|
="Ashie62":yoa9o63e]My senior brain left the 162 on the road option..crap.[/quote:yoa9o63e]
You can edit your poll, sir.
|
smg58
May 05 2009 04:19 PM
Re: Playing 162 on the Road?
|
|
="Ashie62":20knri7u]Would help the offense.[/quote:20knri7u]
Would hurt the pitching. Keep in mind that the dimensions don't shrink when the other team is up.
|
OlerudOwned
May 05 2009 04:21 PM
Re: Playing 162 on the Road?
|
|
="smg58":1kzjrurq]="Ashie62":1kzjrurq]Would help the offense.[/quote:1kzjrurq]
Would hurt the pitching. Keep in mind that the dimensions don't shrink when the other team is up.[/quote:1kzjrurq]
I think you're on to something...
|
Elster88
May 05 2009 08:28 PM
|
|
="sharpie":3p5clyb5]You'd rather have MFYIII where pop flies to right end up going out? Not me.[/quote:3p5clyb5]
Can't I have something in between? Perhaps just a normal field? Since it's going to be there at least 50 years it'd have been nice. Maybe they can tweak the outfield walls in the offseason.
|
Nymr83
May 05 2009 08:37 PM
|
|
="Elster88":7s9bkdxp]="sharpie":7s9bkdxp]You'd rather have MFYIII where pop flies to right end up going out? Not me.[/quote:7s9bkdxp]
Can't I have something in between? Perhaps just a normal field? Since it's going to be there at least 50 years it'd have been nice. Maybe they can tweak the outfield walls in the offseason.[/quote:7s9bkdxp]
parks are rarely built in such a way that you can make it MORE of a pitcher's park, but you can usually bring a fence or three in pretty easily if you are so inclined, so lets be glad they built it the way they did. i'd like to keep it this way, but at least they have options.
|
Elster88
May 05 2009 08:51 PM
|
|
="Nymr83"]="Elster88"]| ="sharpie"]You'd rather have MFYIII where pop flies to right end up going out? Not me. |
Can't I have something in between? Perhaps just a normal field? Since it's going to be there at least 50 years it'd have been nice. Maybe they can tweak the outfield walls in the offseason. |
parks are rarely built in such a way that you can make it MORE of a pitcher's park, but you can usually bring a fence or three in pretty easily if you are so inclined, so lets be glad they built it the way they did. i'd like to keep it this way, but at least they have options. |
Yup I understand all that, it's pretty obvious. But there's no need to have a pitcher's park to this extreme.
| ]so lets be glad they built it the way they did. |
Again, why do I have to be GLAD they did it this way? Can't they build a normal park in the first place if they're going to spend a billion dollars? My original point that there are options between YS3 and Yellowstone stands.
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
May 05 2009 09:00 PM
|
|
Big park doesn't mean less offense-- part of Coors' offensive appeal is Grand-Canyon-sized outfield gaps, a la CitiField. It's just a different sort of offense (as the triples numbers imply).
Should the dimensions stay the same, however, building a speedy, defensively airtight team becomes much more imperative going forward.
|
Ashie62
May 05 2009 09:01 PM
|
|
="Nymr83":192xq2dx]="Elster88":192xq2dx]="sharpie":192xq2dx]You'd rather have MFYIII where pop flies to right end up going out? Not me.[/quote:192xq2dx]
Can't I have something in between? Perhaps just a normal field? Since it's going to be there at least 50 years it'd have been nice. Maybe they can tweak the outfield walls in the offseason.[/quote:192xq2dx]
parks are rarely built in such a way that you can make it MORE of a pitcher's park, but you can usually bring a fence or three in pretty easily if you are so inclined, so lets be glad they built it the way they did. i'd like to keep it this way, but at least they have options.[/quote:192xq2dx]
Name one option
|
Elster88
May 05 2009 09:06 PM
|
|
="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":vevh6h8g]Big park doesn't mean less offense-- part of Coors' offensive appeal is Grand-Canyon-sized outfield gaps, a la CitiField. It's just a different sort of offense (as the triples numbers imply).
[/quote:vevh6h8g]
I'm not buying it. A park with deeper outfield walls leads to less offense than a park in the exact same space with shallower walls.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 05 2009 09:17 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 05 2009 09:20 PM
|
|
Coors Field is unique - Deep outfield walls, but also combined with a thin air that reduces the break on a pitch, thus increasing the number of well-hit balls. Coors Field, post-humidor, is still the best hitter's park in all of baseball. Pre-humidor, it was a freak show -- nothing like it in the history of baseball -- playing half your games at Coors pre-hum overa full season would increase a player's BA by about 40 points. (one point per game played divided by two to account for road games).
I think that Citi Field will play like a 21st century version of the Astrodome -- a park that will reduce run scoring dramatically, despite increasing triples. Yesterday, Gary Cohen remarked that the increase in triples at Citi Field will offset the drop in Home Runs. I disagree with his observation. Strongly.
The only Citi Field triples that will increase offense, relative to Shea, are those CF triples that would have been Shea Stadium doubles. Some CF triples would have been HR's at Shea -- this obviously constitutes a reduction in offense. But the key here is that every single CF triple would have been a hit in Shea. Citi Field is not converting any Shea Stadium outs into triples.
On the other hand, every single "lost" HR at CF represents a reduction in offense. And while some of those lost Shea HR's are playing as doubles and triples at CF (still a a reduction in offense) other lost Shea HR's are being converted into outs -- a drastic loss in offense.
|
Frayed Knot
May 05 2009 09:19 PM
|
|
1) Let's see how this place plays over an entire season before we declare it (or YSIII for that matter) to be an extreme park in any direction. Traditionally Shea played like a better hitter's park in the Summer than it did in April & May.
2) No other park is like Coors. Not only does the high altitude give about 10% more carry to balls but the increased OF size to compensate for that extra carry also allows for more 1Bs, 2Bs & 3Bs.
In retrospect they would probably have been better off to make the fences higher instead of further. Yeah it would resemble a pinball game occasionally but at least then you'd be turning HRs into doubles instead of the other way around
3) They DO have the option of bringing the fences in (and/or lowering them) after the season if the place does indeed turn out to favor hurlers too much. But, like I said, let's wait a bit before declaring that to be necessary.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 05 2009 09:22 PM
|
|
="Frayed Knot":3pl3u7wr]1) Let's see how this place plays over an entire season before we declare it (or YSIII for that matter) to be an extreme park in any direction. Traditionally Shea played like a better hitter's park in the Summer than it did in April & May.[/quote:3pl3u7wr]
I totally agree with this, and should've added to my post that my ideas, (or anybody else's) would take a few years to confirm or refute.
|
seawolf17
May 06 2009 08:18 AM
|
|
Edited your poll for you.
|
Mendoza Line
May 06 2009 08:29 AM
|
|
="sharpie":1tdtxzbf]Fewer homers, more triples. More triples = more fun. You'd rather have MFYIII where pop flies to right end up going out? Not me.[/quote:1tdtxzbf]
What he said.
Also, based on the small sample size, it looks like CitiField will favor teams with:
(a) key offensive players who combine power and speed (like Wright, Beltran, and to a lesser degree Reyes)
(b) key pitchers who tend to give up fly ball outs (like Santana)
(c) good defensive players in the outfield (like Beltran, Church, and...OK, two out of three ain't bad).
So I'm not complaining yet.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 06 2009 08:49 AM
|
|
Not that this means anything but:
HRs through 12 home games 2009
Mets 6
Opponents 12
Total 18
Games with no home runs: 2
HRs through 12 home games, 2008
Mets 10
Opponents 10
Total 20
Games with no home runs: 3
IOW, there's hardly any difference that couldn't be explained by Wright's poor start (he had 4 in the first 12 home games last year; only 1 at home this season)
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 06 2009 09:05 AM
Edited 3 time(s), most recently on May 06 2009 09:14 AM
|
|
I count seven Met HR's at CF through 12 games - Delgado (2), Castro, Tatis, Santos, Wright and Sheffield each with one HR.
[u:1thgf3q8]Some early returns[/u:1thgf3q8]:
Citizen's Bank Park:
48 HR's in 14 Phillie Home Games (Phillies and opponents); 3.43 HR/game
33 HR's in 10 Phillie Road Games (Phillies and opponents) - 3.3 HR/game
Citi Field:
19 HR's in 12 Met Home Games (Mets and opponents) - 1.58 HR/game
22 HR's in 13 Met Road Games (Mets and opponents); 1.69 HR/game
Coors Field:
21 HR's in 9 Rockie Home Games (Rockies and opponents) - 2.33 HR/game
40 HR's in 16 Rockie Road Games (Rockies and opponents); 2.5 HR/game
Candlestick Park, I still call it:
14 HR's in 14 Giant Home Games (Giants and opponents) - 1.00 HR/game
22 HR's in 11 Giant Road Games (Giants and opponents); 2.00 HR/game
Miami:
21 HR's in 11 Marlin Home Games (Marlins and opponents) - 1.91 HR/game
27 HR's in 16 Marlin Road Games (Marlins and opponents); 1.69 HR/game
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 06 2009 09:06 AM
|
|
I was afraid I missed one Met HR too.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 06 2009 09:08 AM
|
|
I'm afraid you did.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 06 2009 05:44 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 06 2009 06:54 PM
|
|
| ="batmagadanleadoff"]Coors Field is unique - Deep outfield walls, but also combined with a thin air that reduces the break on a pitch, thus increasing the number of well-hit balls. Coors Field, post-humidor, is still the best hitter's park in all of baseball. Pre-humidor, it was a freak show -- nothing like it in the history of baseball -- playing half your games at Coors pre-hum overa full season would increase a player's BA by about 40 points. (one point per game played divided by two to account for road games).
I think that Citi Field will play like a 21st century version of the Astrodome -- a park that will reduce run scoring dramatically, despite increasing triples. Yesterday, Gary Cohen remarked that the increase in triples at Citi Field will offset the drop in Home Runs. I disagree with his observation. Strongly.
The only Citi Field triples that will increase offense, relative to Shea, are those CF triples that would have been Shea Stadium doubles. Some CF triples would have been HR's at Shea -- this obviously constitutes a reduction in offense. But the key here is that every single CF triple would have been a hit in Shea. Citi Field is not converting any Shea Stadium outs into triples.
On the other hand, every single "lost" HR at CF represents a reduction in offense. And while some of those lost Shea HR's are playing as doubles and triples at CF (still a a reduction in offense) other lost Shea HR's are being converted into outs -- a drastic loss in offense. |
If Gary's reading the Pool, I'd further like to point out that it's not just a question of trading up some HR's for triples. Citi Field is probably murdering doubles more than it's murdering anything else. Shea Stadium doubles that were landing beyond the outfielders on a fly are turning into outs at Citi Field. If those shots are hitting the outfield Citi Field wall on a fly, they would've probably left the yard at Shea. And whether or not a batted ball gets behind the outfield after first landing in front of the outfield has little to do with stadium dimensions and everything to do with defensive positioning, all other things being equal.
Here are the Home Road split for Mets doubles to date:
47 Doubles in 13 Mets road games (Mets and opponents) 3.62 doubles/game
22 Doubles in 12 Mets home games (Mets and opponents) 1.83 doubles/game
|
Ashie62
May 06 2009 06:43 PM
|
|
Thanks for editing the poll.
Almost all true fly balls are outs..Gaps are unreachable.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 06 2009 08:02 PM
|
|
| ="batmagadanleadoff"]Here are the Home Road split for Mets doubles to date:
47 Doubles in 13 Mets road games (Mets and opponents) 3.62 doubles/game
22 Doubles in 12 Mets home games (Mets and opponents) 1.83 doubles/game |
Runs:
133 Runs in 13 Mets road games (Mets and opponents) 10.23 runs/game
100 Runs in 13 Mets home games (Mets and opponents) 7.69 runs/game
|
Edgy DC
May 06 2009 11:17 PM
|
|
I like big parks and I cannot lie.
|
batmagadanleadoff
May 09 2009 04:54 PM
|
|
| ="batmagadanleadoff"]
Here are the Home Road split for Mets doubles to date:
47 Doubles in 13 Mets road games (Mets and opponents) 3.62 doubles/game
22 Doubles in 12 Mets home games (Mets and opponents) 1.83 doubles/game |
Updated:
47 Doubles in 13 Mets road games (Mets and opponents) 3.62 doubles/game
36 Doubles in 16 Mets home games (Mets and opponents) 2.25 doubles/game
|
Elster88
May 12 2009 09:54 PM
|
|
I wouldn't even consider this "anecdotal evidence". Maybe call it just "anecdotal". Delgado and Beltran hit balls that would've been home runs in Shea. Wright did the same on Monday. All three were doubles. I don't have a point.
But sadly, Pujols or Zimmerman's extra home runs might make a difference when MVP voting comes for Beltran. I'm surprised how much I want a Met to win the MVP and how much I want Santana to win the Cy Young.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
