Why the Lack of Discussion Around Moving Citi's Walls In and Met Pitching?

by Bill Petti on Nov 5, 2011 11:43 AM EDT

Adam Rubin today discussed a study that attempted to project how many additional home runs David Wright, Jason Bay, and Ike Davis would have hit if the 2012 Citi Field dimensions had been in place since 2009.

The conclusion was that Wright would have hit 13 more home runs, Bay 9 more home runs, and Davis 2 more last year.

This is all well and good, but I feel as though folks have been ignoring the elephant in the room: the effect on run prevention.

Since 2009, Met pitchers have enjoyed the 4th largest advantage in terms of Fielding Independent Pitching at their home park. If you look at the difference between their home and away FIP, it's a difference of .63. Only the Padres in the NL had a better advantage (.65).

The difference here is really about home runs. If you look at xFIP over the same time period (which assumes a constant 10.6% HR/FB for all pitchers to avoid bias from park factors), the Mets ranked 6th worst in the NL (only the Pirates and Nationals were worse).

Yes, the park is projected to still be pitcher friendly (92/100 according to the article, where 100 is neutral), but it's still a pretty significant increase from where it was the past few years (mid- to low-70s). And given how bad the team was at run prevention this past season I don't know that they should be so hot to reduce the advantage Met pitchers gain at home, even with Johan Santana set to return to the rotation next season.

Let us not forget that the returning ace has posted his two highest FB% seasons at Citi Field since 2003. Yes, Santana posted FIPs of 3.79 and 3.54 in 2009 and 2010, but his xFIP was much higher both seasons (4.05 and 4.13).

So while I am all for giving the offense a little boost (an offense that still managed to score at above the NL average last year), my concern is that the team might be doing more harm than good from a run prevention standpoint.

Maybe I am overestimating the downside, but I am surprised more folks aren't focused on it.

Tweet Comment 28 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

In one sense...

I think the the conversation has focused on offense because many feel like the park was a drain on what could have been an outstanding offense. To use a football analogy, we could move the chains but didn’t have a player that could “take the top off” the defense. The Mets could conceivably go from a pretty good lineup to damn good one with just a wee bit more power; and that could happen without making any significant additions.

On the flipside, many of us feel like our pitching—bullpen at least—needs drastic overhauling anyway. That is, even in a Petco-like canyon the assorted schlock we brought in from the pen gave up runs by the bushel. With even “averagish” pitching, the park should play nicely in terms of run prevention (at worst neutral).

Apologies if I was too technical or precise with language. It's a weakness.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Nov 4, 2011 3:29 PM EDT reply actions

Yes and no

Yes, this is definitely going to have an impact (adversely) on the home-runs Met pitchers allow. However, I think on the other end, it helps in the sense of pitches thrown under duress. I know it sounds crazy because most people would say “it’s better to pitch with a guy on 2nd, then no runners on and a run scored on a solo shot.” This is not always the case. Sometimes having runner after runner on base due to huge gaps in the field it worse then a guy clearing the bases. Sometimes (though I would agree, a minority of the time) it’s better to start fresh. Also, think about how Mets pitchers probably struggled mentally with the idea “my team isn’t going to score runs for me.” That pressure with certainly be relieved.

by db36 on Nov 4, 2011 3:41 PM EDT reply actions

I don't think it's been an elephant in the room

A number of stories have referenced the thinking of the team (specifically Warthen? I forget) that the pitchers might develop bad habits because Citi lets them get away with it. Sort of a mirror of the home/away issue that’s been talked about re the hitters.

I have no idea if a dig into the data would support this theory, but it’s been talked about.

by SuperT on Nov 4, 2011 3:57 PM EDT reply actions

Agreed

This would be very, very difficult to test statistically, but I think that’s the rationale.

by sjohnson125 on Nov 5, 2011 7:38 AM EDT up reply actions

You could look at pitchers before and after a move to a more pitcher-friendly park

But I don’t know about sample size. I think it is an interesting view, but I am more than a little skeptical as it places a large amount of cause on environmental factors rather than the inherent talent of the pitchers. And in the Mets’ case, many of the pitchers weren’t exactly overflowing with talent.

Columnist at Beyond the Box Score and Amazin' Avenue.

by Bill Petti on Nov 5, 2011 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions

Bottom line-More HR's= more action,more runs and more fun for the fans to enjoy either way.

by Putnan Prince on Nov 4, 2011 7:06 PM EDT reply actions

This is more about placating the fans than hitting HR's IMO

if Alderson wants more HR’s, he could leave the park dimensions alone, and hire Brian McNamee, and problem solved.

One day, this team is going to kill me.

by fxcarden on Nov 4, 2011 8:33 PM EDT reply actions

pftt

We can’t afford McNamee! Haven’t you heard? The team is busted.

"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin

by dcrockett17 on Nov 4, 2011 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions

i liked another reason alderson gave

the pitchers more or less were terrible when they had to go on the road because they were so conditioned to rely on citi’s safety net. now they need to learn to pitch around that, and hopefully that will make them better pitchers everywhere.

by jhMLB on Nov 4, 2011 10:26 PM EDT reply actions

I'm not buying it.

The Mets’ pitchers’ improvement at home was bigger than their deprovement (technical term) on the road. I think we’re giving up an edge for no better reason than to placate whining fans.

I’m definitely with Bill Petti on this.

by Curtis3331 on Nov 5, 2011 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions

I don’t think pitching can be any worse than it is now, and these guys shouldn’t be given any sort of crutches. The dimensions figure to be like Shea Stadium, which was not a hitters park by any means.

If they were going to appease the fans, we’d all be living in the mansion by now. If we win the world series, fans will complain that they had to wait too long. If we win again the next year, they complain about pretzel and parking prices, the existence of anything referring to the Brooklyn Dodgers, the fact that #17 is in circulation, etc.

Mets, Jets, Islanders, Knicks.
GO RANGERS! Get Endy a ring!

by piazza62 on Nov 5, 2011 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Could less ground to cover result in more outs?

Just a thought, while our pitchers would likely give up more home runs, would they also benefit from the outfielders having less ground to cover? Is there any data to suggest (BABIP?) that more balls fall for hits in Citi’s expansive outfield?

The World's Most Famous Blog

by keithprime on Nov 4, 2011 11:06 PM EDT reply actions

It's a good question, but I don't think it is the case

The Mets’ BABIP against at Citi was lower than the road last year (.293 vs. .306). The splits were similar (actually worse) the two previous years.

Columnist at Beyond the Box Score and Amazin' Avenue.

by Bill Petti on Nov 5, 2011 7:56 AM EDT up reply actions

I'd like to think so

but the fact is the Mets team UZR was by far the worst in baseball, nearly 20 runs worse than the Orioles. This should be better when Turner, Harris, and Pagan aren’t playing as much as they were (hopefully, not at all)

Mets, Jets, Islanders, Knicks.
GO RANGERS! Get Endy a ring!

by piazza62 on Nov 5, 2011 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I still don't think Pagan is actually as bad as he was last year.

Save Jenrry Mejia!

by Ogre39666 on Nov 5, 2011 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions

This.

It was a statistical anomaly. Or a down year. While I believe the truth of his batting lies between 2010 and 2011, I feel certain that his ‘true’ fielding ability was demonstrated in 2009/10

by Curtis3331 on Nov 5, 2011 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions

I'd rather not take the risk of having him in CF anymore

If the Mets tender him, someone who can play centerfield and steal 30+ bases a season becomes an extremely valuable trade chip.

Mets, Jets, Islanders, Knicks.
GO RANGERS! Get Endy a ring!

by piazza62 on Nov 5, 2011 9:03 PM EDT up reply actions

Mets pitching

Of the pitchers who appeared in games in 2011, only Jon Niese, RA Dickey and maybe Bobbby Parnell or Dillon Gee figure to have a shot at being on the next Mets playoff staff. Santana didn´t appear in any games in 2011, so he won´t count.

I couldn´t care less about park effects to pitchers who I don´t see being around here longterm. CitiField probably won´t become a hitter-friendly park even with the changes. Probably neutral to slightly pitcher friendly like Shea used to be. And I´d like the Mets to feature a pitching staff that can do well in any sort of environment.
Here´s hoping the new dimensions are okay for Matt Harvey, Jeurys Familia, Jenry Mejia, Zack Wheeler, Josh Edgin, Cory Mazzoni., Jack Leathersich, Robert Carson, Collin McHugh and whoever else comes up from the minors over the next couple of years to pitch in it.

by Doob on Nov 5, 2011 2:30 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

it's not like we're building a CBP Yankee or Fenway type situation here

the change will make the park more hitter friendly for sure, but it shouldn’t turn into a “hitters” park per se. If our pitching staff can’t handle a change from pitcher friendly to neutral, then theres a deeper problem here than the park anyway.

Hey, wait! I'm having one of those things. You know? A headache with pictures?

by KeithsMoustache on Nov 5, 2011 4:18 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

.

then theres a deeper problem here than the park anyway

There already was.

Save Jenrry Mejia!

by Ogre39666 on Nov 5, 2011 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions

This

Insert witty signature here

by BlueChill on Nov 5, 2011 9:06 PM EDT up reply actions

The problem

The Mets utter inability to produce frontline major league pitchers has been a huge issue over the past 20 years.
While “Generation K” did have undeniable talent and was ravaged by injuries while still producing an elite closer for someone else in Jason Isringhausen eventually, the Mets have totally failed to draft & develop or even trade for high-end young pitching.

Over the past 20 years, i.e. basically two full Baseball generations, these – correct me if I´m wrong – are the best young pitchers that made their major league debuts with the Mets:

Rotation:
Bobby J.Jones (1993-2001)
Jon Niese (2009-today)
Mike Pelfrey (2007-today)
Pete Schourek (1992-1994)
Jae Seo (2003-2005) (or Dillon Gee or Brian Bannister if you wish)

Bullpen:
Jason Isringhausen (1995-1999)
Octavio Dotel (1999-2000)
Bobby Parnell (2009-today)
Aaron Heilman (2003-2008)
Anthony Young (1992-1994)

Sure, Scott Kazmir & AJ Burnett were dealt away before reaching the majors and I also didn´t list Heath Bell and Matt Lindstrom who found some success as relievers later on. And maybe even Phil Humber can still have a decent career in his late 20s after all.
Still, over a 20-year period of time, this is an atrocious production rate. No # 1 or even # 2 caliber SP. Just one legit # 3 in Jones, one potential # 3 in Niese, one solid # 4 in Pelfrey, a LH in Schourek who only emerged when he was liberated from Dallas Green and the very pedestrian Jae Seo (or Dillon Gee or Brian Bannister) who all profile as solid # 5 starters. Even if we put all of these pitchers into a time machine and onto the same staff during their peak years, that staff probably isn´t good enough to match up well with the current Phillies or Braves staffs.

All in all, it won´t matter what the Mets do with their home park until this structural issue is resolved. Of course, for the first time since Generation K the Mets finally have more than just one or two high-end pitching prospects in their farm system. Remember waiting / hoping for either Grant Roberts or Pat Strange to add velocity or stay healthy during the late 1990s / early 2000s ? Remember hoping for Yusmeiro Petits fringe stuff also playing out well in the majors or hoping that Gaby Hernandez can become a competent pitcher ? Or Matt Peterson and his nice curveball but merely average fastball ?

Finally, the Mets have a foursome of upper level P prospects who consistently sit in the 92-95 mph range with their fastball velocity. Can´t remember when this was the case the last time.

Fortunately, the Mets top 10 prospect list isn´t littered with pitchers who project as future setup relievers even as prospects anymore – hello Jaime Cerda / Eric Cammack / Jeff Tam / Brant Rustich / Eddie Kunz / Joe Smith and then generally fail to reach that modest ceiling.

And since the Mets are due for some more success with young pitchers, I really hope it can bode well for Harvey – Wheeler – Familia – Mejia. Heck, if that group produces one frontline SP and one shutdown closer, it´d be a success this franchise hasn´t had since the days of Gooden / Cone / Fernandez / Darling / Aguilera in the mid 1980s…

by Doob on Nov 6, 2011 2:48 AM EDT reply actions 4 recs

Um, why aren't you counting Heath Bell and Scott Kazmir?

Okay, Kazmir made his debut with Tampa, but Bell debuted as a Met.

"And that's why anybody who invested with Lenny Dykstra should really call that number. Lawyers are standing by."

by BobbyV_Incognito on Nov 6, 2011 4:11 AM EDT up reply actions

This is kind of a nit-pick

but Niese is already a solid #3, borderline #2. Career 3.77 FIP, 3.64 xFIP.

Save Jenrry Mejia!

by Ogre39666 on Nov 6, 2011 4:27 AM EDT up reply actions

Rec'd.

For reminding me of the woeful days of Pat Strange, Grant Roberts, Jaime Cerda, Jeff Tam and Eric Cammack.

Chamption of the R.A. Dickey Face contest and "Cromulent Photoshopper Extraordinaire" of Amazin' Avenue!
You might know me as mistermet.

by Steve Schreiber on Nov 6, 2011 12:04 PM EST up reply actions

Strange

Has Strange added any velocity to his large frame yet ? I remember Peter Gammons writing rave reviews about this former “Clemens award” winner ?
Is Roberts finally healthy ?
Is Brant Rustich still with the organization ?

by Doob on Nov 6, 2011 1:41 PM EST up reply actions

Quite a few names I wished I'd never hear again

Jaime Cerda and Pat Strange epitomized the futility and depression of the Howe era.

Mets, Jets, Islanders, Knicks.
GO RANGERS! Get Endy a ring!

by piazza62 on Nov 6, 2011 2:16 PM EST up reply actions

Fans like winning teams, ace pitchers and home runs. The Mets attendance sucks because it has none of those. If bringing in the fences means more offense, I think it’s a good move to draw in the casual fan while the pitching prospects are restocked.

by mytoemytoe on Nov 6, 2011 10:46 PM EST reply actions