Home-field advantage rant

[Ieatantlers]

In no other sport do teams get such an advantage by manipulating their roster to fit their homefield as they do in baseball. The twinkies put together the same team every year to go far below .500 on the road, but make up for it by using super-astro-turf. There needs to be a regulation on major league ballparks (turf speed, fence length, grass depth, etc). If you look at the past 20 years, the winningest home teams have the most 'unusual' stadiums (ie. Boston, Minn, Yankee-short-fence, etc) There is nothing preventing a team from putting in a 90 foot fence and having guys train to hit pop-ups for doubles. Shouldn't there be some sort of regulations?

[Brown duck]

Yes, lets make all stadiums uniform and take all the fun out of the game. While we're at it, lets make each inning timed, and institute a little league-like 10-run mercy rule.

True, in other sports, the venues are identical in size and shape. But in what other sport do the true fans discuss at length which venue is the best and which they've attended? (FYI, I've been to Tigers Stadium, Comerica, Fenway, Turner Field, old Busch, and Camden Yards - Camden is far and away the best park of the bunch, though not the most historical or most personal, special memories)

I applaud teams like the Twins who build their teams to suit their parks - its just smart baseball. Remember, with free agency, it's not all about hitting the ball out of the park - you still need good pitching, which is why teams like the Rangers (who play in a band box) have a tough time attracting free agent pitchers. Yes, you play 81 games per year in your home stadium, but you have 81 opponents playing there, too.

And I'm going to need some numbers to back up your claim that teams with "unusual stadiums" (which itself needs to be quantified somehow - what's usual?) have the best records over the past 20 years. I'd argue that the Yankees and BoSox have been successful because of the money they're able to spend, and the Twins have been successful (more or less) because of a good farm system and smart managing. And are those the winningest teams of the past 20 years? What about the Braves? They won 14 straight division titles (1 WS) encompassing two stadiums, with nothing notable about either (not that I remember Fulton County Stadium all that well). What about the Cubs? Wrigley is somewhat unusual in a way - lots of HR's but no success (and they've been known to grow the grass long to help their infielders - what gamesmanship!). What about this years' Phillies? Lots of power hitters in a hitter-friendly park, yet their home record is 16-22 while they play .634 ball on the road! You can build your team a certain way, but they still have to play the games.

And I think there are still some differences in football stadiums (turf vs. grass, dome vs. outdoor, cold vs. warm weather) that allow them to build their teams to suit their home stadiums. Why has the NFC North (what was it before the new divisions?) always been known for power running teams? Cold, nasty weather in Green Bay, Chicago, and Minneapolis (before the dome) precludes finesse passing offenses.

This was fun - good topic.

[sweatyspartan]

I love different ballparks. I love the stories of letting the grass grow long for grounder hitting teams, or wetting down the base paths for fast runners. Short porches, green monsters and hills in the outfield make the game unique and result in me going to every stadium possible when I travel (checked off great american ballpark in cincy last week...GREAT ballpark).

It does give you a bad feeling when you lose on a routine pop fly that makes it over the short fence or a dropped ball when the centerfielder stumbles running up the hill in CF, but thats the game I suppose.

[Brown duck]

and hills in the outfield

I forgot about that one - that's stupid; there should only be one hill on a ball field.

[augustus0603]

Hmm. Kind of makes you think how good a certain team would be if they designed their offense to be played in a certain, unique, stadium.....

[fishenrg]

The Twins are opening their new outdoor stadium next year anyway.

[Ieatantlers]

Don't get me wrong guys, I never said each ballpark should be identical. I just said there should be some sort of guidelines. If you search 'Park Factor' you can see the top scoring ballparks, and not so coincidentally, there are a lot of perennial playoff contenders that top the list. Its mainly Minnesota that drives me nuts, but there are some others.

And whoever said the Tigers might want to fit their lineup to Comerica, I agree. Sadly they kind of have tried to do that with all the batting 'fire-power- we supposedly had last couple years. Guess you can't win em all.

[Brown duck]

If you search 'Park Factor' you can see the top scoring ballparks, and not so coincidentally, there are a lot of perennial playoff contenders that top the list.

Well, I googled 'park factor' at your suggestion. Are you looking at this list http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor ?

If so, I don't see your gripe: the top 5 are Arizona, Colorado, Minneapolis, Kansas City and Florida. Not what I would call "perennial playoff contenders" there, though each (with the exception of KC) has been in the playoffs in the past few seasons. Boston is #15 (right in the middle).

[William H Bonney]

Hmm. Kind of makes you think how good a certain team would be if they designed their offense to be played in a certain, unique, stadium.....

I've been saying that since the DAY they opened up Comerica...:dizzy: Comerica was taylor-made for pitching and speed.. and make sure that speed is in your OF to chase down those balls in the gaps.

I think it's great that some teams are smart enough to know their strengths and weaknesses and build their team around the "park".

[sweatyspartan]

some of the problems with a hitter friendly park like the Rangers have is you can't get top pitching talent to want to sign there.

[jstfish48162]

what about the new Yankee Stadium.....balls are flying out of that park like crazy. you would think that Steinbrenner would have built a little deeper fence.....eh?????

:fish:

[Michihunter]

Watching today's game the AFLAC question was What 4 major league teams scored 800 runs or more the last 3 seasons. Detroit, Cleveland, Texas and Boston. Seems that the Tigers HAVE been built for Comerica afterall.

[augustus0603]

Watching today's game the AFLAC question was What 4 major league teams scored 800 runs or more the last 3 seasons. Detroit, Cleveland, Texas and Boston. Seems that the Tigers HAVE been built for Comerica afterall.

Good point. They have played much better at home this year. The problem with their offense the last couple of years has been the inability to manufacture a run when needed. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

[William H Bonney]

Watching today's game the AFLAC question was What 4 major league teams scored 800 runs or more the last 3 seasons. Detroit, Cleveland, Texas and Boston. Seems that the Tigers HAVE been built for Comerica afterall.

Yeah but........:lol:


Scoring a bunch of runs doesn't mean squat, if you can't stop the other team from scoring just as many..


P.S. I'm pretty sure New Yankee Stadium is the same dimensions as the old Stadium.