From: athornto@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (Alexander William Thornton)
Subject: Re: How to select All-Stars
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Reply-To: athornto@ics.uci.edu (Alexander William Thornton)
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
Date: 12 Jan 93 23:30:14 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <79867@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt1490d@prism.gatech.EDU (Gintas Jazbutis) writes:
>
>How should we determine who is on the all-star team?
>Is fan voting for the starters the best way?
>
>
>I think it's fine the way it is.
>Granted, some fan voting decisions look stupid.
>
>
>This argument always comes up in baseball balloting:
>
>"Player A (who is having a sub-par year at the end of a
>Hall of Fame career) was voted in, while player B (a 12-year
>chump who had a hot first half, and who subsequently reverts
>to chump level anyway) was not even on the team!  Oh, the
>injustice of it all."
>
>Clearly player A is the star--he is well known, popular, and
>has had a stellar career.  He will be enshrined in a sports temple.
>The other will coach minor league ball and never be heard from again.
>
>
>
>Jaz
>--
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  The problem with modern times is that    |  Jaz
>  stupidity has started thinking.          |  Georgia Tech
>          --Jean Cocteau                   |  gt1490d@prism.gatech.edu

All of this hinges upon how you look at the All-Star Game in the first place.
There are two main ways you could determine how a player should be on the team
in any given sport:

1> The player at the position having the best year at the time.
2> The most popular player at the position at the time.

   You can't have it both ways.  With fan ballotting, you are subjecting your-
self to #2, just as you could call a Presidential election nothing more than a
popularity contest if you really dissected the issue (just that the stakes are
higher).
   #2 is the most popular means for a wide variety of people, because everybody
likes to think that they have a voice in their favorite sport.  However, purist
fans tend to get rather philosophical about the whole thing (i.e. "This player
'deserves' to start for the All-Star team, because he's knocking down 26.7 pts.
a game, but he's only fifth in the ballotting!").
   Clearly, the way the league can pump the whole thing for the most hype and
make the most money is to get people involved, and when you get a large number
of people involved, you're going to have some injustices.  But as long as you
view the All-Star Game in the right context, then you're going to be okay.  Just
remember that the All-Star Game is a popularity contest, no different from any
other mass-vote, and if somebody is denied a place in the starting five who you
think "deserves" it, then obviously you were in the minority.  Being selected
to the starting five of the All-Star team in either conference is an honor, but
it doesn't mean you're the best player at your position (though I'm not going to
say that it means you're not!)  Such is the way of things... Bill Clinton is
President, and only slightly more than four out of every ten people voted for
him!  That's The System(tm) for you!
--
Alexander W. Thornton
University of California, Irvine
-----------------------------------> "Verbalizing with half my brain tied
athornto@bonnie.ics.uci.edu           behind my back, just to make it fair!"