithrandir View PostAs of today. Trout definitely. Harper no, but very close.
If you based being an All-Star on how one plays the game, then they should be the top vote getters!
I don't see how anyone can justify trout not being an All-Star with his numbers and defense. Dude is the best player in MLB for the last few weeks.
From a marketing standpoint the decision to make them All-Stars would make even more sense.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JudeBaldo View PostWhy? He's the best player on his team.
From a marketing standpoint the decision to make them All-Stars would make even more sense.
My very close comment was mainly due to the marketing effect of having Harper on the team."I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mithrandir View PostI forgot about that ridiculous player from every team rule. But what about Gio?
My very close comment was mainly due to the marketing effect of having Harper on the team.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cavebird View PostThere's also that Strasburg guy. I think a few people may have heard of him. The Nats don't have to worry about being a one-player team this year; they are leading a tough division for a reason."I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."
Comment
-
Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe asked 55 people in baseball if they'd rather have Bryce Harper or Mike Trout. The final tally: Harper 25, Trout 24, six undecided. Athletics GM Billy Beane was one of the six on the fence and likely had the best quote of anyone. "Beatles or Stones? They’re both great, aren’t they?"
Comment
Comment