The LF wall tracker

[DrungoHazewood]

13 hours ago, oldfan said:

I get why right field is the way it is, warehouse, Eutaw Street. But is there something behind left, why didn't they make it 375 to the power alley when the park opened, First time I saw it, I said that is too short. I don't mined the distance of the new wall, it's the height, should be height to match bullpen wall. 375 in left center, then curve to bullpen.

Remember that they started designing OPACY in the 1980s.  When most parks were cookie cutters, 330-375-400-375-330, or about that.  In 1989 the average American League team hit 123 home runs. The Orioles wanted to be different, they wanted some parts of the park to be good for hitters.  They also wanted RF with the garage door and weird angles to be a triples paradise.  In the 30-some years since circumstances have changed, home runs have almost doubled, and some of their calculations were a little off.  I'd bet Janet Marie Smith didn't intend on LC in her new park to be a really cheap home run, just a little easier than the multipurpose stadiums of the era.

[deward]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The Orioles have mostly had poor teams, they don't much of a budget and they played in a little bandbox of a park.  What pitcher wants to sign with a team featuring that trio of cringe? 

The last one was taken care of.  The first one is very much a work in progress.  They'll probably never have a budget approaching that of the Yanks or Sox.  Yes, if you can routinely offer up 10/300 deals then the pitchers don't care so much if a medium-deep fly lands in the third row.

Factors that would deter a free agent pitcher from signing with the O's:

1) $ per year/length of contract

.

.

.

.

2) Bad team/poorly run organization

3) Doesn't like the city/prefers another region of the country

4) Not a fan of hearing "Thank God I'm a Country Boy" 81 times a year

5) Allergic to crabs

.

.

.

6) Worried that he might give up a couple of extra home runs a year due to the park

[deward]

Smart-ass responses aside, what I'm really curious about is whether or not the old Angelos policy of not signing pitchers to more than 4 years has gone by the wayside. That will matter 100x more than the park, if you want to sign guys like Eduardo Rodriguez or Kevin Gausman (who both signed 5 year deals this off-season).

[Ripken]

8 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Yea, before the dimension change the Orioles routinely extended all their home grown stars.  Like... umm... I'm sure one will come to me eventually.

If a friendly home park is a primary driver of free agents then why don't the Rockies get all the hitters?

The Orioles have historically extended a lot of players.  Not true when rebuilding of course.  The Rockies just signed Chris Bryant.  If the huge left field is said to entice pitchers to come here why wouldn't it also be a disincentive for RH hitters to come/stay here?

[interloper]

5 minutes ago, deward said:

Smart-ass responses aside, what I'm really curious about is whether or not the old Angelos policy of not signing pitchers to more than 4 years has gone by the wayside. That will matter 100x more than the park, if you want to sign guys like Eduardo Rodriguez or Kevin Gausman (who both signed 5 year deals this off-season).

I think we're all waiting to find out what the spending policies will be. It's the biggest missing piece of info in the Elias regime. Well, that's the optimistic take at least. Many people will say we already know what the spending policies are based on the last few years. However, that would go against everything they've told us to our face. So we'll just have to see! It should begin in earnest this offseason. If it doesn't, then there's absolutely a problem. 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Ripken said:

The Orioles have historically extended a lot of players.  Not true when rebuilding of course.  The Rockies just signed Chris Bryant.  If the huge left field is said to entice pitchers to come here why wouldn't be a disincentive for RH hitters to come/stay here?

It's a contributing factor. 

Truthfully, I'm a lot less concerned about free agents than I am about developing home-grown pitchers.  For most of the OPACY era many young pitchers seemed to constantly be on edge, wondering if every mistake was going to result in a home run.  Or maybe that was just the fanbase who assumed that every ball that missed its spot by 4" was going to land in the 12th row.  I assume most of the Hayden Penns, Adam Loewens, Garrett Olsons, Jason Berkens, Chris Tillmans, Brian Matuszes, etc, etc changed how they pitched because it was 364' in the LC gap and not much longer to RC.  Everyone kept talking about needing more groundball pitchers, throwing more groundballs, switching to two-seam fastballs.  Instead of just pitching the way it best works for the individual. Deeper fences give those kind of pitchers breathing room to figure things out without having a 6.50 ERA and getting yo-yo'd back and forth to Harbor Park.

[emmett16]

1 hour ago, Ripken said:

The Orioles have historically extended a lot of players.  Not true when rebuilding of course.  The Rockies just signed Chris Bryant.  If the huge left field is said to entice pitchers to come here why wouldn't be a disincentive for RH hitters to come/stay here?

I think at the end of the day the team that puts up the most $$$ get's the player.  The decision to try and 'boost' your stats is only for a player on short term deal trying to rebrand themselves.  So, I don't think it means anything for the primo FA (which we never go for) but will play, like you said, both ways for the guys trying to rebuild themselves.  I have to imagine we will see a ton of LH hitters and pitchers being drafted this year.

[interloper]

 

[seak05]

Just now, interloper said:

 

was just coming to post the same thing. So it does seem as if we're seeing an increase in singles 

[Can_of_corn]

3 hours ago, Ripken said:

The Orioles have historically extended a lot of players.  Not true when rebuilding of course.  The Rockies just signed Chris Bryant.  If the huge left field is said to entice pitchers to come here why wouldn't be a disincentive for RH hitters to come/stay here?

I guess a lot can mean a bunch of different things but I wouldn't use it to describe the O's history of extending players.

Who was the last player they extended?

[Frobby]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I guess a lot can mean a bunch of different things but I wouldn't use it to describe the O's history of extending players.

Who was the last player they extended?

What’s your definition of an extension?   If a player technically is a free agent and re-signs with the team, is that an extension?  If so, then I think Trumbo after 2016.   If not, then Hardy at the very end of 2014.   

[deward]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

It's a contributing factor. 

Truthfully, I'm a lot less concerned about free agents than I am about developing home-grown pitchers.  For most of the OPACY era many young pitchers seemed to constantly be on edge, wondering if every mistake was going to result in a home run.  Or maybe that was just the fanbase who assumed that every ball that missed its spot by 4" was going to land in the 12th row.  I assume most of the Hayden Penns, Adam Loewens, Garrett Olsons, Jason Berkens, Chris Tillmans, Brian Matuszes, etc, etc changed how they pitched because it was 364' in the LC gap and not much longer to RC.  Everyone kept talking about needing more groundball pitchers, throwing more groundballs, switching to two-seam fastballs.  Instead of just pitching the way it best works for the individual. Deeper fences give those kind of pitchers breathing room to figure things out without having a 6.50 ERA and getting yo-yo'd back and forth to Harbor Park.

I'm not sure Tillman belongs in a list with the rest of those guys, given that he seemed to figure things out fine for a few years.

 

I would argue that you're giving a pass to the organization by blaming things on the park, rather than a deeply compromised ability to identify and develop pitching talent over the past couple of decades. If it was just the park, I would have expected more guys to escape the torture that is OPCY and reinvent themselves elsewhere. You got me curious about how other orgs in HR-friendly parks have done with developing pitching, so I did a little research. I found a website (http://www.parkfactors.com/) that has the 2010-2016 park factors averaged, which I think works as it covers a period during which the O's were largely competitive. OPCY had a HR park factor of 122 during that timeframe, which was 6th (just behind Yankee Stadium and just ahead of Rogers Centre). Coors Field was the highest, of course, but 2nd was Miller Park, at 129. However, since then, Miller Park has played considerably closer to neutral, not because the park has changed, but because they've managed to assemble an impressive core of young pitchers via drafting and trades. It also seemed noteworthy that the best pitching staff the O's have had this century was in 2014, which coincided with the lowest HR park factor for OPCY since 2001 (94). None of this leads me to believe that OPCY is some kind of insane environment where good pitchers go to die. I think you could easily argue that the pitching prospects that have failed over the years either weren't as good as we hoped, didn't survive the injury vortex, or were failed by an incompetent development staff, not victims of the park.

 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

What’s your definition of an extension?   If a player technically is a free agent and re-signs with the team, is that an extension?  If so, then I think Trumbo after 2016.   If not, then Hardy at the very end of 2014.   

Signing a free agent is not signing a player to an extension.

While being a more nebulous case I also don't consider locking in a set salary during years of team control an extension.  For instance signing an Arb 1 player to a two year contract.

 

[Frobby]

14 minutes ago, deward said:

I'm not sure Tillman belongs in a list with the rest of those guys, given that he seemed to figure things out fine for a few years.

 

I would argue that you're giving a pass to the organization by blaming things on the park, rather than a deeply compromised ability to identify and develop pitching talent over the past couple of decades. If it was just the park, I would have expected more guys to escape the torture that is OPCY and reinvent themselves elsewhere. You got me curious about how other orgs in HR-friendly parks have done with developing pitching, so I did a little research. I found a website (http://www.parkfactors.com/) that has the 2010-2016 park factors averaged, which I think works as it covers a period during which the O's were largely competitive. OPCY had a HR park factor of 122 during that timeframe, which was 6th (just behind Yankee Stadium and just ahead of Rogers Centre). Coors Field was the highest, of course, but 2nd was Miller Park, at 129. However, since then, Miller Park has played considerably closer to neutral, not because the park has changed, but because they've managed to assemble an impressive core of young pitchers via drafting and trades. It also seemed noteworthy that the best pitching staff the O's have had this century was in 2014, which coincided with the lowest HR park factor for OPCY since 2001 (94). None of this leads me to believe that OPCY is some kind of insane environment where good pitchers go to die. I think you could easily argue that the pitching prospects that have failed over the years either weren't as good as we hoped, didn't survive the injury vortex, or were failed by an incompetent development staff, not victims of the park.

 

Aren’t park factors basically calculated by looking at how a team and its opponents did at the home ballpark vs. on the road?  If so, it seems like the park factors shouldn’t depend on  if the pitching staff was good or bad.  Obviously there will be some random variation from one year to another.  

[Frobby]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Signing a free agent is not signing a player to an extension.

While being a more nebulous case I also don't consider locking in a set salary during years of team control an extension.  For instance signing an Arb 1 player to a two year contract.

 

I agree with the latter and I’m fine with your choice on the former.   So, I’d say Hardy was our last extension, and just barely, because he was only a few weeks away from becoming a free agent.  For someone who was extended before the final season before free agency I think you’d have to go back to O’Day after 2012.