Left field at OPACY going through a big change

[Sports Guy]

Elias did talk today about how FA pitchers have cited the park as an issue from signing here.  
 

I would guess pitchers will need some a few years worth of data to change the perception though.

[RZNJ]

Just now, ExileAngelos said:

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

Sounds nice except teams couldn't draw flies to games back then and the game was considered "BORING".    There are a lot more people watching the boring game of baseball currently than watched back then in the "good old days".

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, ExileAngelos said:

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

Yea, baby, those routine outs are so much more exciting than home runs and strike outs.

That's why I picked the name Can of corn for this board.  Most exciting play in the game.  Nothing like a nice high fly ball gracefully falling into an outstretched glove.  Sends shivers up my spine.

[ExileAngelos]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Profits seem fine.

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

There are countless articles how baseball is broke and the lack of action is the main culprit.  I am not using profit margins in my assessment so I will concede that.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

There are countless articles how baseball is broke and the lack of action is the main culprit.  I am not using profit margins in my assessment so I will concede that.  

A bunch of folks that share your view and enjoy writing about it doesn't mean an actual problem exists.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.  I don't think MLB is any more danger of having problems than any other form of entertainment does in the current age. 

I don't think more balls in play is going to fix anything that might need fixing.

[ExileAngelos]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yea, baby, those routine outs are so much more exciting than home runs and strike outs.

That's why I picked the name Can of corn for this board.  Most exciting play in the game.  Nothing like a nice high fly ball gracefully falling into an outstretched glove.  Sends shivers up my spine.

Our appreciation of the game is different clearly.  I prefer the brand of baseball that was played before analytics took over.  Just like I enjoyed basketball before analytics destroyed that sport too with everyone jacking threes up every trip down the court now.

[RZNJ]

6 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

Our appreciation of the game is different clearly.  I prefer the brand of baseball that was played before analytics took over.  Just like I enjoyed basketball before analytics destroyed that sport too with everyone jacking threes up every trip down the court now.

What do you consider analytics?   At one point they analyzed back in 1920 or so that they should use a different ball to create more home runs to make the game more exciting.    Sounds you would prefer the dead ball era, seriously.

[Orioles0615]

Someone mentioned OOTP park factors. You can edit ballparks and change fence length, I may try later and calculate new factors

[ExileAngelos]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

What do you consider analytics?   At one point they analyzed back in 1920 or so that they should use a different ball to create more home runs to make the game more exciting.    Sounds you would prefer the dead ball era, seriously.

The shift is one.  Forces hitters to say screw it I am going for home run and how many times I strike out trying is not a big deal. 

Not sure why you equate what I am saying and what a significant number of baseball fans are saying to the extreme that we prefer the deadball era.  You enjoy this?  Have at it.  

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

The shift is one.  Forces hitters to say screw it I am going for home run and how many times I strike out trying is not a big deal. 

Not sure why you equate what I am saying and what a significant number of baseball fans are saying to the extreme that we prefer the deadball era.  You enjoy this?  Have at it.  

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, ExileAngelos said:

The shift is one.  Forces hitters to say screw it I am going for home run and how many times I strike out trying is not a big deal. 

Not sure why you equate what I am saying and what a significant number of baseball fans are saying to the extreme that we prefer the deadball era.  You enjoy this?  Have at it.  

I'm saying it's a slippery slope when you start arguing about analytics ruining the game.   They changed the height of the mound in 68.  They've made lot's of changes through the history of the game to "improve" the game.    The could make changes to outlaw the shift, make home runs harder to hit, make contact more likely.    They could do all of the things that you want to make the game better (in your opinion).   It's been decided that a lot more people like it this way than the way you are talking about.   The proof is in the profits!

You're entitled to your opinion, by the way.

[Moose Milligan]

26 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

I don't think more balls in play is going to fix anything that might need fixing.

I mean, you tell me.  Would you rather see a team strike out 17 times in a game or would you rather see them strike out 7 times and put pressure on the defense to make the other ten outs?  It's not assumed that all 10 outs are easy, routine outs, either.

Speaking strictly for myself, I am watching no matter what but seeing guys strike out all the time is getting annoying.  For me, it's getting to a point where I'd like to see more balls in play and less strikeouts.  Now I don't think that's possible anymore as we've reached a point where each team has a few guys that are hitting triple digits.  95 MPH isn't gas anymore.  Not sure how you come back from that, but whatever.

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I mean, you tell me.  Would you rather see a team strike out 17 times in a game or would you rather see them strike out 7 times and put pressure on the defense to make the other ten outs?  It's not assumed that all 10 outs are easy, routine outs, either.

Speaking strictly for myself, I am watching no matter what but seeing guys strike out all the time is getting annoying.  For me, it's getting to a point where I'd like to see more balls in play and less strikeouts.  Now I don't think that's possible anymore as we've reached a point where each team has a few guys that are hitting triple digits.  95 MPH isn't gas anymore.  Not sure how you come back from that, but whatever.

Some defensive plays are exciting.  Most defensive plays are routine and not very exciting.

Some strikeouts are exciting.  Most strikeouts are not very exciting.

I'm not sure what the optimum ratio is.  I myself would like maybe a 15% decrease in strikeouts.  But I don't think you would see an increase in tv rating or attendance if the percentage of balls in play went up.

I think that issue gets way more attention than it should. 

[RZNJ]

15 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I mean, you tell me.  Would you rather see a team strike out 17 times in a game or would you rather see them strike out 7 times and put pressure on the defense to make the other ten outs?  It's not assumed that all 10 outs are easy, routine outs, either.

Speaking strictly for myself, I am watching no matter what but seeing guys strike out all the time is getting annoying.  For me, it's getting to a point where I'd like to see more balls in play and less strikeouts.  Now I don't think that's possible anymore as we've reached a point where each team has a few guys that are hitting triple digits.  95 MPH isn't gas anymore.  Not sure how you come back from that, but whatever.

Move the mound back 6 inches?  12 inches.   Sounds small but it probably wouldn't take much.    Athletes get bigger faster, more powerful, each generation.   Now, I'm pretty sure that's a fact!

Someone mentioned raising the basketball rim.  It sounds sacreligeous (sp?) but it makes all the sense in the world.  

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

26 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I mean, you tell me.  Would you rather see a team strike out 17 times in a game or would you rather see them strike out 7 times and put pressure on the defense to make the other ten outs?  It's not assumed that all 10 outs are easy, routine outs, either.

Speaking strictly for myself, I am watching no matter what but seeing guys strike out all the time is getting annoying.  For me, it's getting to a point where I'd like to see more balls in play and less strikeouts.  Now I don't think that's possible anymore as we've reached a point where each team has a few guys that are hitting triple digits.  95 MPH isn't gas anymore.  Not sure how you come back from that, but whatever.

The game is a lot more boring now and despite what Manfred might think more home run does not equal more excitement. Strikeout, walk or home run has gotten real old for me. 

Would love to see a team like the 80's Cardinals make a comeback, but I also understand at the same time it's not going to happen. Analytics won't allow it and the astroturf fields that rewarded speed are gone now. Maybe expanding the dimensions of ballparks would eventually encourage teams to value hitters who put the ball in play.