Unfriendly Dimensions Lead to Boring Results
HOME FIELD HITTING DISADVANTAGES
Binghamton is off to a poor hitting start.
I have never been to the Binghamton park, nor to the Phillies’ Reading AA park.
But I believe the best way to assess a team’s hitters is how they hit ON THE ROAD.
Why? Because some teams play in lovely hitter’s parks and some in stingy, frustrating pitcher’s parks. The road largely equalizes hitter abilities from team to team.
So, check this out about the Binghamton Rumble Ponies:
Over the 5 year period from 2021 through 2025, Binghamton hitters on the road hit 340 HRs, while Reading’s hitters hit just 277.
Do the math. That’s 13 more “away” homers per year by Bingo than by Reading.
So that certainly leaves the impression that Binghamton hitters are much better than Reading hitters, huh?
At home, though, Reading hitters in 5 years smashed 373 HRs, or 96 more than Reading hit on the road!
That implies to me that Reading’s home park is “very hitter friendly.”
On the other hand, Binghamton in 5 years hit just 240 homers at home, or a stunning 100 fewer than they hit on the road!
That implies that “Bingo Caverns” plays as a very hitter UNfriendly” park.
Conclusion: if Binghamton on the road has hit 23% more HRs than Reading, then, if Binghamton also hit 23% more HRs than Reading while playing their home games, they would have hit 459 homers (1.23 * 373) at home.
But they hit just 240, or 219 fewer than 459. 219/5 is 44 more home HRs per year at home.
So, the next time you think Binghamton hitters are lousy, that they are Stumble Ponies and not RUMBLE Ponies, think again.
Think how doggone deflating Moribito Park has to be to Binghamton hitters power-wise…44 more home runs at home annually would do absolute wonders for Binghamton hitters’ statistics.
When I see this, and also realize how (let’s say it as it is) piss-poor the hitting conditions are for Brooklyn Cyclones hitters, too, when they’re at home, I simply am baffled as to why an organization like the Mutts would make their hitters struggle at two of their 4 top minors levels in that fashion.
What? Don’t you think that a good hitter, losing perhaps five home runs a year in Binghamton and seven home runs a year in Brooklyn, is going to be having a much harder time impressing the bosses statistically than they would if they were in a normal hitting park or, better yet, in a hitter friendly park? And also look less attractive as trade bait?
And remember dimensions when you ponder Mets prospect pitchers too.
How often have we seen pitchers dazzle in Brooklyn and Binghamton, like Hamel, Vasil, Sproat, Tidwell and Suarez, and then get roughed up in AAA, where the balls carry out much better, just judging by the much higher home run totals in AAA versus AA and versus High A.
I would strongly recommend that Mets management, in coordination with Binghamton and Brooklyn, consider how they might be able to move the fences in somewhat to make both of them at least hitter neutral parks.
“Mr. Cohen, tear down those walls”, President Ronald Reagan might have said.
And put up ones that are more hitter friendly.
Do it in Queens too.
I have said it before, and I will say it again, fans dig the long ball.
And most of them hate the long Mets hitter fly ball that is caught on the warning track that would be a home run in other parks. They hate it even more when their home team is losing too much.
Who wants to go to a game where your team is losing too frequently, and can’t get the darn ball over the wall?
Simply, the Mets compete (poorly) for fannies in NY seats with the Yankees.
And those Yankees? Boy oh boy are they smart! How so?
So far, both teams have played 13 home games.
In 13 home games, the Yankees have hit a whopping 24 home runs.
And in 13 home games, the Mets have hit a paltry 10 home runs, with quite a few near misses that show up in the box score as an average-deflating out, not a home run.
As a consequence, the Yankees have scored 75 runs at home in 13 games, and the Mets have scored an anemic 50 runs at home in 13 games (and just 39 in their last 12 home games). Boring.
Frankly, any smart businessman would know what to do here.
But I’m no longer hedging my bets that there is one in Queens.
5 comments:
Yankees, winners of 8 straight, 42 HRs in 27 games. Mets with 19 in 26 games.
Remind me again why we follow the Queens crew rather than the Bronx bunch?
Given that people like Cohen are clearly intelligent, what could possibly be the reasons why the team would not have hitters neutral parks?
Improves hitters confidence. Gives better reads on player development. Better experience for fans.
There is no logic at all to this situation & I cannot find a single reason that this would persist.
Downright foolish. No other explanation.
Curious indeed. Recall my claim that the best projector of how players will perform at the next level up is how they have performed most recently as baselined by the extent of similarity of their current performance environment with the next one. At some level Bklyn and Binghamton make sense as the environment is close to what it would be in Queens! Ironically, this would seem to be a reliable indicator of both hitting and pitching as both the major league roster and the Bklyn and Bingo rosters are having trouble hitting! Their pitching numbers are comparable to some degree as well. But then what's up with Syracuse? Shouldn't the fences be extended not shortened?
I am making a point ironically here. What you want is consistency throughout to improve evidence based judgments about future performance. I frankly prefer neutrality rather than hitting friendliness throughout the organization. My worry is that if your goal is to have your pitchers pound the zone with good stuff, you don't want hitter friendly parks like Syracuse because you end up with pitchers like Wenninger who have good but not plus fastballs walking too many hitters, probably because he is nibbling more than you would want him too.
It's one of the things I like about Tong (not his motion which is an injury waiting to happen, not now, while he is still built like Gumby and equally flexible, but eventually), but his throwing his best stuff in the zone all the time. Remember how tough last year's early season was on Sproat, until he adjusted; and so on. You want consistency throughout and baselined in a way that makes sense evaluating both hitters and pitchers.
It's not hard to do a study at the major league level since there is data about every fly ball and every home run as to what it would be at all the other parks. That is phase one of a study; phase two looks at how hitting home runs impacts approach at the plate; phase three is what style of play you are tying to teach throughout the organization. That should be an important factor in development strategy. Finally, you need to figure out where it is easier/harder to draft and develop talent (pitchers? hitters, what kind of hitters, etc)
Then data analytics can help you determine dimensions, including foul territory. And then once you have a range that makes sense at the major league level (given all the constraints that would impact the extent to which you can make changes), you have a blueprint/template for each of your affiliate ball parks.
It isn't hard to do that analytics part, and the build out is affordable, and the payoff in predictability, development and accuracy is well worth the costs.
What stifles Mets bats is 5+ ERA pitchers
Post a Comment