Left field at OPACY going through a big change

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, RZNJ said:

Big moment home runs for us, them, or both?

Since the O's have had nine winning records since moving to OPACY 30 years ago, I'm going to say a lot more for the opponents.

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Since the O's have had nine winning records since moving to OPACY 30 years ago, I'm going to say a lot more for the opponents.

Except that Angelos is the reason they didnt have more winning seasons. He was responsible for the 14 year black period in Oriole history.

That was a pretty good Oriole team in 96-97 and had a chance for more ALCS trips, then just those 2.

He is also the reason they went back in the tank, after the Blue Jays came kicking DD's tires.

DD has a decent core built, good enough to ride herd on the rest of the AL East for 5 years. Wish it had been longer. I like winning.

 

 

[ExileAngelos]

2 hours ago, waroriole said:

Honestly it would solve a lot of baseball’s problems if they played at Polo Grounds type stadiums. 

This.  No idea why some of you don't like these changes.  Baseball DESPERATELY needs exactly this.  The game is in big trouble.  More balls in play and less incentive to go all or nothing for the home run ball.  I love this.

[DrungoHazewood]

49 minutes ago, SteveA said:

You are right to some extent about changing the ballpark.   But you can't say that the ballpark doesn't necessarily have a big impact on team construction.   Last year the Yankees were absolutely desperate to trade for LH hitting because they had a heavy RH lineup in a ballpark that strongly favors LH hitters.    Yes, their fault for constructing the team the way they did, but they absolutely had to adjust to compete.

So clearly the ballpark design does have an impact on how you have to construct your team in some cases, and it follows that changing the ballpark layout significantly has to have an impact as well.  So I don't think the idea that there is some synergy between this change, and how Elias/Mejdal are trying to put together a team, is all that far fetched.

By the way, I was in Yankee Stadium for the Pinstripe Bowl and seeing it in person I was absolutely shocked at how short that RF porch is.  TV didn't do it justice.   I was sitting in seats that might be equivalent to section 230 or so at Oriole Park,  and the distance to the foul pole was ridiculously short, felt like it was right on top of the field.   And the RF power alley was super close looking.   And of course unlike RF at OPACY or Philly, or LF at Fenway, the seats out there are at field level.   Seeing it in person, it was far more extreme than I ever dreamed it was from TV.

 

I think the vast majority of team construction to match ballpark and vice versa is just a lot of talk.  You build a good team and they win, you have a not so good team and they lose.  Ballparks mostly just shape the numbers.

Unless you let the park fool you, like the Red Sox used to constantly be searching for pitching and standing pat on hitters because they didn't fully get the impact of Fenway. But that was decades ago, nobody is fooled like that anymore.

But having said that, I'm very much in favor of this change because it may make it easier to develop and sign pitchers if they're in a little more forgiving environment.  Flip side, hitters will complain.

[maybenxtyr]

Just now, ExileAngelos said:

This.  No idea why some of you don't like these changes.  Baseball DESPERATELY needs exactly this.  The game is in big trouble.  More balls in play and less incentive to go all or nothing for the home run ball.  I love this.

I don't mind moving the fence back. I'm just not a big fan of how the CGI looks. It may turn out to look great as a finished product though.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 minute ago, Redskins Rick said:

Except that Angelos is the reason they didnt have more winning seasons. He was responsible for the 14 year black period in Oriole history.

That was a pretty good Oriole team in 96-97 and had a chance for more ALCS trips, then just those 2.

He is also the reason they went back in the tank, after the Blue Jays came kicking DD's tires.

DD has a decent core built, good enough to ride herd on the rest of the AL East for 5 years. Wish it had been longer. I like winning.

What?  The Orioles have had nine winning seasons in 30, so it's a near certainty that more of the big homers have been for opponents than Orioles.  I wasn't talking about why they've been bad.

[Redskins Rick]

If you fill up most of your position players with quality talent. Pitchers will come here to win, regardless of the distance to the OF wall.

If you suck, pitchers will tend to go anywhere but here.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, ExileAngelos said:

This.  No idea why some of you don't like these changes.  Baseball DESPERATELY needs exactly this.  The game is in big trouble.  More balls in play and less incentive to go all or nothing for the home run ball.  I love this.

A couple more balls in play a game isn't going to save the game.

If it needs saving at all.

As I've said before folks are a bit too worried about the routine ground to short that we are missing out on.

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

What?  The Orioles have had nine winning seasons in 30, so it's a near certainty that more of the big homers have been for opponents than Orioles.  I wasn't talking about why they've been bad.

My bad, and my point, which I did a lousy job of selling was, the distance of the outfield way, did not play into, how many winning seasons they had or hadnt had.

 

[ExileAngelos]

Just now, maybenxtyr said:

I don't mind moving the fence back. I'm just not a big fan of how the CGI looks. It may turn out to look great as a finished product though.

It certainly makes sense to simply continue the line through the bullpen and then connecting to right center fence.  Not sure if this was a financial decision, an engineering problem with where to put bullpen, or they simply like the quirky angles.

[justD]

57 minutes ago, SteveA said:

I think the Hoiles grand slam to beat Seattle would still have gotten out, but he would have lost a ton of them.

So I found this database of Orioles game HR (both opponents and O's players) from 1996 through May 2010. 

I pulled the rows for Hoiles.  Does this help answer?  For some reason my brain got a little fried by this exercise and I'm not sure...

 

[ExileAngelos]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

A couple more balls in play a game isn't going to save the game.

If it needs saving at all.

As I've said before folks are a bit too worried about the routine ground to short that we are missing out on.

Oh it needs saving.  And they are in the process of damaging it even further with work stoppage and talk of expanding the playoffs (which for me personally would turn me away in a significant way).  Analytics, the shift, launch angle etc all make sense but they also have made this great game boring.  

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

Oh it needs saving.  And they are in the process of damaging it even further with work stoppage and talk of expanding the playoffs (which for me personally would turn me away in a significant way).  Analytics, the shift, launch angle etc all make sense but they also have made this great game boring.  

Yearning for those 2-1 games from the 60's before they lowered the mound?

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

Oh it needs saving.  And they are in the process of damaging it even further with work stoppage and talk of expanding the playoffs (which for me personally would turn me away in a significant way).  Analytics, the shift, launch angle etc all make sense but they also have made this great game boring.  

Profits seem fine.

I'm not sure what metric you want to use.

[ExileAngelos]

Just now, RZNJ said:

Yearning for those 2-1 games from the 60's before they lowered the mound?

2-1 games with balls in play and the game not taking close to 4 hours to finish?  Yes that sounds nice.