You want to be passive-aggressive, really

We want to thank brilliant reader Ryan for pointing out this quote from Buddy Bell in today’s Kansas City Star. He said it yesterday after the Royals lost to Chicago and pitcher Jon Garland 3-1. I read the quote first thing this morning, but I must admit to having read enough managers’ quotes through the years to have just sort of breezed through it without giving it the proper consideration. That was my mistake.

Here’s the quote:

"With the kind of pitcher (Jon Garland) is, you want to be aggressive," Bell said. "You know he's going to throw strikes, so you want to get after him early in the count. We probably made it a little easy for him. We weren't as patient as we should have been and swung at some balls out of the zone early.”

OK, what? How baffling is that? Remember when you had to diagram sentences in school? Do kids still have to do that? Well try diagramming the logic of this sentence.

Point 1: You know Garland will throw strikes.
Point 2: You want to be aggressive and get after him early in the count.
Point 3: We were aggressive and got after him early in the count.
Point 4: Garland did not throw strikes.
Point 5: We should have known that.
Point 6: You don’t want to be aggressive and get after him early in the count.

Hitting is a very difficult thing to do – the most difficult act in sports, most people will tell you. Explaining hitting, apparently, is even harder.

Seinfeld Minor Characters

Editor's Note: We'll be back this afternoon (I hope) with an all-star blog. In the meantime, instead of an aside, you get a full Seinfeld minor character blog:

There are, best I can tell, a couple of things you can do to express that you are a BIG fan of someone. Well, there are more than a couple of things you could do – you could, I suppose, stalk that celebrity, or you could dress like them, or you could get plastic surgery so you looked like them or you could hang photographs of them all over your house, but I’m really referring here to people who are not insane.

(As an aside: I do not get the idea behind those gigantic Fathead stickers of sports celebrities that people put on their walls. Hey, I love sports more than most, but what’s the deal with that? Maybe if you’re a kid it would be cool to have a humongous David Wright on your wall over your bed. But really these things seem marketed – and priced – for adults, and while I’m no interior decorator, I do have to question the general tastes of a person that wants a gigantic Martin Brodeur stopping pucks on his wall at home).

Anyway, the two ways of expressing super fanhood are:

1. Go obscure. If you are a big fan of someone/something, you cannot just like their mainstream work. You have to go into their little known, minor work. Say you are a big fan of, I don’t know, the Police. Someone asks you to name your favorite Police song. What do you say?

A. “Oh man, I love so many Police songs, but probably “Every Little Thing She Does is Magic” is my favorite. I love “Message in a Bottle” too. And “Roxanne.” And so many. They were just so great.”
B. “I could never reduce my love of the Police to one song.”
C. “You wouldn’t know it – it was only available on an import.”
D. “Probably “Truth Hits Everybody” off the Outlando D’Amour record, I just love the way Stewart Copeland plays on that song, you know, it was really big in Australia, and that’s when the Police were real, man, before they hit it big, before they sold out, you know?”

The correct answer is: (E) “Probably ‘Truth Hits Everybody,’ but only on the bootleg from Milwaukee in 1980. They really played it well in Des Moines too in ’83 – I think that was the day Andy Summers broke up with his girlfriend, and he was so on.”

2. Insist that you discovered the act – you were on to them years before anyone else.

So, I can tell you now that I discovered Jerry Seinfeld – I was on to him years before anyone else. It’s true. Back in college – years before “Seinfeld” hit the airwaves – my friend Joe Habina and I would always acknowledge each other by saying, “It’s that guy! That’s same guy!” That comes from an early Seinfeld bit about his dog, and how his dog would always be so happy and surprised to see him. He would walk out of the room for one minute, come back, and the dog would have that stunned look, “Hey! It’s that guy! That same guy!” Well, it’s funnier in person.

Anyway, as a big Jerry Seinfeld fan, I was so excited to see his show when it hit the air, and at first I can distinctly remember feeling disappointed. First of all, those early shows weren’t very good. Seinfeld was one horrendous actor at first. I mean, he never became Olivier, but in those early shows he was so stiff and confused and he couldn’t stop laughing – he acted like someone PRETENDING to be a bad actor.

Of course the show found its speed, in large part because the four main characters were so good, but also because they had so many great minor characters. So for your beginning of the week bonus, here are the 10 best Seinfeld minor characters.

10. Susan Ross. George’s fiancée who died after licking poisonous wedding invitation envelopes. That was a very twisted turn for the show, wasn’t it? I mean I realize they had to get her off the show, but was that really necessary? Susan (Heidi Swedberg) wasn’t actually that good a character, but I thought she was cute. Apparently not everyone thought so. Once we were in a Mexican restaurant, and our waitress was a dead ringer for Susan – I mean, at first we thought it really was her. So I said something to her about it. Big mistake. She was SO offended. She really thought it was a huge insult.

This brings me to a much larger point that probably deserves its own blog: Women and men have very different views about what constitutes a beautiful woman. I won’t get into it now, but I will say that when People Magazine named Drew Barrymore their most beautiful woman this year (over Scarlett Johansson? Natalie Portman? Halle Barry? The Jessicas? Beyonce?), my first and only thought was: “Well, I guess women did the voting.”

9. George Steinbrenner. I thought the Steinbrenner character got old after a little while, but the first couple of episodes of Steinbrenner were absolutely hilarious. And, of course, there was the classic exchange when George was alerting Mr. and Mrs. Costanza that George was dead.

Steinbrenner: He'd been logging some pretty heavy hours, first one in the morning, last one to leave at night. That kid was a human dynamo.
Mrs. Costanza: Are you sure you're talking about George?
Steinbrenner: You are Mr. and Mrs. Costanza?
Mr. Costanza: What the hell did you trade Jay Buhner for? He had 30 home runs and over 100 RBIs last year. He's got a rocket for an arm. You don't know what the hell you're doing!
Steinbrenner: Well, Buhner was a good prospect, no question about it. But my baseball people loved Ken Phelps' bat. They kept saying "Ken Phelps, Ken Phelps."

Steinbrenner was voiced, you probably know, by Larry David.

8. Kenny Bania. “They have the best pea soup in the city, Jerry. The best.”

7. Tim Whatley. The dentist who converts to Judaism for the jokes.

Whatley: Jerry, It is our sense of humor that sustained us for 3,000 years.
Jerry: It’s 5,000.
Whatley: Five thousand, even better. (To assistant). OK, Chrissie, give me a shtickle of fluoride.

6. Frank Costanza: “I wasn’t born here, so I can’t be president. That’s why I don’t vote. If they don’t want me, I DON’T WANT THEM!”

5. Jackie Chiles. Johnnie Cochran type lawyer -- he’s the one minor character that, to me, could have had his own show – a funny version of “Judge Judy.” My favorite Jackie Chiles exchange happens when Kramer sues Sue Ellen Mischke, the Oh Henry Bar heiress, for walking streets in only her bra (“lewd, lascivious, salacious, outrageous!”) and causes Kramer to get into an accident.

Jackie: "So she's walking around with nothing but a bra on? You're driving along, get distracted, wreck and ruin your dream of being a golfer."
Kramer: So, do you think we have a case?”
Jackie: “I don’t know.”
Kramer: “She’s the heiress to the Oh Henry candy bar fortune.”
Jackie: “Really? I love Oh Henry bars. It has peanuts...nougat ... chocolate ... yes we definitely have a case!”

4. David Puddy. Elaine’s on-again, off-again boyfriend has lots of great moments, like the time he was wearing the jacket with an eight ball on the back. “Are you going to wear that all the time?” she asked him. He pointed to the eight ball and said, “All signs point to yes.”

But my favorite moment happened on the plane when Puddy sat on the plane and just stared at the seat in front of him. Elaine asked him if he was going to read or go to sleep, he said no. “Are you going to just stare at the seat in front of you?” she asked. “Yeah,” he said. And they broke up again.

3. Newman. Jerry’s nemesis. Quote: “Hear me, and hear me well. The day will come. Oh yes! Mark my words, Seinfeld. Your day of reckoning is coming, when an evil wind will blow through your little play world and wipe that smug smile off your face. And I'll be there, in all my glory, watching.”

2. Babu Bhatt. “You’re a bad man! Very, very bad man!”

1. Bookman. The best minor character in the history of television, Bookman was the library investigations officer who ran down Jerry for a book (Tropic of Capricorn) he had checked out many years ago and never returned. Bookman gives this soliloquy:

“Let me tell you something, funny boy. You know that little stamp that says New York Public Library? Well that may not mean anything to you but that means a lot to me, one whole hell of a lot. Sure, go ahead, laugh if you want to; I've seen your type before, flashy, makin' the scene, flaunting convention. Yeah, I know what you're thinking:
‘What's this guy making such a big stink about old library books?’ Well let me give you a hint, junior. Maybe we can live without libraries, people like you and me. Maybe. Sure, we're too old to change the world. But what about that kid, sitting down opening a book, right now, in a branch of the local library, and finding drawings of pee-pees and wee-wees in The Cat in the Hat and The Five Chinese Brothers. Doesn't he deserve better? Look, if you think this is about overdue fines and missing books, you better think again; this is about that kid's right to read a book without getting his mind warped. Or, maybe that turns you on, Seinfeld. Maybe that's how you get your kicks, you and your good-time buddies. Well I got a flash for you, joy-boy: Party time is over. You got seven days, Seinfeld. That is one week.”

TSOB recommendation: If you have not checked out the movie Hard Eight, (also called Sydney, for some reason), I cannot recommend it more highly. It isn’t that the movie itself is all that great – I like it, but the movie isn’t exactly “Goodfellas.”

In this case, the movie isn’t the point. It has several classic actors playing classic roles. It has actor John C. Reilly doing his, “I have no idea what I’m doing” act which is always entertaining. It has Gwyneth Paltrow back in her supreme days playing a desperate cocktail waitress and hooker. It has Samuel L. Jackson doing his, “I’m one crazy MF” routine. It has Phillip Seymour Hoffman playing a bit role as a loser – which he does supremely well. And it has Phillip Baker Hall doing his Bookman routine for an entire movie. I mean, seriously, any one of these five would make a movie worth seeing – you get all five in one movie? A must see.

All Star -- NL Version

OK, so I have to take a moment to say how much I am enjoying the Roger Clemens' disaster film happening in New York. It's like Towering Inferno, only entertaining. Sure I have (I think) the appropriate admiration for Clemens the pitcher -- I think he's one of the three best in baseball history.

As an aside: I recently had someone hand me an enveloope with statistical analysis that he says conclusively proves that Christy Mathewson was better than Clemens. As anyone who reads this blog knows, I'm all about statistics. But I'm not sure you could statistically prove that Christy Mathewson pitching 300-plus innings every year in a segregated league, day games, with a dead ball was better than Roger Clemens throwing seven innings most nights against worldwide competition and into a strike zone smaller than the newest MP3 players. I'm not sure you could prove the opposite either.

ANYWAY, though I respect Clemens, I cannot stand him, as is the right of any red-blooded American baseball fan who does not currently have Clemens either (A)on his/her favorite team or (B) on his/her fantasy baseball team. I had this vision when he signed the big contract that he would suddenly and irrevocably suck, leaving the Yankees in a death spiral that would snap George Steinbrenner back to his 1970s, fire-everybody-I-won't-take-this-anymore former glory. I didn't dare believe it really could happen, though.

Well, folks, it's all coming true. Clemens blows. The Yankees are under .500 and a million games behind the Red Sox. Steinbrenner releases a statement every so often saying he won't take this much longer. Milk and honey flow in the streets. It's raining Smarties. OK, sure, it probably won't last. But for a moment, it's all there: Clemens is giving up hits. He's giving up homers. His ERA is 5.32. Yesterday, he pitched six innings against Baltimore and, get this, he didn't strike out ANYBODY. Nobody. Zero. You know the last time Clemens went at least six innings and didn't strike out anybody? Go ahead. Take a guess.

It was 1987. Twenty years ago. Reagan was in office. Paris Hilton was 6. Here's the really odd thing -- odder even than me using Paris Hilton as a reference point.

In 24 years of pitching -- almost 700 starts -- Clemens only had two games (before Wednesday) when he threw six or more innings but didn't strike out anybody. But they happened three weeks apart in 1987.

On July 1, 1987 -- so almost exactly 20 years ago -- he threw a complete game against Baltimore, allowed six hits, two runs and did not strike out a soul. That was a weird Orioles lineup by the way -- it had the two Hall of Famers (Murray and Ripken) along with several minor stars who you never think about when you think about the Orioles (Ray Knight, Fred Lynn, Terry Kennedy, Rick Burleson, Lee Lacy). I dunno, I just thought it was a weird lineup.

Twenty days later, only July 21, 1987, Clemens threw a five-hit shutout against California and, again, did not strike out anybody. Isn't that weird. It had never happpened before, and it would not happen again for 20 years. My theory is this: Clemens was still quite young then and even though he was coming off his dominant 1986 season, he had not been pitching all that great (he was 6-6 with a 3.66 ERA when he threw that shutout), so I wonder if that month he went through a stage where he was trying to "pitch" rather than overpower hitters. Whatever the reason, he snapped back to life -- starting with that Orioles victory he finished the year 12-2 with a 2.03 ERA.

In any case, 20 years later, Baltimore again, Clemens went six innings without a strikeout. Now there's no mystery how it happened -- he's old (though he still has more strikeouts than innings pitched this year, which is amazing). Of course, he's Roger Clemens so he could still go on a crazy streak, win 10 in a row, pitch the Yankees back into contention, and end this fun dream. But it's fun right now.

OK, time for the NL All-Star Ballot. I have received a few emails from people who disagreed with my AL All-Star Ballot, and I appreciate that, I suppose that is the point of all this, but I do want to say that I'm not really analyzing who BELONGS in the All-Star Game. I'm just picking the guys I want to see. I don't want to vote Big Papi or Travis Hafner as first basemen because they're not a first baseman. I like watching Placido Polanco play, so I punched the chad for him. I get a kick out of seeing Ichiro, so I voted for him.

I touched on this in the last blog ... I think there are four ways to vote for an All-Star team:
1. Vote for the players who are having the best first halves.
2. Vote for your hometown heroes.
3. Vote for the players you think are the best, regardless of the first half that they are having.
4. Vote for the players you like watching the most.

I'd say most writers/broadcasters/critics think the only correct way to vote is option No. 1. Their point is you MUST vote for the player who is having the best year or you are un-American and unworthy of the car key you used to punch your ballot.

I disagree -- I think it's fine if you want to vote for the guy having the best first half. But I also think it's fine if you're a Bucs fan or Rangers fan or whatever and you vote for your hometown favorites. It's more than fine. I think it's fine voting for the player you think is better even if he's having a lousy first half. I think it's fine if you vote for the guy you like watching. I don't think any of the latter three options is any less viable, less intelligent or less patriotic.

In other words: There are no wrong answer. Except, maybe, Jason Kendall.

First base: Prince Fielder. I would have definitely voted for Todd Helton if he had even given me the slightest hope of hitting .400. But he's down to .321 now, and I'm more focused on Ichiro and Magglio and their chances to hit .400. Fielder is having a great year, and I like watching him play. But I will predict now that Ryan Howard will end up with more homers and Albert Pujols will have a higher OPS at year's end.

Second base: Chase Utley. Slam dunk. Quick question about Craig Biggio -- should he just retire as soon as he gets 3,000 hits? He's been such a fabulous player, but it's clear he's no longer effective. He has a 73 OPS+ this year, which isn't significantly worse than his 83 OPS+ last year. This is always one of the tough questions in sports: How do you say good bye? Maybe Biggio plays it out as a backup the rest of the year. Or myaybe Houston keeps giving him at-bats, and he keeps looking bad until the season ends. I don't know. There's no good answer.

Most seasons with .400 OBP, 20 homers, 20 steals:
1. Barry Bonds, 9
2. Bobby Abreu, 6
3. Joe Morgan, 4
4. Willie Mays 3
(tie) Rickey Henderson, 3
(tie) Craig Biggio, 3
(tie) Jeff Bagwell, 3

Shortstop: Jose Reyes. You could certainly argue for J.J. Hardy, with his 18 homers and solid play. Edgar Renteria is having a terrific first half. But how can you not want to have the excitement of Reyes in the All-Star Game?

Third base: Miguel Cabrera. It's a virtual tie for me between him and Wright -- if I was a manager I would rather have Wright. But just for fun, I think I like watching Cabrera even more. You never know when he's going to mash four homers in a game. ... Have you noticed how much Cabrera looks like Manny Ramirez at the plate? I was stunned by the similarities in body type, composure, and general hitting ability. This guy's a masher. I love watching him hit.

Outfield: Ken Griffey Jr., Matt Holiday and Carlos Beltran.

It's really kind of neat to see Griffey having a career renaissance; it's a bit like seeing Travolta come out of his coma to make "Pulp Fiction." Let's hope Griffey doesn't end up years from now dressing up like a woman.

Holiday is, I realize, the latest Coors Creation -- he's hitting .404 at Coors field and .297 on the road. But he's fun to watch hit. And he's also fun to watch field in that "strike up the Bad News Bears theme music" sort of way.

Beltran is not having a good first half (after a terrific start) but I still have an emotional attachment to him, and I love watching him play. Barry Bonds has the amazing OPS, the ridiculous on-base percentage, he's still the most feared hitter in the National League based on his 28 intentional walks. He probably deserves to start in the All-Star Game, if you buy into that whole "deserving" notion. But the fans generally don't want to see him. And personally, I would just rather watch Beltran play. It's also worth pointing out that since May 9, Bonds is hitting .264 with four homers and a .418 slugging percentage. He walked a bunch in that stretch (including an absurd 17 intentional walks) but who wants to watch that?

Catcher: Russell Martin.

Best 17th round picks in amateur draft history:
1. Orel Hershiser
2. Kenny Lofton
3. Brian Giles
4. Jermaine Dye
5. B.J. Ryan
6. Russell Martin
7. Kent Hrbek
8. Joe Sambito

Others of note: Vern Ruhle; Eric Hinske; Rich Harden; Bud Black; Glendon Rusch.

ONE LAST THING, that I think is too small to put in a separate blog but worth mentioning. I asked Bill James who had the better swing, Kevin Costner or Robert Redford. He chose Costner. "Redford looked like he was swinging a wagon tongue," Bill wrote.

Television Hall of Fame: First Class

Here is the problem (for me, anyway) with doing these individually wrapped, single-topic blogs … the absurd tangents this blog often takes seem even more absurd when they’re broken out and asked to stand on their own. It’s sort of like a bad Broadway song – it’s one thing when you hear the song in the middle of the play. At least then you hear it in context, and you can say, “OK, that’s a bad song, but it’s part of the play.”

But if you hear someone sing that same song completely out of context – say the cast of Les Miserables shows up on the Jerry Lewis telethon to sing, “Castle on a Cloud” – then it’s about 40 percent more awful.

So, yeah, when I throw out the idea of the Television Hall of Fame in the middle of a baseball blog from St. Louis, sure, it’s bizarre and stupid, but at least it’s clear from the outset that I KNOW it’s bizarre and stupid. But when I actually name a blog item “Television Hall of Fame,” suddenly it may seem like I’m actually taking this idea seriously, and I would say that makes it about 40 percent more stupid.

Does that make any sense at all? I can’t imagine that it does.

I’ve decided that the Television Hall of Fame should have a first induction class of seven because it’s the magic number, Mantle’s number, Biggio’s number, and also I could not really narrow it down any more than that. Now, this is really a television performer’s Hall of Fame – that is, only people who appeared in front of the camera. So Norman Lear, Lorne Michaels, the 60 Minutes producer that Al Pacino played in “The Insider,” the 849 people who wrote for the original “Late Night with David Letterman” (it was always hilarious when that show won an Emmy – two thirds of the crowd would walk up on stage), the creators of M*A*S*H and the original guy who said, “Come on down, you are the next contestant on The Price is Right” – none of them are eligible.

A handy rule.

Jim Henson = Not eligible.
Kermit the Frog = Eligible.

Here is the first class as voted by a couple of readers, various friends and mostly your blogging host. We'll try to get that NL All-Star Ballot up before the end of the day:

Lucille Ball
Hall of Fame Plaque: Starred in “I Love Lucy,” the landmark sitcom that dominated television ratings in the 1950s and revolutionized television programming. Famed for eating chocolate off a fast-moving conveyer belt, stomping grapes and trying to get into Ricky’s show. Was voted Greatest TV Star of All-Time by TV Guide in 1996.

Johnny Carson
Hall of Fame Plaque: Beloved television star hosted “The Tonight Show” for 30 years. In that time, he won six Emmy’s and a Peabody Award. Famed for his deadpan humor and engaged interviewing style. Apparently it is not true that once Zsa Zsa Gabor brought a cat on the show and said to him, on air, “Would you like to pet my pussy?” to which he replied, “I’d love to if you would just get rid of the damn cat.”

Bill Cosby
Hall of Fame Plaque: Was the first African American male to star on television with “I Spy” in the mid-1960s and later produced, directed and starred in “The Cosby Show,” one of the most beloved sitcoms in television history. Also created and did the voices for “Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids. Won four Emmy Awards.

Walter Cronkite
Hall of Fame Plaque: Anchorman for CBS Evening News for almost two decades. Was voted many times the most trusted man in America. Spoke exactly 124 words per minute because he determined that this was the speed at which people could most easily follow him. Ended his broadcasts with the famed signoff, “That’s the way it was.”

Jackie Gleason
Hall of Fame Plaque: Pioneer changed the television landscape with his breakthrough role as Ralph Kramden in “The Honeymooners.” He also hosted “Dumont’s Cavalcade of Stars” and “The Jackie Gleason Show.” Was famed for both the outrageousness and humanity he instilled in Kramden, and the catch phrase, “To the moon, Alice!”

Jerry Seinfeld
Hall of Fame Plaque: Co-creator and star of “Seinfeld,” which was voted by TV Guide as the best sitcom in television history. The show changed the comedy landscape by being about “nothing.” And there are also his classic commercials with Superman.

Ed Sullivan
Hall of Fame Plaque: Host of the Ed Sullivan Show for almost a quarter century. He broadcast the first American appearance of “The Beatles” and brought numerous musical artists such at the Rolling Stones, Johnny Cash and the Jackson Five to America’s living rooms. He was one of the first television shows to feature African American musicians.

All Star -- AL Version

I’ve never understood the question that comes up every year around the All-Star Game. The question is, of course, “Why do people park in a driveway but drive on a parkway?” Huh? That’s nutty! You know, I saw a sign the other day that said, “No Dogs Allowed Except Seeing Eye Dogs.” Who is that sign for anyway? Boing! And why do they call it Grape Nuts? I open it up, no grapes, no nuts … hey, I’m here all week. Why do those airplane people always tell us go get on the plane? Uh uh, lady, I’m getting in the plane! Please tip your waitresses; they’re working hard for you. Hey, if a guy’s undisputed heavyweight champion of the world, why’s he still fighting? Hey-ho!

OK, sorry, lost my mind for a minute there, went all Shecky Greene on you. It happens occasionally when the medication wears off. For copywright purposes, I believe those jokes belong to (a) public domain; (b) David Brenner; (c) Jerry Seinfeld; (d) George Carlin and (e) ibid.

No, the question I’m talking about is this: “Did the fans choose the right players for the All-Star Game?” Every year, same thing, this question leads to huge talk radio show arguments. Every year, it’s an enormous Internet discussion. And, it is a state law in 42 or 43 states that newspaper columnists must discuss how right or wrong the fans are in their voting. FYI: There are four types of columns to be written on the subject.

1. The fans are morons.
2. The fans are wiser than you think.
3. The system has to be changed.
4. The system is perfect just as it is.

Now, I understand (from experience) that these are easy columns to write, and believe me I’m wholeheartedly in favor of easy columns. I believe, for instance, that Microsoft or some other computer company (such as, uh, Microsoft?) should invent the “columnist emergency alert button.” Any time a columnist runs into extreme writer’s block or a good drink special (“I’ve fallen and I can’t come up with a good lead,”), he/she should be able to hit the button and, within minutes, get an emergency call from Bob Knight, Peyton Manning, Charles Barkley, George Steinbrenner, Shaq or Curt Schilling.

Columnist: Curt, thanks for calling, I need help and fast. Column is due in 45 minutes and I’ve got nothing. Can you say something controversial?
Schilling: Yeah, I’ve only got a minute – Dan LeBatard is buzzing in from Miami. What do you need? You want something about America or about the All-Star Game or Barry Bonds? What?

(I kid Dan because I love the guy. Remind me some blog to tell you the story about how he sent me to a crazy Italian restaurant Super Bowl week. I’d do it here, but I’m trying to cut down the size of these blogs. I’m already failing miserably).

ANYWAY, while I appreciate the relative ease of writing an All-Star column – and reserve the columnist’s God given right to write it next week if I can’t think of anything else – I’ve never really gotten the point. I guess I’ve always thought that the All Star Game is FOR the fans, which means, by definition, that they really cannot BE WRONG ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT.

Am I wrong about this? The player who wins the voting at each position is the player that most fans (or at least the most passionate fans) want to see, right? The player may or may not be deserving by other standards – maybe he didn’t have a great first half, maybe he is injured, maybe he’s Angel Berroa, maybe he is not as good a player as someone else – but it seems to me the only real qualification to be an All-Star Game starter is that more fans want to see you than anyone else. So whoever the fans choose is the right answer, right?

I mean, let’s say there’s a Rob Deer like guy who hits .134 with no walks and plays awful defense, but he hits 65 homers in a season – and all of them are tremendous blasts. That guy certainly isn’t the best player – but could you blame the fans for wanting to see him? Are they WRONG for voting for him?

How about a real scenario: Take the Albert Pujols vs. Prince Fielder. I’ve read several columns about which one should start in the game. Their season totals up to now seem to point toward Fielder, I guess.

Fielder: .283, 27, 62. He has a .374 OBP, .629 SLG, and has been (perhaps) the biggest key to Milwaukee’s rush to first place in the National League Central.

Pujols: .300, 16, 48. He has a .399 OBP, .530 SLG, good stuff, but he has not been quite as good as in years past. He has even been caught four of the five times he’s attempted to steal too, which is a little thing, but I think it represents that Pujols is just not quite on his game. The Cardinals are playing pretty bad baseball and even though nobody thinks that’s Pujols fault, he hasn’t prevented it either.

So there you go. Advantage: Fielder.

Of course there are those who say the All-Star Game should not just be about what a guy has done the first three months of the season. It should be about the player – and it’s pretty clear that Albert Pujols is a better baseball player than Prince Fielder. Nobody in baseball would take Prince Fielder over Albert Pujols in a draft. No general manager with the possible exception of Jim Bowden would trade Albert Pujols for Prince Fielder. If the All-Star Game is about quality, pure and simple, then Pujols seems like the better choice.

And it makes for an interesting discussion, I guess, but I don’t think the All-Star Game is about either of those things. It’s about which player you as a fan would rather see start in the All-Star Game. If enough fans decided they would rather not see Fielder or Pujols, if they decided they would rather see Ryan Shealy start because they think it would be funny to see him strike out against Jake Peavy, hey, it’s the fans’ game.

The Ryan Shealy scenario, I realize, is pretty unlikely. Well, the part about him striking out against Jake Peavy is quite likely.

Point is: I just don’t see how anyone can get all that worked up over the fans’ All-Star choices. That said: Getting worked up over Ozzie Guillen taking Mark Redman as the Royals lone All-Star representative – yes, that’s worth writing a column.

* * *

OK, now forget all that I said. Here is my American League All-Star ballot. NL tomorrow.

First base: Justin Morneau. I know some All-Star heads are all fired up about Carlos Peña’s great start and all. Come on. He’s Carlos Peña. You really think this is going to last? I’ll take Morneau because I don’t want to wake up at the end of the year and say, “Did I REALLY vote Carlos Peña for the All-Star Game?”

Second base: Placido Polanco. Brian Roberts is probably having the better year, and he’s a great player. But I punched in Polanco because I think he’s vastly underrated. He does a lot of the same stuff that Roberts does (minus the stolen bases), and I think Polanco’s a pretty fun player to watch. He almost never strikes out, he’s hitting .316 since joining the Tigers in 2005, and he always seems to be in the right place on defense.

Shortstop: Carlos Guillen. There is something about that Detroit middle infield that people overlook. Alan Trammell can’t get any traction for the Hall of Fame; Sweet Lou Whitaker couldn’t even stay on the ballot. I mentioned Polanco. And what about Carlos Guillen? Everybody loves Derek Jeter for what he can do offensively and for the various sultry models he has dated. But compare their numbers from 2004 to now:

Carlos Guillen: .321/.386/.518. Hit 111 doubles, 23 triples, 56 homers, stole 39 bases.
Derek Jeter: .319/,.391/.470. Hit 129 doubles, 12 triples, 61 homers, stole 78 bases.

Doesn’t that surprise you? I was shocked. It’s pretty much a wash. Jeter’s slight advantage in counting numbers comes from Guillen being injured for much of the 2005 season. And Guillen is probably a better defensive shortstop no matter what the Gold Glove voters say.

Third base: Alex Rodriguez. Slam dunk. And has anyone noticed, by the way, that it has been three years since Eric Chavez has been any good at all? He keeps winning Gold Gloves (the last couple have been pretty questionable, probably) and he will give you 20-plus homers and everybody keeps talking about him like he’s a superstar. But is he? What happened to the Chavez who hit .275-.280, walked a bit, gave you 30 homer, 40 double power and played third base like Graig Nettles? The guy Billy Beane was ready to crown as the best young player ever? He has a .297 OBP this year, a 94 OPS+ and is striking out more than twice as often as he walks. Have the injuries and wear and tear drained him?

Outfield: Magglio Ordonez, Vladimir Guerrero, Ichiro Suzuki. I’ve had a chance to watch Vlady play the last couple of days against the Royals, and it just reminded me again how amazing this guy really is. I don’t think anybody hits the ball harder than he does these days. Vlad hit a line drive to center field that probably never got more than 15 feet off the ground, and it was hit so hard that it went right over the head of centerfielder David DeJesus, who was playing about four steps in front of the wall.

Would Ichiro have a shot a .400 at Fenway? My buddy Vac brought up this possibility in our interview the other day, and I tended to agree with him without looking up the numbers. But I’ve since looked up the numbers – Ichiro is hitting .266 at Fenway, by far his lowest batting average in any park where he’s had 100-plus plate appearances. I don’t know why this is or if it’s a fluke or if the Red Sox pitchers just know how to pitch him. But it’s interesting. So I would say: No, Ichiro could not hit .400 at Fenway. Also, I will say this: I don’t think the Red Sox have any interest in signing Ichiro.

Magglio Ordonez is hitting .377 now which is absolutely amazing to me because I thought he was flat done two years ago. Here are the highest batting averages for right-handed hitters since World War II:

1. Nomar Garciaparra, .372, 2000.
2. Andres Galarraga, .370, 1993
3. Jeff Bagwell, .368, 1994
4. Rico Carty, .366, 1970
5. Joe Torre, .363, 1971
6. Mike Piazza, .362, 1997
7. Albert Pujols, .359, 2003
8. Alex Rodriguez, .358, 1996
9. Roberto Clemente, .357, 1967
10. Nomar Garciaparra, .357, 1999

Catcher: Jorge Posada. I give him the edge over Victor Martinez because Martinez has thrown out, what, .00000004% of the baserunners who have tried to steal against him? (OK, see, this is why people should look things up. First there was the Ichiro blunder. And now, I get this Victor Martinez thing completely wrong. It’s true that last year Martinez was a joke against base stealers, but Posada has actually allowed many more base stealers this season than Martinez. Posada has only thrown out 14 of 71 this season while Martinez has thrown out 15 of 52. So I take it back). Let’s start again.

Catcher: Jorge Posada. I give him the edge over Victory Martinez because he’s got a higher batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage. He has not, however, thrown out more base stealers despite what you may have read in the past.