Left field at OPACY going through a big change

[Orioles0615]

I updated the dimensions in ootp guessing the distances using the rendered images and auto calculated park factors. 1.000 is average. > 1.000 is above average, < 1.000 is below. 

 

just a fun experiment. 

 

[Moose Milligan]

I took a closer look at the artist renderings of the new LF area, I think it actually looks pretty cool. 

[Hallas]

3 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Pins in golf, when every hole is a different shape and length, is a bit of false equivalency.  Every baseball field has different dimensions at the walls but the dimensions inside the diamond are the same.  

I'd agree with deadening the ball, but I don't think that would ever happen.  I mean, for diehards like us, we're showing up no matter what.  But MLB, I think, feels that it needs to have high scoring games in order to keep the casual fan interested. 

I've said it before, but I'll say it again here...MLB wants its cake but wants to eat it, too.  They want high scoring games which inherently take longer to play but they want to shorten the time of the game so they're going to do things like limit mound visits, pitching change rules, etc.  

 

The part where MLB wants to have its cake and eat it too is with commercial breaks.  If you knock off 40 seconds of commercial time you will shorten games by over 10 minutes.  But that costs money.

[deward]

So....my gut reaction is to hate everything about this. Partly due to the hideously ugly aesthetics of the new configuration, maybe partly a sentimental reaction to such a drastic change to the park I grew up with. I can think of at least a dozen memorable moments that don't happen with this configuration. Cal's home run the night of 2130 becomes a routine fly ball. I'm not sure the one he hit the next night would be out in this configuration either. Some of the key home runs that Reynolds and Jones hit during the wild card run in 2012 would have been fly ball outs. I'd really like to know what free agent pitcher turned down top dollar to sign elsewhere due to the park. I can't think of one off the top of my head that we've heard about. I'd also like to know what the home run figures in the park would have looked like the past few years with a pitching staff that even approached being competent. When (if?) they finally build a better pitching staff, the results will improve, not because they screwed with the dimensions of the field. 

[ExileAngelos]

24 minutes ago, deward said:

So....my gut reaction is to hate everything about this. Partly due to the hideously ugly aesthetics of the new configuration, maybe partly a sentimental reaction to such a drastic change to the park I grew up with. I can think of at least a dozen memorable moments that don't happen with this configuration. Cal's home run the night of 2130 becomes a routine fly ball. I'm not sure the one he hit the next night would be out in this configuration either. Some of the key home runs that Reynolds and Jones hit during the wild card run in 2012 would have been fly ball outs. I'd really like to know what free agent pitcher turned down top dollar to sign elsewhere due to the park. I can't think of one off the top of my head that we've heard about. I'd also like to know what the home run figures in the park would have looked like the past few years with a pitching staff that even approached being competent. When (if?) they finally build a better pitching staff, the results will improve, not because they screwed with the dimensions of the field. 

Come on dude.  364 power alley was a joke.  That was obvious the day the park opened.  Routine deep fly balls to that area will now be caught or off that 13 foot wall.  I absolutely love it.

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Profits seem fine.

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

Median age of a baseball fan is 104?

[DrungoHazewood]

11 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

This is some @DrungoHazewood type **** but IIRC, they really wanted it to be 66 feet and there was an error somewhere along the way.  Someone, in a Spinal Tap moment, got the dimensions wrong.  

This article says that's not true, https://www.mlb.com/news/why-is-the-mound-60-ft-6-inches-away

It's a really long read, though.  Not gonna lie, I lost interest.

Quick summary:

In the beginning the pitcher's distance was 45' (or 15 paces).  In 1881 it was moved back to 50'.  Sometime in there they switched from a line to a 5 1/2 foot box the pitcher had to remain within, and the front edge was 50' from the plate.  So a pitcher's front foot had to be no more than 50' away, with a back foot somewhere in the neighborhood of 55'.  When they changed to a pitcher's rubber/plate in 1893 they made it the equivalent of the back line of the box, and moved that back 5'.  So, 60 1/2 feet. 

The mound evolved kind of independently, with a few parks having small mounds in the 1880s, and some using flat ground into the 1900s.

[DrungoHazewood]

10 hours ago, Frobby said:

The Atlantic League did it for half of last season and the feedback from the players was that it didn’t make much difference.   They’re dropping the experiment.   Dropping robo-umps too.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/33059011/atlantic-league-ends-trials-61-foot-mounds-robo-umps-balls-strikes

The biggest surprise of the 2021 baseball season was that the Atlantic League moved the mound back a foot and strikeouts went slightly up.  There was some speculation that moving it even a foot would be catastrophic, that pitchers would take years to adjust, especially their breaking stuff.  The reality was that it was barely a blip.  I think they're eventually going to have to move the pitching distance back 3', perhaps more.  At least if we're going to ever go back to a game that doesn't involve 20 strikeouts every night.

[Sports Guy]

Btw, it’s easy to pick on this organization for a lot of things…but there are some things they been to always do right.  One of them is how they have changed/upgraded OPACY over the years.  
 

They have routinely made changes and they have turned out great.  
 

You see people complaining about how this will effect player safety, which is totally absurd imo.

[DrungoHazewood]

11 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think that anyone has ever seen a game winning home run and said, man that was cool and all but what if it had been a double instead?  Wouldn't that have been even better?

I'm not arguing that the double was the more exciting play, but I will argue that the fact that it was a double and not a HR doesn't help the game.  No one is going to buy a ticket or tune into a broadcast because that ball didn't go over the wall.

I just checked, you can't even by a Delmon Young Double hat.

Or a wife beater...which would be a lot more fitting for Delmon....

Nobody ever complained when their team hit a game-winning homer.  But when 50-win teams hit 200 homers and the 9th-place hitter on a last place team could homer at any moment it's no longer a special event but just a thing.  Maybe today's fan wants to look at their phone for an hour or two or three while a bunch of strikeouts happen, then glance up at the game when the homers come.  I think the sport can do better.

[Can_of_corn]

39 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Nobody ever complained when their team hit a game-winning homer.  But when 50-win teams hit 200 homers and the 9th-place hitter on a last place team could homer at any moment it's no longer a special event but just a thing.  Maybe today's fan wants to look at their phone for an hour or two or three while a bunch of strikeouts happen, then glance up at the game when the homers come.  I think the sport can do better.

I think that is you being elitist and thinking that the style of baseball you prefer is somehow superior.

[Can_of_corn]

45 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Btw, it’s easy to pick on this organization for a lot of things…but there are some things they been to always do right.  One of them is how they have changed/upgraded OPACY over the years.  
 

They have routinely made changes and they have turned out great.  
 

You see people complaining about how this will effect player safety, which is totally absurd imo.

They have done a good job using the funding provided by the State.

[Frobby]

38 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

They have done a good job using the funding provided by the State.

There are plenty of teams who’ve spent a lot more public money and done a much worse job.  

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

There are plenty of teams who’ve spent a lot more public money and done a much worse job.  

Absolutely.

 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

They have done a good job using the funding provided by the State.

What is the point in mentioning this?

What does it have to do with what I posted and you quoted?