ziyuen wrote:
It is true that Washington Mudskippers shortstop Jason hit three home runs in a game last week. However, over the course of the Little League season, Jason has struck out in more than half of his at bats, and no player who strikes out that often is truly a great baseball player. Only truly great players deserve to be chosen for the Little League All-Star team, so none of the Mudskippers players deserve to be selected as All-Stars this year.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Most of the Mudskippers players are truly terrible baseball players
(B) The entire Mudskippers team is currently embroiled in a major cheating scandal.
(C) The other players on Jason’s team are even less likely to be named to the All-Star team this year than is Jason himself.
(D) Jason is the best player on his baseball team.
(E) The other Mudskippers players will refuse to play for the All-Star team unless Jason is selected.
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
This question hinges on the idea of generalization. There's a huge gap when the fact pattern leaps from discussing Jason to reaching a conclusion about the entire Mudskippers baseball team. The total lack of information about whether other Mudskippers players might be deserving is a problem that will have to be remedied in order to strengthen the argument.
Answer A makes a valiant attempt in this regard; if most of the Mudskippers players are terrible, and we're given that only great players are deserving, then certainly most of the Mudskippers players are undeserving. However, the conclusion is that none of the players are deserving, and it's quite plausible that some Mudskippers could be deserving even if most are not.
Answer B plays on mental inertia; students may speculate that players embroiled in cheating scandals should not be named All-Stars, but nothing in the argument ever specifies this fact. Without support in the argument, we cannot conclude that this information would render the Mudskippers players undeserving.
Answer C recognizes that a comparison could be used to connect Jason with the rest of the Mudskippers team. However, this answer choice subtly misses the conclusion of the argument. The question isn't whether the players will be selected for the team -- it's whether any of the players deserve to be selected. Thus, answer C doesn't really address the gap in the argument at all.
Answer D is the correct answer. If Jason is the best player on his baseball team, then every other Mudskippers player is worse than Jason himself. But we already know that Jason, because of his excessive strikeout rate, is not a truly great baseball player. Thus, none of Jason's inferior teammates are truly great players either. And only great players deserve to be chosen. So D does, in fact, strengthen the conclusion that none of the Mudskippers deserve to be All-Stars.
Answer E again misses the conclusion. Whether the Mudskippers will play has nothing to do with whether any of them are deserving of selection for the All-Star team.
D is correct.
_________________
"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."
“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”
"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."
Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!
Advanced Search : https://gmatclub.com/forum/advanced-search/
close
64% (01:44) correct 
