What ever happened to 'homefield advantage'?

[PolarVortex]

Mariners have the 4th best road record in the AL this year and the worst record at home.
Last year the Mariners had the 2nd best road record in the AL and only the 10th best at home. The inability to win at a league-average pace at home was the reason this team missed the playoffs last year.

Since the beginning of last season, the Mariners are 83-70 on the road and 70-78 at home.

Our recent 5 game winning streak was all achieved on the road and abruptly ended as soon as the team returned home.

 

[blstoker]

Mariners have the 4th best road record in the AL this year and the worst record at home.
Last year the Mariners had the 2nd best road record in the AL and only the 10th best at home. The inability to win at a league-average pace at home was the reason this team missed the playoffs last year.

Since the beginning of last season, the Mariners are 83-70 on the road and 70-78 at home.

Our recent 5 game winning streak was all achieved on the road and abruptly ended as soon as the team returned home.

Its because this team isn't build for success at Safeco. Z has liked all or nothing types at the plate that typically struggle at Safeco. Even with all the inconsistancy scoring runs at home (3.7 rpg) the team has their best BA (.250) since 2009, best OBP (.313) since 2009 & best slg (.403) since 2007.

 

[Cloud]

Safeco Field is a reality and not a myth.

 

[NWinAZ]

But both teams have to play there so...

 

[SeattleCoug]

Its because this team isn't build for success at Safeco.

Yea who would thought an outfield filled with DHs and infielders wouldn't work.

 

[blstoker]

But both teams have to play there so...

Yes, that's true. Both teams play at the field, but the advantage is that the home team not only plays there more often, but that they have the opportunity to build their team in a way that highlights the strengths of the ball park. Z never seemed to take the ball park into account when building his teams.

since 2008 (638 games, including last night):
- H/AB R 2B/3B/HR SB/CS BB/SO BA/OBP/SLG/OPS

M's - 5087/21072 2256 951/76/517 350/129 1808/4731 .241/.304/.367/.672
O's - 5337/22077 2528 1013/66/587 358/167 1886/4750 .242/.305/.373/.678

In the time that Z was leading the team up til now, the M's have had no descernable advantage at home over their opponents (O's stands for opponents, not Orioles ). Actually, with the offense scoring 1/2 a run less per game, it's been a disadvantage for the M's.

If interested in what it looked like before Z:

1999-2007 (692 games):

M's - 6087/23026 3212 1086/118/643 546/167 2405/4298 .264/.337/.406/.742
O's - 6017/24044 2966 1196/62/704 312/175 2303/4608 .250/.319/.393/.712

When the M's had teams built for Safeco, they:

1) Batted 10% higher.

2) Hit 32% more SH/SF.

3) Stole 46% more bases.

4) Attempted 37% more stolen bases.

5) Walked 23% more.

6) Struck out 17% less often.

7) Hit 10% more EBH (5% 2B, 42% 3B, 15% HR).

 

[PolarVortex]

But both teams have to play there so...

Yeah but our opponents aren't here frequently enough to let the stadium get in their head. The Mariner offense clearly has a psychological disadvantage at home.

I know, I know, Edgar and Boone didn't have a problem here, but Edgar could have hit anywhere and Boone was roided out of his mind.

 

[NWinAZ]

Yeah but our opponents aren't here frequently enough to let the stadium get in their head. The Mariner offense clearly has a psychological disadvantage at home.

That I can buy.

 

[NWinAZ]

Yes, that's true. Both teams play at the field, but the advantage is that the home team not only plays there more often, but that they have the opportunity to build their team in a way that highlights the strengths of the ball park. Z never seemed to take the ball park into account when building his teams.

since 2008 (638 games, including last night):
- H/AB R 2B/3B/HR SB/CS BB/SO BA/OBP/SLG/OPS

M's - 5087/21072 2256 951/76/517 350/129 1808/4731 .241/.304/.367/.672
O's - 5337/22077 2528 1013/66/587 358/167 1886/4750 .242/.305/.373/.678

In the time that Z was leading the team up til now, the M's have had no descernable advantage at home over their opponents (O's stands for opponents, not Orioles ). Actually, with the offense scoring 1/2 a run less per game, it's been a disadvantage for the M's.

If interested in what it looked like before Z:

1999-2007 (692 games):

M's - 6087/23026 3212 1086/118/643 546/167 2405/4298 .264/.337/.406/.742
O's - 6017/24044 2966 1196/62/704 312/175 2303/4608 .250/.319/.393/.712

When the M's had teams built for Safeco, they:

1) Batted 10% higher.

2) Hit 32% more SH/SF.

3) Stole 46% more bases.

4) Attempted 37% more stolen bases.

5) Walked 23% more.

6) Struck out 17% less often.

7) Hit 10% more EBH (5% 2B, 42% 3B, 15% HR).

I guess comment was that people say we aren't built for Safeco so that is why we lose at home, but my point is that other teams aren't built specifically for Safeco either yet they win there. I just think we aren't built to win period. The reason for better road success than home success over the last two years could be a number of reason other than Safeco effect. I really don't think it is a stadium vs stadium issue. Could be wrong.

 

[unlvmariners]

I guess comment was that people say we aren't built for Safeco so that is why we lose at home, but my point is that other teams aren't built specifically for Safeco either yet they win there. I just think we aren't built to win period. The reason for better road success than home success over the last two years could be a number of reason other than Safeco effect. I really don't think it is a stadium vs stadium issue. Could be wrong.

I don't think its a stadium issue either. I think its the way the roster was built. I think the results of the season are the same regardless of the home field. Could the home stadium play a factor? YES but not a big enough factor to change this team into a playoff team.

 

[blstoker]

I guess comment was that people say we aren't built for Safeco so that is why we lose at home, but my point is that other teams aren't built specifically for Safeco either yet they win there. I just think we aren't built to win period. The reason for better road success than home success over the last two years could be a number of reason other than Safeco effect. I really don't think it is a stadium vs stadium issue. Could be wrong.

My point is that by building a team to win in Safeco gives them an advantage to win at home The fact that over the last 5 years the Mariners haven't been built for their own stadium and the skill level of the players themselves is so low, that teams that only play in Seattle a few times a year have at least equal footing when playing against the team that plays there 81 times. So, it's not just getting people who are suited for Safeco, but they also have to be good players. At the same time, it isn't just going after good players, but ones that are suited for Safeco.

With the way the playoffs are now, winning 45 games at home (league average) will mean that a losing road record could still get you into playoffs - and depending on the division - 50 home wins could put a team with a losing road record into a division title. I feel an offense built for Safeco would travel well to any stadium, but not every offense would succeed in Safeco.

There have been too many guys like Morrison (.217/.284/.356/.640), Smoak (.204/.293/.346/.639), Zunino (.194/.250/.347/.597), Cust (.205/.338/.353/.692), Johnson (.161/.251/.246/.497), Balentin (.226/.261/.375/.636), Olivo (.218/.257/.396/.653), Peguero (.176/.237/.344/.581), Saunders (.219/.290/.357/.646), and Hart (.198/.289/.277/.567).

At the same time, there have been too few guys like Ichiro (.319/.365/.415/.780), Ibanez (.273/.346/.472/.817), Gutierrez *healthy* (.261/.319/.393/.712), Cano (.300/.353/.465/.818) and Cruz (.282/.360/.493/.853).

 

[NWinAZ]

My point is that by building a team to win in Safeco gives them an advantage to win at home The fact that over the last 5 years the Mariners haven't been built for their own stadium and the skill level of the players themselves is so low, that teams that only play in Seattle a few times a year have at least equal footing when playing against the team that plays there 81 times. So, it's not just getting people who are suited for Safeco, but they also have to be good players. At the same time, it isn't just going after good players, but ones that are suited for Safeco.

Agreed that getting good players overall is the #1 factor because in reality a player best suited for Safeco is a high on-base guy. But on-base guys are keys to winning anywhere so I don't know what is the Safeco itself guy. Cruz isn't a "Safeco Guy". but he sure worked out because he is just talented and talent prevails anywhere.

 

[blstoker]

Agreed that getting good players overall is the #1 factor because in reality a player best suited for Safeco is a high on-base guy. But on-base guys are keys to winning anywhere so I don't know what is the Safeco itself guy. Cruz isn't a "Safeco Guy". but he sure worked out because he is just talented and talent prevails anywhere.

The thing about Cruz, is that he adjusts his approach at Safeco. He hits for a higher average and much higher OBP when playing in Safeco, and hits for much more power in other stadiums. His ability to adjust his approach is what has made him so successful this year. He's having the most Edgar-like season @ Safeco the M's have seen since Edgar in 2000, which is impressive for a guy that is mostly known for hitting HRs. So, he may not be thought of as a Safeco guy, but when he's playing in Safeco, he's been playing like the prototypical "Safeco guy", to which I stand corrected from this offseason when I thought he wouldn't be worth what he was being paid and I didn't want him here.....

Guys who just swing for the fences tend to struggle @ Safeco, so when I say a guy suited for Safeco, I mean a player who is capable of playing small ball. Hit for average, is patient at the plate, uses the entire field and hits to the gaps. Power is a positive, but not a must, but someone who can hit SH & SF is definitely a bonus, and having 2-3 guys who can steal bases (as well as one more on the bench to PR) is also a must. Having players that just flat out hustle is also a bonus. The team can do well when they have one or two HR swingers in the line up - but it can't survive having 7.

 

[Destroydacre]

I won't argue that Safeco has no effect on hitting stats, but IMO using Safeco Field has always just been an excuse for bad hitters. The Mariners lineup has been full of bad hitters for years, teams put together by incompetent general managers who don't have a clue. Justin Smoak is hitting .224 this year playing half his games at Rogers Centre. Maybe they should move the fences in? The early 2000s Mariners teams did fine playing in Safeco because they didn't suck.

 

[blstoker]

Justin Smoak is hitting .224 this year playing half his games at Rogers Centre. Maybe they should move the fences in?

Smoak has actually had a decent year this year, especially in limited playing time (60 games started out of 140). He's averaging 1 HR every 16.3 ABs, a double every 18.8 and an extra base hit every 8.4, despite averaging just .224 BA. He's actually hitting an astounding .317 RISP, with a .717 slg. He's been reliable off the bench (.273 as a pinch hitter) and hits ok in Toronto (.242/.326/.484/.811). He's producing a run for Toronto every 3.95 times he appears at the plate, which is better than anyone on Seattle (Cruz is 4.67).

Smoak may never become the .280 40 HR guy it seemed he was destined to be when the M's traded for him, but I think that's more this organization ruining a talent than Smoak was actually that bad.

 

[NWinAZ]

Smoak may never become the .280 40 HR guy it seemed he was destined to be when the M's traded for him, but I think that's more this organization ruining a talent than Smoak was actually that bad.

He was never that guy. 31 career MiLB homers in 1126 PA's.

 

[blstoker]

He was never that guy. 31 career MiLB homers in 1126 PA's.

I never expected it, but that was all I heard from everywhere when he was traded for. I expected him to be a 40 2B 20 HR guy personally.

 

[NWinAZ]

I never expected it, but that was all I heard from everywhere when he was traded for. I expected him to be a 40 2B 20 HR guy personally.

Ya that is what M's brass was selling us. Watched him in spring a lot for Texas and never got the hype. I saw him at best as a .250 20 homer, 20 doubles guy with 50 RBI's. Turns out that would have been great.

 

[blstoker]

Ya that is what M's brass was selling us. Watched him in spring a lot for Texas and never got the hype. I saw him at best as a .250 20 homer, 20 doubles guy with 50 RBI's. Turns out that would have been great.

He was at his best when he was patient and hitting balls to the gaps with nice even swings, but after a week of that he'd revert to trying to pull everything and hit it as far as possible with impossibly long swings. I never understood why they couldn't keep him with a short swing - but it looked like they were actually coaching him to try and kill the ball instead of just taking what you're given.

 

[NWinAZ]

He was at his best when he was patient and hitting balls to the gaps with nice even swings, but after a week of that he'd revert to trying to pull everything and hit it as far as possible with impossibly long swings. I never understood why they couldn't keep him with a short swing - but it looked like they were actually coaching him to try and kill the ball instead of just taking what you're given.

Hard to say whose decision that was. I always said he should have modeled his stroke after McGwire's. Despite the roids, McGwire's short stroke was perfect for a bigger man. The advantage of being bigger is that you don't need to swing as hard to hit homers but yet he swung away.