Austin Hedges

[Villain]

That doesn't answer my question though, and I think perhaps you're a little unclear on how park factors are calculated. Employing a bad pitching staff that gives up a lot of home runs will not affect a team's park factor unless there is also a home/road split in the data.

Total runs surrendered home versus away is a major component of park factor. Most calculations only sample data that goes back 3 or 5 years or since their last renovation. Since PETCO was renovated about the same time as their rotation (LOL), you get a pretty outlandish result. I expect their rating to regress. I do not believe that brining in LF suddenly made that place into a hitters' park, which is the point I'm really trying to argue here.

If a team simply has generally bad pitchers that give up a lot of home runs that should show up in their "Away" data as well, and therefore shouldn't really affect their park factor much.

2015 James Shields gave up 19 at home versus 14 away.
2015 Ian Kennedy gave up 19 at home versus 12 away.

So, no.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Except you're only playing 9 games at any given park.

Compared to 81 at your own.

The park factor considers both sides though, not just the home pitchers. So it tends to balance out.

 

[Villain]

Except you're only playing 9 games at any given park.

Compared to 81 at your own.

It's usually Total Runs Home versus Total Runs Away so 81 and 81 (theoretically), in some part of the equation.

Wikipedia has the most simplified one: Batting park factor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you dig around baseball reference and other sites you can find some much more intricate equations, but that aspect (TRH/TRA) is pretty much universally represented.

 

[The Q]

Yeah but i'm just saying. the effect of any one time on any one park besides their own is only 9 games.

Not to mention you don't face the same pitching staff every year.

And the baseball margin of error is so small.

 

[Villain]

The park factor considers both sides though, not just the home pitchers. So it tends to balance out.

Yeah, but the point is PETCO has a smaller sample size due to the dimensions changing and has also had some really bad pitching. Their rating is inflated because of those two things. Again, this is why the park factors change annually. Wrigley Field doesn't change, Fenway Park doesn't change, etc etc, yet their Park Factors tend to fluctuate. I think there was a year that Wrigley was worse than Coors (or close to it).

 

[DragonfromTO]

Total runs surrendered home versus away is a major component of park factor. Most calculations only sample data that goes back 3 or 5 years or since their last renovation. Since PETCO was renovated about the same time as their rotation (LOL), you get a pretty outlandish result. I expect their rating to regress. I do not believe that brining in LF suddenly made that place into a hitters' park, which is the point I'm really trying to argue here.


2015 James Shields gave up 19 at home versus 14 away.
2015 Ian Kennedy gave up 19 at home versus 12 away.

So, no.

You only picked two individual pitchers, and you picked them from the period of closer PETCO fences.

Looking for something quick and dirty on park factors I found this Joe Posnanski piece which luckily and coincidentally has a larger sample of data for the Padres.

A bit more math: Park Factors – Joe Posnanski

"Everybody knows San Diego is a great pitchers park. But what do the numbers say? This time I’ll use the overall numbers.

Since 2010, at PetCo Park, there have 2,268 runs scored. Both teams, remember.

Since 2010, away from Petco, there have been 2,660 runs scored in Padres games. That’s about 400 more — about 100 more runs per year on the road.

The Padres offense has scored more on the road. Since 2010, the Padres offense has scored about 13% more runs on the road. The Padres pitching staff has allowed about 16% more runs on the road. Every single year, the Padres offense has scored fewer runs at home than on the road. Every single year, the Padres pitching staff has allowed fewer runs at home than on the road.

THAT is a pitcher’s park.

 

[Villain]

You only picked two individual pitchers, and you picked them from the period of closer PETCO fences.

Looking for something quick and dirty on park factors I found this Joe Posnanski piece which luckily and coincidentally has a larger sample of data for the Padres.

A bit more math: Park Factors – Joe Posnanski

"Everybody knows San Diego is a great pitchers park. But what do the numbers say? This time I’ll use the overall numbers.

Since 2010, at PetCo Park, there have 2,268 runs scored. Both teams, remember.

Since 2010, away from Petco, there have been 2,660 runs scored in Padres games. That’s about 400 more — about 100 more runs per year on the road.

The Padres offense has scored more on the road. Since 2010, the Padres offense has scored about 13% more runs on the road. The Padres pitching staff has allowed about 16% more runs on the road. Every single year, the Padres offense has scored fewer runs at home than on the road. Every single year, the Padres pitching staff has allowed fewer runs at home than on the road.

THAT is a pitcher’s park.

An article from 2013 that is using the numbers from before the fences changed.... Okay....

 

[DragonfromTO]

An article from 2013 that is using the numbers from before the fences changed.... Okay....

But it's kind of part of the whole question here... if Petco is still just just as much of a pitcher's park as it was then wouldn't we expect to see similar splits now? But we don't.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Yeah, but the point is PETCO has a smaller sample size due to the dimensions changing and has also had some really bad pitching. Their rating is inflated because of those two things. Again, this is why the park factors change annually. Wrigley Field doesn't change, Fenway Park doesn't change, etc etc, yet their Park Factors tend to fluctuate. I think there was a year that Wrigley was worse than Coors (or close to it).

Their park factors fluctuate because the team's home/road splits fluctuate year to year. But that is not really a function of "generally bad/good pitching staff" (or lineup) though. Unless there is something showing that "bad" pitchers do worse at home than on the road (and vice versa for "good").

I mean, you say that the Padres "have also had some really bad pitching". I don't disagree, I just don't see why that bad pitching wouldn't pitch badly on the road too and balance out any negative effect on the home numbers.

 

[Villain]

But it's kind of part of the whole question here... if Petco is still just just as much of a pitcher's park as it was then wouldn't we expect to see similar splits now? But we don't.

You're right, and I'm arguing that is also because the cast and crew have changed, and numbers they are plugging into the park factor only go to 2013 (small sample size). They only changed a little bit of the park:



The PF, in my opinion, has been moved to the middle of the pack more drastically than the change of dimensions should allow.

Their park factors fluctuate because the team's home/road splits fluctuate year to year. But that is not really a function of "generally bad/good pitching staff" (or lineup) though. Unless there is something showing that "bad" pitchers do worse at home than on the road (and vice versa for "good").

I mean, you say that the Padres "have also had some really bad pitching". I don't disagree, I just don't see why that bad pitching wouldn't pitch badly on the road too and balance out any negative effect on the home numbers.

Yeah, I get what you're saying, but look at the splits! They are weird! This is what brings me to my point, the factor has been skewed by the likes of Kennedy and Shields, and I wouldn't expect it to stay where it is.

I definitely think moving in the fences was the right call and I think that it should help make it so things aren't as extreme as they used to be. I just don't believe that PETCO is now a neutral playing ground as some pre-HRD articles would suggest. It's still a pitchers' park.

 

[DragonfromTO]

Another one for him tonight. On quite a roll now.

 

[navamind]

Hopefully he keeps this up. The catcher position is pretty boring right now.

 

[The Q]

Hopefully he keeps this up. The catcher position is pretty boring right now.

I did a fantasy preview event, and my 2 experts on catches said that after the first 2 (Posey & Lucroy) they wouldn't want to draft a C, so just wait everyone out and be one of the last people to take one cause the gap is so small after those 2.

So it is a nice change to the pre-season expectations.