All-Star games are about the fans and giving the league's great players recognition for having great seasons and, in some cases, a lifetime achievement award.

I'm not a proponent of MLB's approach of giving every team an All-Star, especially when rosters are small and some teams have a surplus of elite players while some have none. But baseball does do something right in that they expand the roster beyond a normal baseball regular season roster because more players have a better season than can be on a roster, certainly a 26-man roster and to fit the charity mandatory picks off bad teams.

I think the NBA should expand rosters and even beyond that name a few alternates per conference so that more players can have that recognition on their resumé. 15 is a good number for the roster plus 3-5 alternates.

Of course, given how bad the All-Star Game was Sunday, worse than a YMCA pickup game other than that those don't usually feature dunks, my real idea is scrap the game altogether, still name the reserves as alternates as well as a few "injured reserves" and pit each starter from each conference against each other in a 1-on-1 tournament by position to really see who is best. Or a pickup game or 3 of the starters of each conference against each other. If you have to offer a money pot that may pique their interest, then do that, anything to improve the ASG.

What say you?

I like when every team gets a rep. Gives teach team's fans someone to cheer for & helps prevent 2-3 teams dominating it. & usually it’s the same 2-3 big market teams dominating it.

That's not practical for the NBA, as elite players aren't equally dispersed to much extent. And this isn't kindergarten, where everyone gets a turn.

It's why I propose 15 with alternates to spread the honor of being an All-Star as much as possible. And technically, 15=1 per team in theory, so there is room for 1 per team, in theory.