Most pretigeous Being an All Star or Winning a WS?

[jake33]

Just isolating the sport of baseball here, what on equal levels would you consider more prestigeous winning a World Series or All Star team? The politically correct answer you'd get from players I think would be wiining a world series. The interesting variableis that the all star game does have some signficance though with home field advantage and it is not viewed as a competition rather than guys going through the motions like Kruk did in the 1990's.

However, assuming everything equal, think about these points.
Guys that had pedestrian careers and showed up in the post season would be a strong argument against ALL star selection being more prestegious for example Jim Leyritz, Mark Lemke, or even Kirk Gibson who himself had a very sound career, but is known for a WS moment. What do you think Bill Buckner thinks is better?

-Winning 7 world series' would not guarantee a player a hall of fame induction, 7 all star games would make you much more strongly considered ; i.e. Paul Molitor was a 7x time all star

-My fav player Mr. Hinske was in 3 consecutive WS, winning 2 of them with NYY and Boston, one of the handful of players to do that all time in BOS and NY. Also, only Don Baylor was the only other player to play on 3 different WS teams in 3 straight years in MLB history. A quirky tidbit, but true. With EH though, I think more fans know him for being Rookie of the Year (also an individualized award), the number of ROY auto's of his on the market out weigh the WS signed balls of his on the market, largely becuase of him being a role player on all 3 WS teams.

- MLB is not the like the NFL, where the main judgment is winning a Super Bowl. MLB is individual stat based and winning a WS isn't held against you. Actually, another favorite of mine, DON MATTINGLY never played in a WS, and in some way, I believe it helped his appeal to Yankee fans. I also think more fans know the last 5 all star game MVP's before they will know the last 5 pro bowl MVP's.


- A drawback against the arguement for All Star being more prestigeous than a WS, is the 58 players are elected to the all star game each year. WS has a firm 25 man roster, so 50 would be the limit with no inguries.

- Think of the end of the roster guys on a WS team compared to the back end roster guys on the all star game (the Robert fick type guys that get on because each team needs a representative).

- Each WS is not the same for each player, most all star games are all prestigeous. Take for example Jose Canseco and being deemed a 2000 World Series Champion. He down played it and felt the Yankees got him, so he wouldn't hit against them. I am not saying that is true but Jose believed that and is not really viewed at a true yankee. Jose is probably more proud of his 1989 WS championship than 2000. Didn't Grey Flannel even sell of his 2000 WS ring a few years ago, come to think of it?

---

Like I said, I think the PC answer players would give would be a WS, because by saying All star game, there would be a lot of fans that would not think that player is a "team" player and only cares about himself and his own acheivements, etc.

This would be interesting to get a TRUE 100% honest answer from a ball player that never had won a WS or gone to an AS game and was at the end of his career.

Would you rather go to the All star game and play or be a role player on a world series team and go 0-3 with 3 K's over the entire series and have your team win it and be a role player throughout the season with nothing very memorable?

I also think from a player's POV that an all star selection can be celebrated more in the moment with their family and friends.

---

And as a fan what would you rather have your team win the WS or your favorite player go the all star game. I think the overwhelming majority would choose a WS win for their team even over their fav player even being an all star game MVP.

[gnishiyama]

As a fan I would rather see my team win the WS. I think most players in the
beginning, if they had to choose one, would rather be an All-Star before
winning it all since being an All-Star caliber player means a bigger contract.
I think priorities change as a player gets further along in his career and
starts thinking about being part of history by winning the WS. Like you
said though if you ask a player who has done both, the PC answer is
winning the WS but who knows what he really thinks.

[joelsabi]

i go with winning a championship.

an example is the comparison of kobe bryant to michael jordan.

you always hear the argument that you shouldn't even compare until kobe has x number of championships. you never hear an argument base on all star appearances tho.

[jake33]

In the NBA though, guys are typically not soley measured by Champinships only when they are compared to other players or coaches to in some way quantify a perception of "greatness."

[trsent]

The MLB All-Star Game has become a joke and if you asked 100 Major League Baseball players which they thought was more prestigious all 100 would answer how I will now answer - They would rather win a World Series.

Ask 1000 players you'll also get the same answer.

[godwulf]

The All-Star Game is an exhibition, and selection to play in it is seldom more than a popularity contest among fans or of playing for one of the two managers during the regular season. As far as any "prestige" attached to simply being on an All-Star team, that's in the eye of the beholder, I suppose; realistically, though, what does it add to your reputation or worth as a player if you are selected to multiple All-Star teams and don't play for shit on any of them? At least having been a member of a World Series Championship team, you (in most cases) slogged it out with your teammates all season and played well enough to make the playoff cut. To my way of thinking, there just isn't any comparison whatever.

[cjclong]

I think most players would chose the world series. There are a number of great players who never got to a world series. I bet if you asked someone like Michael Young, he would take his All Star selections for winning the World Series this year. And I bet if you asked Derek Jeter whether he would rather give us his All Star selections or his 5 World Series wins with the Yankees he would give up the All Star selections in a heart beat. This isn't to knock the All Star selections, which is of course more a personal honor, but the goat of most players in sports, starting back when they are teenagers, is to win a championship.

[cjclong]

Meant to say Young would trade his all star selections. Also Jeter would give up his. Glad I don't get a grade for typing.

[gingi79]

And as a fan what would you rather have your team win the WS or your favorite player go the all star game. I think the overwhelming majority would choose a WS win for their team even over their fav player even being an all star game MVP.

Admittedly, before I read your post I thought this was an obvious answer. You brought some real solid points up though Jake, and I spent time actually debating with myself before replying. I'll start with this part though. I think Cubs fans would have a different answer than say Yankees fans. If you suffered though years of near misses and lifetimes with a title, having an All Star on your team is meaningless in comparison to wanting to see your team finally win it all. When you know your team will win another title in the next 5 years, you would be more inclined to see your favorite player get his just desserts in an All Star selection.

Joel makes a lot of sense too. Players love admiration and accolades but play the game since Little League to win a title. (In my opinion at least) Tony Gwynn once said he would trade all his All Star games for one more shot at the title.

Selfishly, I'd love to be chosen as one of the best players in the game one season. However, I don't think you need to be a long time baseball fan to realize All Star teams are NOT made up of the best players each season but rather the ones loyal fans stuff the ballot box for.

You can add my vote to the World Series title side.

[gnishiyama]

I interpreted the question as to whether a player would rather
be an All-Star player or just a regular player who won a World Series.

The All-Star game itself is a complete joke so there is no comparison
to playing in the WS. However would a perennial All-Star like Tony Gwynn
give up his place in the Hall of Fame to win one WS? I don't think so...
I personally wouldn't but I don't think there is a PC answer to that.

Playing in one All-Star game is much different than being remembered as
an All-Star caliber player. Nowadays perennial All-Stars don't even want to
go to the All-Star game even when they're voted in. (i.e. Jeter)

If I were an up and coming player I would be more concerned about
personal achievements, which means I'm contributing, to secure
that long term contract and my financial future. (I am not talking about
playing selfish to pad by stats) Later I would consider sacrificing
(i.e. play a lesser role, waive my no-trade clause to go to a
contender) to go for the title.