7/15/2008 8:53:08 AM

Honestly, I stopped watching the Derby about 5 years ago. The only thing worse than the Derby is the Dunk contest during the NBA All-Star break.

I know that "chicks dig the long ball", but I'm not a chick. I would rather see them do something a little more skills related. Back in 1986, when I was a kid growing up in Houston, I went to the All-Star festivities in the old Astrodome. They used to have a team skills contest, which ended with the Home Run Derby.

They had a timed event running the bases, so you could find out who truly is the fastest on the paths. Wouldn't you want to know who is the fastest man in baseball? Han-Ram, Reyes, Taveras, Bourn, etc. could all have at it and settle it once and for all.

Then they had an outfielders contest where they had to catch a fly ball, run to a mark cone (where there was a ball waiting for them, pick up that ball and fire it home. They were awarded points based on where the ball hit a target set up at home plate, and from which cone they chose to throw from. You got more points if you went to the cone closest to the fence.

You could finally find out which guy had the best hose. Ankiel. Franceour. Hamilton.

Just think of how much TV sponsorships you could add into the fold as well. They would take a commercial break between each contest. And each contest could/would be sponsored by a different company.

So much better than the lame HR Derby only.

Jeremy Fischer

7/15/2008 2:10:47 PM

While I'd be in favor of a skills-type contest, Barry Larkin hurt his arm doing the same thing at an All-Star event a long time ago. He missed time due to that so the injury risk might be a bit higher. I still like the HR Derby (on mute...is anything worse than Berman STILL saying 'back back back'?) because while I can make a 3-pointer and dunk on an 8-foot rim, I cannot hit a baseball 500 feet.

The thing about the derby that I DON'T like is how the best power hitters decline to participate. I know you can't have A-Rod, Ryan Howard, etc every year, but it'd be nice to see them give a rat's arse. Hell, I still think Junior could do well in the derby because of his effortless swing...and the fact the pitches are coming in at more his speed (but that's another argument).

And while part of me still wishes Hamilton was still a Red, I'm perfectly content with Edinson Volquez. Young, stud pitchers are harder to find than power-hitting outfielders. I was happy for Josh and I rooted for him. But, I don't for one second wish the Reds hadn't made that deal.

Jeff Gentil

7/15/2008 4:12:09 PM

Hamilton is a stud, but like others before I would still make that trade today. A 25-year old right-hander with velocity and movement like Volquez is priceless. If you take a look at outfielders the Reds have had over the past week, you can see they are a dime-a-dozen.

Dan Clasgens

7/15/2008 11:13:28 PM

I think that there shouldnt even be a homerun derby every year guys try to hit 25 somtimes more homeruns in a couple hours and they havent hit that many in the season yet. but since the derby wont end the rules should be changed so that the guy who hits the most homeruns over 3 rounds wins

Glenn

7/16/2008 7:02:07 AM

If we didn't trade Hamilton, we wouldn't have Volquez. And if we had Hamilton, Dusty Baker wouldn't know what to do with him. Because he wouldn't bench Griffey, and thus we wouldn't have Jay Bruce up. In an ideal world, it would be great to have somehow acquired Volquez without giving up Hamilton (or Bruce), but that isn't reality. Pitching wins championships.

Jimmy Dinsmore