Oct 2, 2009, 8:50 AM EST
The New York Times asks whether or not Citi Field needs some tweaking:
By most accounts, the new park is fan friendly. But a key question — is
the field too large? — has emerged as the Mets, and particularly, David Wright, have struggled to hit home runs at home. And from that question, comes
another: Should the Mets think about moving home plate 10 feet forward
so they could shorten Citi Field’s dimensions without having to knock
down any walls?
This is dumb for three reasons. The first reason is that, as those who have studied park effects have shown, it’s really hard to predict how a park will play after only one season. You have to give it a couple of years before reaching any conclusions about the place.
The second reason this is dumb is because the Mets actually and intentionally set out to build a pitchers’ park because they thought it would give them a competitive advantage over the long haul. If that was the strategy, why abandon it after one year?
The third and most important reason this is dumb is because there’s absolutely no reason to believe that it’s the park, as opposed to a lousy Mets team, that is the reason for the low number of homers. The Mets offense has hit 47 HR at home and 46 on the road (visitors have hit 81 HR in Citi Field and 77 off the Mets on the road). There are still three road games left, but that seems pretty damn even to me.
Upshot: It ain’t the park, folks. It’s the crappy 2009 Mets team that is the reason for the low-octane offense. Leave the fences alone.
- Ian Kinsler hopes Rangers go 0-162, calls GM a “sleazeball” (132)
- Albert Pujols was insulted when someone asked him if he can put up Mike Trout numbers (101)
- The politics of “The Cardinal Way” (67)
- Robinson Cano wants the Mariners to bring in Kendrys Morales and Ervin Santana (64)
- Reporter calls Ian Kinsler as self-absorbed as A-Rod (60)