| MLB Home field Advantage |
|
|
|
Countless baseball aficionados traverse the country to watch meaningless games between the Royals and Devil Rays simply to check Kauffman Stadium off from their to-do list. Why? Every baseball stadium offers an exclusive social, culinary, and playing experience unique from every other stadium. To be successful, players, fans, and managers must behave differently and adapt to each setting.
You don’t buy a “Philly Cheesesteak” from Coors Field. We often hear that some ballparks are considered great for pitchers, while others will make a career year out of a hard-slugging lefty. Is it fair that Yankee Stadium houses a generous short porch in right field, Fenway Park’s left field is protected by a monstrous 37 foot wall, and Dodger fans show up in the third inning (only to leave in the seventh)? Although the rules remain constant, all baseball fields are not created equal. Many people seem to believe that there is an apparent “home field advantage” and that a player’s overall statistics and a team’s winning percentage are augmented by local karma and invisible forces. It is difficult to discuss the success of a home team in its natural environment without first comparing the success of all other teams in that stadium. Although the season is still early, the 2007 statistics hint that Fenway Park, Shea Stadium, and Coors Field are the “easiest” places to get hits. The opponents of the Boston Red Sox average almost three more hits a game when playing in Boston than in any other city! The Red Sox boast a team ERA of 3.66 (fifth best in baseball) which contrasts quite surprisingly with Fenway’s apparent affinity for allowing hits. Possibly, the quirky and sharply angled walls in the outfield may make fly balls difficult to catch for even the most seasoned Sox fielder. Further, the proximity of seats to the field significantly reduces foul territory, helping batters to prolong their at bats. On the other hand, teams playing in Milwaukee’s Miller Park are subject to the league’s tenth rated pitching staff (with an ERA of 3.95) yet are surprisingly averaging two less hits per game in Milwaukee. Although the Brewers have a higher ERA than the Red Sox, they are giving up five fewer hits per game! Possibly, the decrease in hits can be attributed to a larger foul territory and a predictable and symmetrical outfield. How do differences in hits translate into runs scored? Opponents playing at the Marlins’ Dolphins Stadium and the Giants AT&T Park hit safely significantly more often than elsewhere, yet were unable to turn these extra base hits into success. Opponents playing at the Shea Stadium, Fenway Park, and Coors Field, however, were in the top five in the league for increased number of hits and increased number of runs. The opponents of the New York Mets score 2.52 more runs at Shea Stadium than any other stadium! The top five stadiums characteristic of fewer hits were all also significantly characteristic of fewer runs. It appears that the for the Brewers’ Miller Park, the Mariners’ Safeco Field, the Padres’ PETCO Park, the Indians’ Jacobs Field, and the Blue Jays’ Rogers Centre are all what you may call pitchers parks. Defensively, there appears to be no correlation between a “tricky park” and the type of grass or symmetry of the walls. Opponents commit more errors in the Athletics’ McAfee Coliseum than in any other Stadium; yet, the Coliseum is nothing more than an almost symmetrical field, gardened with real grass, and gradual angles. Perhaps in stadiums characteristic to a higher number of visiting team errors, there is a larger and more raucous fan base which creates an intimidating atmosphere. Or perhaps, players may be more distracted after a late night of partying (Players make a tremendous amount of errors in Tampa Bay, home to the largest percentage of gentleman’s clubs per capita. Read MLB PARTYING for more information) As a whole, do players and teams perform better at home? When comparing statistics for home teams and away teams, we must analyze every statistic per at bat or per inning because road teams have more chances to hit than home teams. Home teams average .136 runs per at bat while road teams average .124. While the fractional difference may seem trivial and insignificant, a team averaging a modest 600 at bats per player will generate over 65 more runs at home a year from these numbers! Quite a significant difference! Further, home teams average .103 walks per at bat while road teams average .0957 walks per at bat. This turns into over forty more walks a year for home teams! Perhaps umpires are intimidated by boisterous home fan base and call borderline pitches in favor of the home team in fear of angering the 40,000 people surrounding him. A thunderous environment may also disturb an opposing pitcher’s concentration and cause him to throw more balls. Whatever the reason, home players earn a significantly higher rate of walks than players on the road. Earned Run Average is also significantly higher for the road team than the home team by .41. As of 5/30, we see that the Cleveland Indians boast a 17-4 record at home and a 14-14 record on the road. Surely the aforementioned numbers help to explain some of the increase in home productivity; however, the Cleveland Indians show a drastic and unexplainable inefficiency on the road when compared to home statistics. Most good teams have similar road and home winning percentages. It appears that good teams have learned how to adapt to different environments and consequently are able to win anywhere. Similarly, bad teams tend to be just as bad on the road as they are at home. The New York Mets, however, also buck the trend as they are performing better on the road with an 18-7 record than at home and a 14-10 record on the road. Overall, road teams this year are winning .479 percent of games while home teams are winning .528 percent of the time. Trackback(0)
Comments (0)
 Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev |
|---|