Red Sox pitching coach.

[Dipre]

You could, you know, look that up, right?

 

Park Factors

[table]Park|R|HR|H|2B|3B

Fenway|1.073|0.902|1.004|1.362

AT&T|1.049|0.926|1.009|1.025

[/table]

 

More thoughtless drivel, [insert trite nickname here].

 

You DO know that table is close to useless because of all the variables that pertain to park factors.

 

Thoughtless drivel indeed.

[Dipre]

We all stand corrected, that game was played at Citizens' Bank, which makes it all even more confusing, so i went to Gameday and tried to look for an explanation to Penny's dominance and i found one factor that stood out.

 

6 warning track shots and an incredible amount of pop-outs and groundouts.

 

So a measure of luck was indeed involved.

 

There was nothing different about his velocity, pitch location or pitch selection that would indicate an "improvement", in fact , a lot of pitches right down the heart of the plate were either ignored or popped-up.

 

The man was living middle-high in on Howard, Victorino, Rollins, Utley and Ibanez with his pencil fastball and no one made him pay.

[ORS]

You DO know that table is close to useless because of all the variables that pertain to park factors.

 

Thoughtless drivel indeed.

 

Please enlighten me, your grasp of statistics on the subject thus has been exemplary. I'm curious to know what else you can pull from your rectum.

[Dipre]

Please enlighten me' date=' your grasp of statistics on the subject thus has been exemplary. I'm curious to know what else you can pull from your rectum.[/quote']

 

No need to get personal, champ.

 

However, i find your fascination with men's evacuation systems quite interesting, but since i haven't insulted you, please find it in your heart to refrain from insulting me. You can keep a civil conversation i suppose?

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/gameday/index.jsp?gid=2009_09_02_sfnmlb_phimlb_1

 

Here's the link to that game's Gameday.

 

 

Oh, and about park factor (which in this case is moot anyway) quality of the pitching staff is a major influence on its overall end result.

 

Kauffman stadium is one of the hardest parks to drive the ball in, and even though the HR numbers are indeed very low, every other category is on par with the Rangers' Ballpark.

 

 

 

You can check out pitch selection and location, as well as out location and type.

[ORS]

This all goes back to my original point, the lack of thought that went into the original "LOL, the NL" sentiment that was the immediate justification for Penny's performance. Perhaps had you agreed with me up front, like you appear to be doing now, we could have left it at that.

[Dipre]

This all goes back to my original point' date=' the lack of thought that went into the original "LOL, the NL" sentiment that was the immediate justification for Penny's performance. Perhaps had you agreed with me up front, like you appear to be doing now, we could have left it at that.[/quote']

 

But you don't think the "LOL, the NL" sentiment has some validity to it, at least regarding pitching?

 

I can go right ahead now and cook you up a chart with at least 10 pitcher with sample sizes of 300 innings or more that were getting creamed in the AL, then went to the NL and found moderate to great success pitching there.

[ORS]

I don't deny the NL is easier for pitchers. The AL consistently averages about 0.5 runs more per game. The DH spot consistenly produces about 60-100 more RC than pitchers/pinch hitters (average of 80 runs, or 0.5 R/Game). The difference in rules makes it so.

[Dipre]

I don't deny the NL is easier for pitchers. The AL consistently averages about 0.5 runs more per game. The DH spot consistenly produces about 60-100 more RC than pitchers/pinch hitters (average of 80 runs' date=' or 0.5 R/Game). The difference in rules makes it so.[/quote']

 

Also,(and this is what i meant about the stadiums), most of the NL parks are pitcher-friendly, or at least neutral, unlike the AL, where about half are brutal for pitchers, Fenway included.

 

ORS call-out alert:

 

Of the 14 AL stadiums, the following can be considered hitter-friendly, if not downright launching pads:

 

New Yankee (AKA Coors East)

Fenway

Camden Yards

US Cellular

Tropicana

Rangers Ballpark

The Metrodome

[ORS]

I don't know if I agree with that. There are a mix of parks in both leagues.

[Dipre]

I don't know if I agree with that. There are a mix of parks in both leagues.

 

There are.

 

But i think that the balance shifts just a bit towards bigger stadiums in the NL, with the West and East leading the charge.

[SoxSport]

The.Post-Season.Is.A.Crapshoot.

 

The Cards won it all in 2006 with a team that was a disrespect to playoff baseball.

 

I agree. Depends on who is hot. Especially the pitching. You have to top out in October.

[Dipre]

I agree. Depends on who is hot. Especially the pitching. You have to top out in October.

 

Exactly my point.

[CrespoBlows]

Pedro's line:

 

7 ip, 1 ER, 9K.

 

9K.

 

The Giants had a single player with an OPS over .786. They suck.

[MANNYHOF24]

The Giants had a single player with an OPS over .786. They suck.

 

Yeah, but did you see the highlights, Pedro would have done at least pretty well against anyone with that stuff. Not that good, but decent at least.

[CrespoBlows]

Yeah' date=' but did you see the highlights, Pedro would have done at least pretty well against anyone with that stuff. Not that good, but decent at least.[/quote']

 

How do we know that?

[MANNYHOF24]

How do we know that?

 

Well, judging from the past, when Pedro is between 90-92 mph with the fastball, he is pretty damn good.

[Spudboy]

How do we know that?

 

Faith in our own judgment.

[Dipre]

The Giants had a single player with an OPS over .786. They suck.

 

They make the Royals look like the Yankees.

 

They are, however, dangerous because of their pitching.

[ORS]

Also,(and this is what i meant about the stadiums), most of the NL parks are pitcher-friendly, or at least neutral, unlike the AL, where about half are brutal for pitchers, Fenway included.

 

ORS call-out alert:

 

Of the 14 AL stadiums, the following can be considered hitter-friendly, if not downright launching pads:

 

New Yankee (AKA Coors East)

Fenway

Camden Yards

US Cellular

Tropicana

Rangers Ballpark

The Metrodome

Since you've editted this since my original reply, I'll provide another.

 

The Metrodome and the Trop fluctuate between hitter/pitcher friendly, they are neutral parks.

 

So that whittles your list down to 5 parks. In the NL there is Citizens Bank (Phillies), Great America (Reds), Wrigley (Cubs), Coors (Rockies), and Chase (DBacks).

 

The equal mix I indicated seems more accurate.

[Dipre]

Since you've editted this since my original reply, I'll provide another.

 

The Metrodome and the Trop fluctuate between hitter/pitcher friendly, they are neutral parks.

 

So that whittles your list down to 5 parks. In the NL there is Citizens Bank (Phillies), Great America (Reds), Wrigley (Cubs), Coors (Rockies), and Chase (DBacks).

 

The equal mix I indicated seems more accurate.

 

I think we'd have to go a little deeper in research to come to a definitive conclusion:

 

There are parks, like AT&T, whose dimensions and regular wind factors would deem logical for the park to have a pitcher-friendly effect, so does the offense of that team, yea i can't figure out for the life of me why the hell is that park playing nearly like a hitter's park.

 

When i checked park factors for the Metrodome and Tropicana, i'll give you the Metrodome, since it actually fluctuates more to pitcher-friendly than hitter's haven, but you could make an argument based on the Trop's measurements, that some of the below-average offensive years at the park have more to do with the team's suck than the park itself.

[SoxSport]

Pedro is still effective with that great changeup and corkscrew fastball, even at 90-92. His brother, Ramon, could not come back from a torn labrum--but Pedro is a special pitcher, and might pull it off.

He doesn't need to throw 96 to be effective, if he can change speeds and locate his pitches.

[ORS]

.... but you could make an argument based on the Trop's measurements' date=' that some of the below-average offensive years at the park have more to do with the team's suck than the park itself.[/quote']

Why? How do you think park factors are calculated?

[Dipre]

Why? How do you think park factors are calculated?

 

I checked the formula beforehand, my point is that a team as futile in both sides of the ball, but specially on the offensive as the 2006 Rays is bound to impact park factor negatively.

[ORS]

Why? The calculation compares their offensive contribution to the game score + their pitching contribution to game score in home vs. road parks. If they suck on offense, they suck at home and on the road. If their pitching sucks, it sucks in both places. Your conclusion appears to ignore analysis and come directly from opinion.

[Dipre]

Why? The calculation compares their offensive contribution to the game score + their pitching contribution to game score in home vs. road parks. If they suck on offense' date=' they suck at home and on the road. If their pitching sucks, it sucks in both places. Your conclusion appears to ignore analysis and come directly from opinion.[/quote']

 

That's the point.

 

What if the difference between home and road performance isn't as negligible as the stat makes it out to be?

 

Factors in home games are nearly constant,and quality of pitching cancels itself out, on the road, not so much.

 

I took the 2006 Rays as an example, because their 57 run difference in runs scored between home and the road is a significant number when taking into consideration this is a team that scored less than 700 runs overall.

[ORS]

What do you mean by "...quality of pitching cancels itself out, on the road, not so much."? Their home opponents are, for the most part, the same as their road opponents. Being on the road has no effect on quality of pitching.

[Dojji]

I think he means that at home, you're always playing in the same park, but "the road" represents a conglomeration of many different park effects. That makes road results, especially for individual starting pitchers within the same team for example, a bit more ambiguous than they appear to be.

[Dipre]

Just for argument's sakes, i looked up HR/game numbers for AT&T and Fenway Park:

 

Park factor has AT&T leading Fenway by a 0.936 to 0.907 value, for 0.029 difference, which in Park Factor, is somewhat of a noticeable difference.

 

However, HR/Game has Fenway beating AT&T park by a 2.18 to 1.48 margin, which is an enormous difference.

 

In fact, the only stadiums which have a lower HR/Game ratio than the Giants this year are Turner Field, Busch stadium and Dodger stadium.

[Dipre]

I think he means that at home' date=' you're always playing in the same park, but "the road" represents a conglomeration of many different park effects. That makes road results, especially for individual starting pitchers within the same team for example, a bit more ambiguous than they appear to be.[/quote']

 

Wow, couldn't have said it better myself.

[Dojji]

Oh and if you are tempted to simply assume that the road parks balance out to neutral, or even "neutral enough to be going on with" bear in mind two things.

 

1: Unbalanced schedules and interleague play means that everyone's road park effects are going to fall together a little differently.

 

2: There is one park that will never appear on your team's road stats. Its own park. Skewing the conglomerate park effects of your league by the value of whatever your own park's effects actually are (most notable in extreme effect parks)

 

Which would seem to be the point, since in principle that might give you an isolated variable -- except for the unbalanced schedules and interpeague play, combined with plain old ordinary sample size variation, confound that variable making it dang hard to make a meaningful number out of the data available.