I LOVE ANALYTICS!
DOESN'T EVERYBODY?
I read with great hope and interest the recent Ken Davidoff article in the New York Post about the Mets' addition of analyst (actually "Assistant GM for Systematic Development") Adam Guttridge.
One would have thought during the era of Mr. Moneyball, Sandy Alderson, that the Mets would have had MLB-leading analytics going on...but Ken's article states that the Mets had just 3 analysts, while the Bronx Boys had about twenty.
Which makes me believe that analytics were far from maximized under Sandy.
Maybe the Wilpons did not want to spend on analytics - whatever. I don't need analytics to tell me that 3 analysts vs. 20 meant the Mets' analytics were not nearly as adequate.
Maybe the Wilpons did not want to spend on analytics - whatever. I don't need analytics to tell me that 3 analysts vs. 20 meant the Mets' analytics were not nearly as adequate.
The article noted that Mr. Guttridge started young. He first did an analysis while in high school for the Colorado Rockies, indicating that the extremely positive hitting performances by the Rockettes in Corrs Field actually hurt them hitting on the road.
Which tells me two things:
First, as a kid, he was sharp - and now, he must be even sharper.
And second, and much to my delight, he will certainly and absolutely look at (and present solutions for) the Mets' home hitting malaise dilemma.
He surely is already aware, as I wrote recently, that the Mets scored 274 runs at home in 2018 and 402 runs on the road.
And that deGrom's home ERA was around a microscopic 1.50, but he miserably went just 4-6 at Citifield anyway.
And he will realize, as I did, that this team has averaged far less runs scored at home than on the road not just in 2018, but over those several seasons, a differential far greater than any advantage that the Mets' pitchers accrued at home vs. on the road.
And that deGrom's home ERA was around a microscopic 1.50, but he miserably went just 4-6 at Citifield anyway.
And he will realize, as I did, that this team has averaged far less runs scored at home than on the road not just in 2018, but over those several seasons, a differential far greater than any advantage that the Mets' pitchers accrued at home vs. on the road.
And he will no doubt be aware, as an analyst extraordinaire, that while the Baltimore Orioles had a huge home field advantage at home over the past 7 seasons, winning 65 games more at home than on the road, the Mets in those same seven season had a total home field win advantage of exactly one game.
And that such a complete lack of home field advantage costs a team PENNANTS AND PLAYOFFS.
And that such a complete lack of home field advantage costs a team PENNANTS AND PLAYOFFS.
And, guess what, he'll not just be aware of those things, he will deeply drill down and analyze, analyze, analyze to figure out WHY that happened and HOW to fix it.
Why, for instance, an Amed Rosario would hit a measly .200 at home and robust .300 on the road, and not be the only regular Mets hitter with such a gaping home/away disparity.
Why, for instance, an Amed Rosario would hit a measly .200 at home and robust .300 on the road, and not be the only regular Mets hitter with such a gaping home/away disparity.
In my recent article on the subject, a copy of which I sent to Brodie Van Wagenen (and hopefully he received and read), I pointed out these simply unacceptable hometown results.
And I postulated (without analysis, just surmising with my analytical mind) that much of the hitting drought at Citifield might be due to the ball's lack of carry for much of the season, cutting down long flies and turning what would otherwise be hits into long outs.
And I postulated (without analysis, just surmising with my analytical mind) that much of the hitting drought at Citifield might be due to the ball's lack of carry for much of the season, cutting down long flies and turning what would otherwise be hits into long outs.
I also surmised (without analysis) that visiting hitters would not suffer the cumulative effect of hitting in a tough Citifield environment since they only play there several games a year. The Mets' home hitters, though, would get deflated over the course of a long season, seeing balls snagged that ought to be doubles or homers. At least that is how I would feel if it were happening to me.
Instead of being psyched to hit at home, I'd be wondering when I'd lose another extra base hit.
Even though the fences were already moved in twice, my suggested solution (without in depth analytics) was to make the fence in dead center curve, and not be parallel to the plate; have the CF depth moved in from 408 to 400; get rid of the outward dip in the bullpen fence in right field; and curve in and shorten the corners somewhat.
The above are simple, cheap fixes for 2020 - quite inexpensive to do - and perhaps, if done, would be a great help to the hitters and their psyches, without our pitchers suffering as much as our hitters would gain.
Yes, pitchers' ERAs might climb a bit - but so would their win totals, and my guess is they would gladly make that trade.
Adam Guttridge, that's my take - hopefully, you will see this.
Maybe my surmising is all wrong - I am confident that you will find an answer to the "lack of home field advantage" dilemma.
Whether you agree with my or not, I feel confident you will come up with solutions to PROVIDE THIS TEAM WITH A REAL AND SUSTAINABLE HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE.
Of course, I realize that analytics are not just about field dimensions. I think the analytics will improve the Mets on all levels (batting average, scouting, etc.).
Instead of being psyched to hit at home, I'd be wondering when I'd lose another extra base hit.
Even though the fences were already moved in twice, my suggested solution (without in depth analytics) was to make the fence in dead center curve, and not be parallel to the plate; have the CF depth moved in from 408 to 400; get rid of the outward dip in the bullpen fence in right field; and curve in and shorten the corners somewhat.
The above are simple, cheap fixes for 2020 - quite inexpensive to do - and perhaps, if done, would be a great help to the hitters and their psyches, without our pitchers suffering as much as our hitters would gain.
Yes, pitchers' ERAs might climb a bit - but so would their win totals, and my guess is they would gladly make that trade.
Adam Guttridge, that's my take - hopefully, you will see this.
Maybe my surmising is all wrong - I am confident that you will find an answer to the "lack of home field advantage" dilemma.
Whether you agree with my or not, I feel confident you will come up with solutions to PROVIDE THIS TEAM WITH A REAL AND SUSTAINABLE HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE.
Of course, I realize that analytics are not just about field dimensions. I think the analytics will improve the Mets on all levels (batting average, scouting, etc.).
If the Mets don't do better in 2019, I will see my analyst!
Tom, This and your other post on this subject were both great and on target. Do you or anyone else know a website that lists players' averages by ballpark? It would be interesting to see who hit best at Citi Field on the Mets or other team. My guess is that Daniel Murphy would rank pretty high.
ReplyDeleteAdam Guttridge is my son-laws bosses son so I'm trying to get to at least talk to him at some point and of course mention the fine work being done at this site....stay tuned
ReplyDeleteGary, that would be terrific if it does connect.
ReplyDeleteAnalytics are great and considering I've set up innumerable dashboards for corporate clients, I'm fully on board. However, the simple eye test at CitiField shows it for what it is -- a pitcher's park.
ReplyDeleteYes, Guttridge looks like a prodigy. Finally, we have a guy who "actually can" outsmart the competition. Exciting!
ReplyDeleteAnalytics are great.
ReplyDeleteI grew up eating Campbell's Analytic Soup.
No.
Wait...
John From Albany, thanks, and please keep reading our stuff here.
ReplyDeleteI do not know of a site that lists all players' averages (say in 2018 and in career) at Citifield.
For Daniel Murphy individually, BaseballReference.com allows you to see his splits, though, including how he hit at Citifield - here's the link for 2018 - it let's you look at any of his years by Park, and by opponent, and you can also look at it for his entire major league career:
https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.fcgi?id=murphda08&year=2018&t=b
Hey, if the Mets hit .210 but had a .700 winning % at home, I would grin and bear it - successful but boring. But they don't hit and don't win at home. That is boring, but not successful, and in need of solutions.
Also, Daniel Murphy has been quite the Mets' opponent since being traded from the Mets: 181 PAs, .383/.442/.698!!
It is also interesting to note that he hit .284 career in Citi and Shea, which was lower than he hit in 22 other parks. He was also about the same rank in on base and in slugging %. More proof that Citi is TOUGH to hit in.
I went to a Citifield game in Murph's last Mets season, where he crushed a liner to right center and hit the top of the fence and stayed in - he crushed it and I was shocked it didn't go out - I bet he was shocked and disheartened too.
Mack, you probably saw the letters ERA and OBP floating together in your soup - then your mother told you to eat it!
ReplyDeleteNothing bothers me more about professional sports as when a team skimps on the things that only cost money, like having bigger staffs in the minors or small scouting departments. This applies to all sports. Joining the analytics revolution should help them. The more good info you have the better chance you have of making good decisions.
ReplyDeleteRobb
ReplyDeleteGlad we dont do dat
This is not what John from Albany requested, but I found it interesting. Someone quantified Park Factors and if you scroll down the page you'll see the dismal allowances that must be made for CitiField:
ReplyDeletehttps://rotogrinders.com/pages/ballpark-factors-49556
Surprised? Not me.
Delete