The Home Run Derby should decide home field for the World Series.
Yep, totally ludicrous. But, really, is it more so than having the winner of the All-Star Game decide it?
In a 3-0 AL victory last year, the first two runs were produced by Toronto’s Jose Bautista vs. Arizona’s Patrick Corbin and Baltimore’s J.J. Hardy vs. Philadelphia’s Cliff Lee — in other words, representatives of four teams that did not even make the playoffs.
So, when it is Houston’s Jose Altuve vs. San Diego’s Huston Street this year to decide where the seventh game of the World Series will be played, would that be sillier than having a homer-hitting contest decide such a thing?
Keep in mind, the whole idea of putting the home-field designation on the All-Star Game was to try to juice TV ratings. Then my suggestion is to really go for it. Think of those two days — the Monday festivities and the Tuesday game — as 48 hours to promote the heck out of the sport, to entice more attention and passion in MLB, at a time when there should be some worry about recruiting the next generation of fans.
My gut says turning the Home Run Derby into a team competition with the winning side bringing home-field advantage to their league would bring greater interest than putting that emphasis on the actual All-Star Game.
Here is how I would do it: Four teams of four. Ten swings a player a round. After each round, low man from each team is eliminated. So that finally you have a mano-a-mano at the end so an individual champion is crowned, as well. But the whole time, a total is being kept for the AL vs. NL.
Points should be bestowed for each homer. One for a standard homer. Two points for anything of 400-425 feet, three for 426-450, four for 451-475, and five points for further than that. Again, think of what the audience likes — both long homers and a chance for a team way behind to catch up on the strength of those long homers. Imagine, say, Edwin Encarnacion down to his final few swings in the whole competition and the AL down by four points. Drama.
I think by putting such an importance on the contest, the best power hitters — particularly from contending squads — would be more motivated to participate.
Again, if I were the Czar of Baseball, I would not have World Series home field determined by anything involved with the All-Star festivities and game, but if you are going to stick with something so capricious, why not add the theater and poignancy that would be near guaranteed with a homer-hitting contest?
Some more All-Star thoughts:
■ The World Cup showed again what kind of passion could be generated when you pit a U.S. squad against global competition. So why not do it in the All-Star Game, at least every other year or every four years — U.S. vs. the World?
The World Baseball Classic has yet to generate fervor in the United States. But too many of the best players stay away because they don’t want to risk throwing off their normal preseason progression or incurring injury in a tournament that lasts for weeks and comes before the season. But a single game played in mid-July likely would encourage all the best players in the world to participate.
■ Have the commissioner form a panel of executives and media to add three wild-card players to each side. The rosters already have blown up to 34, what does it matter if it is 37?
You want to assure players who will bring buzz are admitted. How was it good for MLB — at its showcase moment — not to have Yasiel Puig on center stage last year? Please spare me the “he didn’t earn it” nonsense. This is an exhibition game — an exhibition game designed to promote the sport. Thus, you bring the players who will make more viewers care about the game.
The White Sox’s Paul Konerko is not having an All-Star season. Who cares? He has been a tremendous player and credit to the game and has announced his retirement. So bring him to the game and maybe get more sets turned on in Chicago. Houston’s George Springer might have been promoted to the majors too late to make the AL team, and that is certainly true for Pittsburgh’s Gregory Polanco and the NL team. Again, so what? They are terrific young talents, key pieces of the future, so introduce them to a larger audience.
If Cincinnati’s Billy Hamilton doesn’t make the team in a traditional way, bring him — if for nothing else, so the world can see him run. Do you want to appeal to a younger demographic or not?
■ Put microphones in as many places and on as many players as possible. With all due respect to my friends in the FOX broadcast booth, they can set the scene, fill in the blanks. But I think the fans would more enjoy seeing the game from the inside. Have the managers miked so we hear their strategies of how to use as many players as possible while still winning the game. Mike the players, so we hear the exchanges between the best in the world.
Remember, this is a three- to four-hour photo op for the sport. Let the fans see the intellect, passion and humor of those involved in the game.
■ Use the All-Star Game as a laboratory. This isn’t a holy ritual. Again, it is an exhibition. Try stuff. If it doesn’t work, throw it away and go in a different direction next year.
For example, right now, there is worry about too much dead time in games. OK. Use a pitch clock — like an NBA shot clock — on the scoreboard: Deliver a pitch in 15 seconds or it is a ball. Leave the painted lines of the batter’s box and it is an automatic strike. See what this looks like in an actual game and — if it works — think about adopting it for real.
Remember, the NFL — which is the king of leagues — is not afraid to alter rules, particularly to enhance offense. I think the MLB experience has to move faster for folks in attendance and the folks at home. It is just a reality of our age.
Here is a place to experiment — designated runners, anyone? — without commitment. The idea is to put on a show, so free your mind MLB and put on the best darn show possible.