Votto: 2020 WS Winner Would Deserve Full Credit

[Ron Madden]

Cincinnati Reds first baseman Joey Votto believes that any potential 2020 World Series winner would deserve “full credit” — and that it would actually mean more to win it under the circumstances, as he told Jayson Stark of The Athletic:

“I feel very strongly that any team that wins the World Series, even in an abbreviated season, will get full credit and will be able to enjoy it. And I’ll be honest with you. The more I think about winning the World Series this year, I think it’s freaking worth more.”

https://theathletic.com/1829339/2020...and-wont-mean/

[North]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb...re/ar-bb14tnnx

Ron - the link directs me to a general page on MSN.

[KronoRed]

Votto wise as always.

[Ron Madden]

Ron - the link directs me to a general page on MSN.

Thanks. I fixed it.

[RedsBaron]

Absolutely. A World Series championship is almost always extremely difficult to win (unless you have a trash can to help).

[MikeS21]

Nice of Votto to say this, but the 2020 season will always have an asterisk beside it, just as all the strike-shortened seasons have asterisks beside them. Folks are still debating and questioning the legitimacy of the results from 1994-95. And the 2019 season will always have an asterisk beside it because the Astros cheated their way to a championship.

Losing half or two-thirds of the season will not necessarily give us the best teams competing for a World Series. It will be the hottest teams when the season ends. Nothing wrong with that, but a ten game rough patch can pretty much knock you out of contention. And minor trips to the DL are magnified, especially if your top hitter or top pitcher is out for 15 games.

Winning would be great and far better than not winning. But there will always be that cloud hanging over the season, where there are legitimate questions about winning. There will always be that asterisk of “what if?”

In some ways, Votto is right. Winning will be more difficult. But we will always be left with the question “what if the season had played out normally?”

[RedTeamGo!]

Nice of Votto to say this, but the 2020 season will always have an asterisk beside it, just as all the strike-shortened seasons have asterisks beside them. Folks are still debating and questioning the legitimacy of the results from 1994-95. And the 2019 season will always have an asterisk beside it because the Astros cheated their way to a championship.

Losing half or two-thirds of the season will not necessarily give us the best teams competing for a World Series. It will be the hottest teams when the season ends. Nothing wrong with that, but a ten game rough patch can pretty much knock you out of contention. And minor trips to the DL are magnified, especially if your top hitter or top pitcher is out for 15 games.

Winning would be great and far better than not winning. But there will always be that cloud hanging over the season, where there are legitimate questions about winning. There will always be that asterisk of “what if?”

In some ways, Votto is right. Winning will be more difficult. But we will always be left with the question “what if the season had played out normally?”

I have never once spoken to a person that debates the 94-95 season.

You’ll have to explain to me how after 80 games or so we won’t be able to tell which team’s deserve to be in the playoffs or not.

The season is WAY too long as it stands. 162 games is an obscene amount and completely unnecessary. September, an entire month of games, is completely unnecessary. Half of the teams in the league are playing minor leaguers to see what they have for the next season.

[Kc61]

Nice of Votto to say this, but the 2020 season will always have an asterisk beside it, just as all the strike-shortened seasons have asterisks beside them. Folks are still debating and questioning the legitimacy of the results from 1994-95. And the 2019 season will always have an asterisk beside it because the Astros cheated their way to a championship.

Losing half or two-thirds of the season will not necessarily give us the best teams competing for a World Series. It will be the hottest teams when the season ends. Nothing wrong with that, but a ten game rough patch can pretty much knock you out of contention. And minor trips to the DL are magnified, especially if your top hitter or top pitcher is out for 15 games.

Winning would be great and far better than not winning. But there will always be that cloud hanging over the season, where there are legitimate questions about winning. There will always be that asterisk of “what if?”

In some ways, Votto is right. Winning will be more difficult. But we will always be left with the question “what if the season had played out normally?”

I agree. The 2020 season will always have an asterisk in the minds of fans. That’s Votto’s point, whether there is an actual asterisk in the record books - everyone will know that 2020 was different.

I think MLB should embrace this. 2020 should be a “fun” season. A time to experiment with universal DH and other rule changes. Loosen up the telecasts, allow more in-game interviews with players and managers.

By definition there will be problems. Maybe a group of players have to quarantine mid-season. Maybe the pitchers are not fully stretched out for awhile. No fans in the stadium, less of a home field advantage potentially.

MLB should recognize it’s an unusual season, have some fun with it. The public probably could use a lighter touch now.

[reds77]

The world is different now. 2020 champions in any sport absolutely deserve credit as the best of their sport. I agree with Votto's sentiment.

[texasdave]

The Washington Nationals were 40-40 after 80 games last season, and would not have made the playoffs. How do you win the World Series, if you don't make the playoffs?

[Falls City Beer]

I don’t care about asterisks. This isn’t a matter of cheating. Whoever wins is the champion. It’s the game they agreed to play. Exogenous factors don’t change it.

[BCubb2003]

I don’t care about asterisks. This isn’t a matter of cheating. Whoever wins is the champion. It’s the game they agreed to play. Exogenous factors don’t change it.

I agree. It’s a little like taking all the marathoners and having them run a mile. The marathoner who wins this event has accomplished something.

The normal baseball season is like a triathlon anyway. There’s the running of the season, the swimming of the playoffs, and the bicycle sprint of the final series.

[mth123]

I don’t care about asterisks. This isn’t a matter of cheating. Whoever wins is the champion. It’s the game they agreed to play. Exogenous factors don’t change it.

I agree. Still, after 80 games last year, the eventual champion was 40 - 40 and wouldn't have even made the play-offs.

[Falls City Beer]

I agree. Still, after 80 games last year, the eventual champion was 40 - 40 and wouldn't have even made the play-offs.

Who decides which set of 80 games matters more? It seems that this year the agreement is the first/last 80 games matter more.

[757690]

Who decides which set of 80 games matters more? It seems that this year the agreement is the first/last 80 games matter more.

Neither should matter. 162 games matter, not 80 or even 161.