As the MLB moves closer to the halfway point in the 2018 season, fans of every team might have noticed a shift in each teams’ social media policies.
Like 30 overly enthusiastic dentists, each MLB team constantly reminds their followers that the All-Star Game is coming. The game is a well-deserved break for all players and recognition for those who are voted in, but the game itself has become a chore to watch and a difficult product for the MLB to sell.
Much like the issues with the NFL’s Pro Bowl and the NBA’s own All-Star Game, the MLB’s Midsummer Classic is dull, close to meaningless and hard to sell to the players and fans. Unlike the other leagues, there might be a silver bullet to alleviate all those worries and create a thrilling product.
Simply put, the MLB All-Star Game should be shortened, electrified, and imbued with heavier importance. And since baseball’s fans are some of the most tradition-conscious fans in all of sports, the changes implemented cannot be too drastic.
Instead of one regular game, the All-Star Game should become three miniature games of baseball that are three innings apiece. The National and American Leagues would still play nine innings in one day, maintaining the basic tradition of the game that has been played almost every summer since 1933. By structuring the “game” as three smaller exhibitions, the biggest stars could be played throughout the game as fresh starting lineups are inserted in what would otherwise be the first, fourth, and seventh innings. By not burning through every A-list player in the first four or five innings, the managers and the league could put out a better product that fluctuates in talent level throughout to raise interest.
The point of the three mini-game series would be to replicate the series format that makes playoff baseball so exciting, but in a smaller time period. The winner of the series would get home field advantage, which was removed as a condition of the All-Star Game after the 2016 season.
Plenty of arguments can be made about why the All-Star Game is not a fair decider of home field advantage, but a money hungry league would almost assuredly value a more interesting and profitable All-Star Game in exchange for ire from pundits who always have something to complain about. If the game is given this importance, an important problem can be solved preemptively. If one team were to win the first two three-inning games, they could earn a fifth home game by sweeping all three games. In either case, the final three-inning game would be appointment viewing without much competition during non-World Cup years.
A cursory glance would suggest that getting five home games in the World Series would be too much importance to assign to an exhibition in the middle of the season, but the numbers behind home field advantage don’t suggest an unassailable boon for the winner. After 111 Fall Classics, the record stands at 56-45 in favor of home teams. Theoretically, that is just enough of an advantage to get the highest level of play out of the players without inciting anarchy from the old guard.
In the case of a tie after each three-inning minigame, the home run shootout would go into effect. Much like a soccer or hockey shootout, each team would take turns trying to hit home runs in a best-of-five format. The teams would get to choose which batters to send to the plate in whatever order they choose, along with whichever pitcher on their roster who could throw the best meatballs. Each batter only gets one pitch to hit.
The pseudo-Home Run Derby approach would also capitalize on the remarkable success of last year’s dinger-centric event, which pulled in more viewers than the 2017 All-Star Game.
Baseball needs to be more exciting. The All-Star Game is the most flawed incarnation of a losing template. Those issues can be fixed at once by making the game a thrilling three-part miniseries instead of a grueling and stuffy feature production.
Jonah Baker can be reached at [email protected] or on Twitter @jonahpbaker