St. Louis pitcher Adam Wainwright. Ben Margot/Associated Press

Baseball's biggest stars will convene in America's biggest city Tuesday for the sport's annual midseason showcase. But judging by the makeup of the rosters, this All-Star Game doesn't belong in New York. It belongs on a field somewhere between Appalachia and the Great Plains, surrounded by a crowd of mild-mannered folks.

Of the 78 All-Stars this year, 32—or roughly 41%—are from baseball's Central divisions. By percentage and by sheer total, that is the largest combined representation from the National and American League Central divisions since they were formed in 1994.

And get this: The two teams from Chicago, the lone big market in each Central division, account for only three All-Stars. More than ever, the biggest concentration of star power this year is in the heartland.

The St. Louis Cardinals and Detroit Tigers lead all teams with six All-Stars each. But what's most striking is the representation from each league's traditional bottom feeders.

Related Video

Baseball legend Mookie Wilson, who played for the New York Mets during their 1986 World Series win, demos his secrets to base stealing, hitting & fielding ahead of the 2013 All-Star Game.

The Kansas City Royals have three All-Stars, one more than the New York Yankees. The Pittsburgh Pirates have five, more than the Los Angeles Dodgers and Philadelphia Phillies combined.

These organizations are the reason why Major League Baseball has a rule requiring one All-Star from each team. For years, MLB invited them to its midsummer party for the same reason people invite distant relatives to their weddings: because it would be rude not to. But these are no courtesy invites.

"From our team, it's good to see more than just one guy go," Royals outfielder Alex Gordon said. "That's a big step for us."

This year's All-Star Game highlights the rise of baseball's Middle America. Three of the NL's top four records belong to the Cardinals (57-36), Pirates (56-37) and Cincinnati Reds (53-42). And the Tigers have outscored opponents by a wider margin than all but one other AL team. Overall, Central teams are on pace to finish with their best combined run differential in the history of the divisions.

That represents a stark change for teams that are almost always outspent and are often outplayed by richer, star-studded teams from big cities along the coasts. Since the inception of the Central divisions, their teams have a combined winning percentage of just .487, the lowest of the three regions.

Through last year, the Centrals accounted for 37% of all franchises, yet between 2001 and 2012, they produced 51% (26 of 51) of teams that lost 95 or more games in a season. The NL Central is better this year in part because the Houston Astros, baseball's worst team the last two seasons, moved to the AL West.

"I've always felt like the Central got disrespected," Cardinals general manager John Mozeliak said. "I think the reason the Central gets beat up is the bottom of the division sort of drags everyone else down, where people say we're just benefiting from it."

Detroit third baseman Miguel Cabrera. Reuters

Part of what's fueling the rise of heartland teams is the changing economics of the game. Revenue sharing, the luxury tax and soaring television revenue have made it easier for Central teams to keep their own best players and compete for free agents.

The combined payrolls of Central teams are up 14% since the start of 2011, while the rest of baseball is spending just 10% more. The Cleveland Indians made one of the biggest free-agent splashes last winter by signing outfielders Nick Swisher and Michael Bourn for a combined $104 million. In a symbolic shift, the Pirates pried free-agent catcher Russell Martin away from the Yankees.

"Other teams have money to spend now," Royals pitching coach Dave Eiland said. "I just don't think the lure of New York is as strong as it used to be."

But some Central teams have benefited just as much from their inability to compete for the most expensive free agents, many of which have become albatrosses for big-market clubs. In a year when only three of baseball's 10 highest-paid players made the All-Star teams, financial restraint looks like a virtue.

The Cardinals couldn't match the $240 million deal the Los Angeles Angels gave Albert Pujols in late 2011. But they used the money they saved to sign or extend four of their current All-Stars. Meanwhile, Pujols is in a steep decline.

"I think of it as unintended consequences, in a positive way, for some of these smaller markets," Mozeliak said. "You may have been trying to accomplish something, but for whatever reason you got outbid, and you end up sort of benefiting because it didn't happen."

In some instances, Central teams have benefited from gambles that big-market teams preferred to avoid. The Reds weren't the richest team interested in signing Cuban pitcher Aroldis Chapman in 2010, but they were the only team willing to offer him $30 million. Now, Chapman is an All-Star closer.

"If you're going to go out and get a top free-agent pitcher, you would probably have to spend two to three times as much," Reds general manager Walt Jocketty said. "We're not going to be in a position to do that. You have to take some risks."

But even within the Centrals, the economics for each team vary. The Tigers are thriving in large part because of a deep-pocketed owner, Mike Ilitch, who appears far more concerned with winning a championship than he is with profits. Detroit has the fifth-highest payroll in the game, at $148 million.

"They are not operating as a Central division, Middle America team," Indians president Mark Shapiro said. Tigers president Dave Dombrowski said finances are always a consideration, but with Ilitch, he said, "His driving force to us in every conversation is winning."

To some degree, the rise of baseball's flyover country is simply a byproduct of better management. Whatever the reason, one thing is clear, Eiland said: "There's a lot more talent in this division than there used to be."

Write to Brian Costa at