Ron - Please Answer About Citi Field!

[Stat Boy]

Ron,

I've made a number of posts, but haven't gotten a truly satisfactory answer. You have repeatedly indicated that you think Citi will play as much more of an extreme pitchers' park than people are thinking. (You even refer to it as Petco East in your Longshots article).

What I'm trying to discern is -- are HQ's projections reflecting this belief or a more conservative approach?

David Wright, for instance, is predicted to be hitting 31 HRs. But in your longshots article, you suggest that Beltran, Delgado, and Wright combine to hit 75 -- pegging Wright more in the 24-27 HR range.

So, again, my question is -- for Mets' hitters and pitchers -- are the projections taking your suspicions about the extremity of Citi Field? OR is it taking what seems to be the more conservative approach of HQ's park effects?

And, in practical terms, if HQ's projections are NOT taking your views on Citi Field, would you consider it prudent (or if we're in agreement with you) to scale down some of the Mets' power numbers and maybe scale down ERAs of flyballers like Santana and Perez?

Thanks in advance for answering!

[RAY@HQ]

Ron was pretty clear in today's longshots article that you shouldn't take what was written there to your draft table.

I don't honestly know whether the projections are reflecting Citi Field to be worse for hitters than Shea was, but I'm quite sure that any "additional factor" is quite conservative. Despite suspicions, rumors, and hearsay, we have no hard data on Citi Field... and we're not in the business of creating projections based on suspicions, rumors, and hearsay.

I would say that, if you do agree with Ron's view, some manual adjustment to the projections would be an appropriate action.

[Stat Boy]

Ray,

I read and understood what Ron said in the Longshot Article. However, his comments vis a vis "Petco East" reinforce other statements he's made about the park in prior articles and at 1st Pitch Forums. Ask him yourself, but I believe that Ron believes it will play like a much more extreme pitcher's park than people are planning on.

And as far as "not being in the business of creating projections based on suspicions, rumors, and hearsay"... well, I can't vouch for what goes into the projections, but the site itself thrives on all three.

"News vs. Noise", "If It Looks Like A Duck", "The Speculator", etc. It's up to each individual to sift through the information and use it as they see fit, but, in my experience, the shrewd drafter makes some educated inferences about these things and adjusts accordingly.

These types of insights -- especially in competitive leagues -- will often separate the winners from the losers.

While I might be wrong on my educated guesses, I really try and read all the various reports from ST and see what I can believe and what I can't. The insights I've gleaned over the years have allowed me to grab or ignore players in ways that have had a substantially positive effect in my auctions.

If most roto players are media savvy these days, all with access to the same sites and info, then you look for every advantage you can.

If that advantage is seeing something in the Speculator column that resonates and feels like there might be other information to support it, use it.

If Ron names players suspected of using steroids and you look at other stats or rumors that back it up or just look at a player and see the physical difference, use it.

And if certain rumblings or looking at the specs of a new ballpark suggest stats might be impacted in one way or the other far more than people are anticipating, use it.

I'm not saying that basing your entire draft strategy on "suspicions, rumors, and hearsay" is a sound strategy. But it informs all the information you process and might often determine whether to go the extra buck on a player or pass on him. Or to wait on someone in the end game others might not be considering.

I have asked on 3 different posts now to get some clarification on whether Mets player projections are based on the semi-pitchers' park data represented on the site or more on Ron's sense of how it might play -- which seems far more drastic than the Park data listed on the park effects' hcart. And, especially because he's a Mets fan, I'd like to see how much Ron's sense of things influences the actual HQ projections.

I have still not received a definitive answer.

I plan on taking your advice -- making a manual adjustment to the projections based on Ron's view (and, having seen a visual representation of the stadium on MLB The Show '09, it really reinforces it for me).

BUT before I do, I just would like absolute clarification that HQ hasn't already done that. In other words, I don't want to adjust for something that's already been accounted for. That seems reasonable, no?

[RON@HQ]

Your points are well taken. However, if you are looking for a definitive answer... We do not make changes to the projections based on speculation. The projections are the "official company line" based on as much hard data as possible. HOWEVER, I HATE THE PROJECTIONS because hard data is highly restrictive and does not allow for nuance. This game is all about nuance. If I had a choice, there would be no projections on this site at all. (But then nobody would subscribe and I wouldn't be able to send my daughters to college.) Just like the least important element of the Baseball Forecaster are the projections, so are the projections that appear here too. They are more valuable than the Forecaster numbers but that's like saying Tyler Walker is the most valuable member of the Seattle bullpen.

Use the projections here as a rough baseline. Then take everything else on this site -- the real analyses, the speculations, the longshots, etc. -- and form your own opinions.

[Tom_T]

Adrian Gonzalez somehow managed to hit 36 homers last year for the Padres. He hit 14 at home, 22 on the road. My point is that you just don't know how a player's splits are going to shake out. I'm not particularly concerned about the ability of Wright, Beltran, and Delgado to hit homers, and I would not change my draft planning at all.

Besides, Shea Stadium wasn't exactly a hitter's paradise. Dimensions aren't the only factor. The ball didn't carry that well there. Citi Field has a lot more tall stuff behind the fences, blocking the openings. Nobody will know for sure until the season is over.

Here's an interesting NY Times story from last month about Citi Field.

[Stat Boy]

Ron -- thanks so much for the clarification. That's all I was looking for. And I understand what you mean about the projections. But we still use them because, as Woody Allen says, "we need the eggs."

Tom -- thanks for the link to the article. Very interesting.

I agree, obviously, that nobody will know anything for sure until we get a season or many under our belts. BUT... if you're angling to know just a little more than your opponents, I'd wager to say that CIti might depress home runs anywhere from 10-20 per cent compared to Shea.

The New York Times did a graphic that indicated about 18 of the 95 HRs hit at Shea last year most likely would not have gone out in the new park.

So, for argument's sake, if you take a David Wright (or Delgado or Beltran, for that matter) who hit 20 of his HRs at Shea last year, look at his HQ prediction of 31 HRs... maybe you expect more in the 27-28 range.

Maybe with a Santana or a Perez, you bump their value up a $1 or $2 because the park might be more forgiving to pitchers with flyball tendencies.

That's if you are so inclined. For my money, I look at some of those gaps and the height of those walls and that crazy nook in RF, and I think that's enough to drop HRs considerably.

But it's all just an educated guess, like which players are adversely affected by steroid crackdowns, that people can choose to take or not take.

In any case, I appreciate having the info on HQ's projections so I can make that choice accordingly.

[ChetLemon]

I was in a position to keep Webb or Santana...only one, and opted for Santana based on the alleged influence of the new park coupled with a stronger bullpen and slightly better peripheral numbers. The Adrian Gonzalez example is really telling, I was talking with a guy at work and I was suggesting that I wouldn't be surprised if Matt Holliday has a better line at home in Oakland just like he did in Colorado..which means that more than a "Coors Factor", there's really just a "home cooked meal" factor for every player.

[Michael@HQ]

Pitchers and defense are able to generate a lower H% on average at home than they do on the road. I suspect that batters' better success at home is primarily the flip side of this effect rather than batters themselves hitting the ball differently at home. Whatever the source, the outcome is true that batters' statistically perform better at home on average.