Comments on: The Mets hint that they’ll change the fences at Citi Field

By: xmatt0926x

xmatt0926x — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:32:55 +0000

Oops. Hit the post button before I finished. Bottom line I guess was to ask whether in the long run it has shown to be an adavantage to any team to intentionally build a larger than normal park?

By: xmatt0926x

xmatt0926x — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:30:09 +0000

I may be wrong on this and I’m sure someone will quickly rip me if I am, but right off the top of my head it just seems to me that the teams that always struggle with offense every year are the teams that play in these “grand canyon” stadiums. It’s easy to say that a team in these stadiums needs to adjust their players to guys who hit in the gaps, have speed, etc., but is it just too hard to build a team like that consistently? Are there enough quality hitters like that in baseball to fill out whole lineups on these kind of teams or is it easier to have a “normal” team that may have a couple real quality hitters and a couple power sluggers that hit you the 3 run bomb here and there? How many years are the Giants, Padres, Mets and every other team that plays in these giant parks going to talk about how they have to redo their entire hitting philosophy to adjust to these giant parks? I’m a Phillies fan and good pitching plays well in any sized park (even with the occasional pop-up that goes for a homer). I’m trying to think if there are any real good offensive teams who play in these big parks.

By: jwbiii

jwbiii — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:18:55 +0000

Since CitiField opened, the Mets have outhomered at home 182-157. During that same timeframe, they’ve been outhomered on the road 251-168. If they mess with the fences, and make CitiField play like a more average park,I think it is likely that the Mets pitchers will allow more additional home runs than their hitters will hit.

By: ikedavisnose

ikedavisnose — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 18:33:59 +0000

To anybody who says that other teams will also hit more home runs. Yes you are rite but other teams are already hitting the CRAP out of the ball there just look at Mike Stanton and Mark Renyolds

By: Francisco (FC)

Francisco (FC) — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:17:07 +0000

Sandy Alderson: David, just swing for the fences!

David Wright (points to the outfield): Can you even SEE the fences?

Sandy Alderson (squints): You have a point…

By: crash1582

crash1582 — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:07:41 +0000

The only advantage to this would be they could put more seats in the outfield. Good teams are going to win ballgames regardless of how big the outfield is. Seems the opposing teams don’t have any problem winning there.

By: dailyrev

dailyrev — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:01:15 +0000

Ha, I just remembered something else from that day: my sister asking: "ugh, are there people buried out there?"

By: sdelmonte

sdelmonte — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:59:10 +0000

I think the idea is that the Mets want to go big, both to put butts in the seats and to get big time hitters. I don’t agree that you need bats to win, but it does seem to be a popular attitude.

And as we’ve seen on this very board, some New York area fans seem quite happy with a team that wins with big hits, and plenty of them, with the occasional gem tossed by the team’s lone ace. If it works in the Bronx, it could work in Queens.

All that said, Alderson has never been the sort to copy what other teams do. My guess is that changes won’t be coming soon, and won’t be as drastic as he suggests.

By: dailyrev

dailyrev — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:55:20 +0000

I still remember being taken to Yankee Stadium for the first time when I was 9. I’ll now reveal how old I am: the monuments were on the field. From behind home plate, it was like looking into space; that green galaxy just went on and on and on, and those three stone markers were like grey dots on the horizon. I thought it was the most beautiful thing I’d ever seen.

so I have no problem with “cavernous.” You can win in such a stadium with the right team and good pitching. What has changed in this context since I was a boy, however, is this: the athletes are faster and there are more of them. Like the Snakes’ OF, all 3 of which can run down gappers that outfielders in the 60′s could only chase on the ground. So in that respect “cavernous” has lost some of its offensive advantage. But I haven’t seen any of the new corporate stadiums, can’t afford anything more these days than the Coney Island double A field. Sports belongs to the corporations now; the rest of us just have our telescreens.

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:54:51 +0000

http://m.static.newsvine.com/servista/imagesizer?file=vidya-raoD04421A6-A7CF-E030-9EEB-3C6D4E0A68D7.jpg&width=nws

By: Joe

Joe — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:52:28 +0000

My understanding is that moving/lowering the fences will make it easier for the other team to hit home runs, too. Is that your understanding? Because if that’s the case, altering the fences doesn’t really do anything to address the fact that Mets Players < Other Teams' Players.

By: aleskel

aleskel — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:50:38 +0000

Honestly, I don’t know why they should bother. The stadium plays both ways – stock your team with guys who can hit it into the gap and run a little and you can still have an effective offense. And maybe get some pitchers who can throw strikes and miss the occasional bat.