All-star appearances in HOF arguments: pointless?

[Rory Sparrow]

Baseball's All-Star game is pointless, no matter what Bud Selig tries. Players make it based on reputation, fans get to vote the players in, Tony LaRussa only picks Cardinals players, etc. etc. etc. But add in the fact that the baseball all-star game takes place in midseason, and you have a messed up situation.

So why do people mention a player's all-star appearances as a point of merit for making the Hall of Fame? The whole process is so messed up to begin with, and then some very good players get overlooked for Cooperstown because they don't have enough all-star appearances on their resume.

The Bill Madlock Situation


Bill Madlock led the league in hitting 4 times, yet he was an all-star only 3 times. In 1976 he batted .339 with a .412 OBP and a .500 SLG, yet he did not make the all-star game. He was beaten out by Pete Rose (.323/.404/.450) and Ron Cey (.277/.386/.462). Oh, and Mike Schmidt was also on the 1976 all-star team, and he would go on to appear on the 1989 all-star team with a .203 batting average.


The Ken Schrom Incident


Ken Schrom was a below-average pitcher who hung around for a few years. He won 51 games, lost 51 games, walked 320 batters, struck out 371 batters, and had an ERA slightly below 5. So why are we mentioning him? Because he was an all-star in 1986, despite finishing with a 4.84 ERA for the middling Cleveland Indians, while Jack Morris was left off the team despite going 21-8 with a 3.27 ERA, 15 CGs, and 6 shutouts.

[JosMin]

Yeah, the All-Star angle is an interesting one. I've been putting it in the same talks with some of the former numbers we've considered "milestones," like 3,000 hits, 500 homers, etc. Think of a guy like Johnny Damon. He's fifth on the active list for hits with 2,723, so I could definitely see him reaching 3,000 with two more complete seasons. But outside of that number, with a few other solid ones (400+ career steals, a chance at top 10 in runs scored, a career batting average of .286), does that mean he's a Hall of Famer?

I have these debates all the time with friends -- if there was never a point where somebody mentions a player and I can say, "Yeah, that guy was definitely one of THE BEST at his position for at least 8 years," I just can't put them in that conversation. A lot of current guys fall into this category: Vladimir Guerrero (who's been my favorite player for a long time), Todd Helton, Jim Thome, Mike Mussina, Lance Berkman, etc. It's definitely a cool debate.

But yeah, I agree that All-Star games should mean absolutely zilch when considering a person's HoF candidacy.

[Rice Cube]

There are some HOFers whose All-Star appearances are definitely justified, but I agree that in the grand scheme of things, you look at their career numbers and not so much how many times they got into a meaningless game. In the end, the ASG is just a popularity contest that's flooded with Yankees and Red Sox anyway.

[Cloud 9]

It should hold very little weight. It's just a nice plus on their resumes for voters.

[FirstTimer]

I think the bigger picture is that Ken Schrom wasn't making 10 consecutive All Star games. I would think a guy making multiple All Star games would mean a lot more in proper context and is worth more of a discussion than "Pff All Star games mean jack, Ken Schrom made one once". Kind of the same principle behind while GG's may be flawed they can give an overall feel and if a guy wins a bunch of them it's more than likely telling you something relevant to the bigger picture and shouldn't be disregarded because Jeter has won a couple he shouldn't have.

I just think completely discounting a guy like Ken Griffey Jr's 13 All Star games or Ron Santo's 9 All Star games as an accomplishment because Ken Schrom made one is rather odd and too large a step to take

[CODE_BLUE56]

its all about context...in some cases alot of all star games shows prolonged elite play...or it could be because the person is a fan favorite or flashy

i think this especially applies to basketball...where it seems AI,T Mac, and Yao are always in the all star game

but a guy like kareem who had a lot of all star games was a testament to his consistent great play

[X-Factor]

Originally Posted by FirstTimer

I think the bigger picture is that Ken Schrom wasn't making 10 consecutive All Star games. I would think a guy making multiple All Star games would mean a lot more in proper context and is worth more of a discussion than "Pff All Star games mean jack, Ken Schrom made one once". Kind of the same principle behind while GG's may be flawed they can give an overall feel and if a guy wins a bunch of them it's more than likely telling you something relevant to the bigger picture and shouldn't be disregarded because Jeter has won a couple he shouldn't have.

I just think completely discounting a guy like Ken Griffey Jr's 13 All Star games or Ron Santo's 9 All Star games as an accomplishment because Ken Schrom made one is rather odd and too large a step to take

First Timer makes the truth sexy.

[Jntg4]

Joe Schwenn (better known by the alias JoeCawks): All-Star Games should be the sole method of judgement for entry to the Hall of Fame.

Rationale:

Spoiler

The White Sox had 2 All-Stars, the Cubs only had 1.

[Rory Sparrow]

Originally Posted by FirstTimer

I think the bigger picture is that Ken Schrom wasn't making 10 consecutive All Star games. I would think a guy making multiple All Star games would mean a lot more in proper context and is worth more of a discussion than "Pff All Star games mean jack, Ken Schrom made one once". Kind of the same principle behind while GG's may be flawed they can give an overall feel and if a guy wins a bunch of them it's more than likely telling you something relevant to the bigger picture and shouldn't be disregarded because Jeter has won a couple he shouldn't have.

I just think completely discounting a guy like Ken Griffey Jr's 13 All Star games or Ron Santo's 9 All Star games as an accomplishment because Ken Schrom made one is rather odd and too large a step to take

To use a tired metaphor, I think you are missing the forest for the trees.

The point isn't "Griffey made 13 all-star games, but that doesn't mean anything". The point is that for guys like Bill Madlock and Jack Morris who missed out on appearing in 10+ all-star games wasn't really through any fault of their own. You shouldn't look at a guy's HOF resume and dismiss it because he only made the all-star game 4 or 5 times.

[brett05]

As helps but shouldnt hurt