Grading the Ballparks
January 12, 2005
There are countless factors that can affect a pitcher's performance in any number of categories. Pitchers that play on high-scoring teams usually have a better chance of collecting a few wins in subpar starts. Other pitchers can end up with a lower ERA or WHIP because they have a strong defensive team behind them. The most obvious thing that can affect a pitcher's performance is often right in front of our faces. However, most people are more apt to downgrade players on the teams that have a disadvantage of pitching in a hitter's park rather than taking advantage of a pitcher that will throw half his starts in a pitcher's haven. Before we go into our stadium breakdown, let's take a brief look at some of the other factors we've mentioned.
Perhaps the most common and most overrated philosophy to take into account when filling out your fantasy rotation is the offensive firepower that a pitcher has behind him. It's true that I never suggest that any fantasy owner tank a category until I know the particulars of their situation, but if I go into any draft with a category I may tank in mind, wins are always near the top of the list. If you go into your draft planning to grab the Yankees', Cardinals', and Red Sox' fifth starters in the late rounds to scam some W's and lock up the category, chances are that they're going to cost you in at least one other category. In most leagues, there are enough statistics that are built on your overall staffs ratios so that the overall effect of grabbing a starter just for wins is negative.
Anybody who watched the St. Louis Cardinals or Los Angeles Dodgers play a game last season can tell you just how advantageous is can be to have a pitcher with tremendous defense behind him... particularly if they tend to have a high groundball to flyball ratio. While all Cardinal starters had the advantage of the above strategy as well as having a great defense, this isn't always (or even often) the case. Not surprisingly, both the Redbirds and Dodgers saw their 1-2 finish in terms of zone range pay off with division titles. Even less surprising is that both squads finished in the top five in team ERA and team WHIP, covering two of the standard 5X5 categories quite nicely. Much like you would in real baseball, try to take your pitcher's defensive lineup as much into account as you would his offensive lineup.
All of this leads us to one of the most overlooked factors in fantasy baseball... not all parks are built the same. This is much less of a factor in other fantasy sports. Hockey uses the same size rinks in every arena, though sometimes the boards will allow for some funny bounces. All basketball courts are the same size, as are the rims. Every football field has exactly 100 yards from end zone to end zone, even if the turf and the conditions aren't always the same. No.... baseball allows for some diversity among the ballparks, with different heights and lengths for the fences, and any smart fantasy manager will try to take advantage of this.
Sure, any good manager will take them into account a little bit, but most people don't realize just how big a difference there is between Coors Field and Petco Park. Everyone will throw their hitters into the lineup when they're in Coors, and most are astute enough to bench any non-elite starter when they head to Colorado, but how many starters were wise enough to grab a spot starter who was heading into The Great American Ballpark last season? In terms of how we ran our study, TGAB didn't play as a hitter's park, as many expected, but actually played as the best pitcher's park as compared to how many runs were scored in its home team's road games. While it didn't see the least runs of any park in the league, it was still owned by pitching.
To determine our ballpark rankings, we took a slightly different approach than most. Rather than looking at the total runs scored and home runs hit in a park last season, we removed the most obvious factor that can be overlooked there as well.... teams such as Texas, Colorado, and Boston (the top three "hitter's parks" last season) are going to score no matter where they play. We are, after all, talking about some of the more talented offensive ballclubs in baseball. Offensively, we removed each team's run production on the road from each team's performance at home. We then turned around and did the same with the pitchers, subtracting their road ERA from their home ERA. First, we'll look at how team's did offensively at home as compared to how they did on the road.
On the Offensive (Total RS at home vs. RS on the road)
* Better at home = Positive Number
Colorado 1.96
Texas 1.51
Boston 1.05
Chicago White Sox 0.82
Toronto 0.79
Chicago Cubs 0.78
Arizona 0.73
Milwaukee 0.52
Minnesota 0.42
San Francisco 0.34
Oakland 0.21
Philadelphia 0.09
Houston 0.09
New York Mets 0
Tampa Bay -0.02
New York Yankees -0.05
Atlanta -0.11
Pittsburgh -0.25
Baltimore -0.27
St. Louis -0.33
Cleveland -0.43
Los Angeles -0.43
Kansas City -0.55
Florida -0.62
Anaheim -0.63
Detroit -0.75
Seattle -0.89
Cincinnati -0.99
San Diego -1.36
On the Attack
As you can see (and most likely expected), the Colorado Rockies did score more runs per game at home as compared to what they did on the road than any other team in the league. The only really surprising ballpark that hit me with a team's run production at home vs. their run production on the road was SBC Park in San Francisco, which has been known as one of the dominant pitcher's parks in baseball since its inception just a few years ago. Perhaps the Giants have just tailored their park too much to Barry Bonds, and he's taken advantage of that stadium enough to put them in the black instead of on the road.
Neither Chicago ballpark was much of a surprise, as the wind tends to blow out in the windy city when the weather warms up. Miller Park and the BOB (particularly now that both Curt Schilling and Randy Johnson are gone) both have reputations for being friendly to hitters. The Twins, A's, and Red Sox always seem to tailor their lineups around their home parks a bit, and they've all been successful because of it for the past five years. Both Philadelphia and Houston are supposed to be hitter's parks, so it's not surprising that they're both able to take advantage of that fact.
Meeting in the Middle
I promise you that our study was not designed to have a ground zero, but the Mets did just that. The Mets scored exactly the same amount of runs (342) at home that they did on the road. You will notice later, however, that Shea did still play as a pitcher's park, as the Mets allowed nineteen fewer runs at home than they did on the road.
Home, Sweet Home
Yes, we are a pitching column, so we're not big fans of the hitter's parks. For this reason, it was nice to see that half the league scored less runs at home than they did on the road. You'll see later when we cover the pitching half of the ledger that even more teams allowed fewer runs at home than they did on the road. However, for right now, let's look at some of the surprises that made this list, starting at the bottom.
I'm sure everyone expected to see Petco, Safeco, Comerica, and Pro Player among the best pitcher's parks in the league, so we won't really go into those. Many also probably expected that the Dodgers and Cardinals (best road team in baseball) were a little more proficient with the bats when they were on the road. The big shocker? The Great American Ballpark. Cincinnati built that stadium for Ken Griffey, which also means that the park plays extremely well for Adam Dunn. The fences aren't that deep, and the Reds are a team that's loaded with power, from Dunn to Wily Mo Pena. Only the Cubs and, to a much lesser extent, the Astros saw their ballparks play as hitter's parks in the NL Central, so it wasn't that the Reds had a tremendously favorable road schedule. For whatever reason, TGAB changed from a completely neutral ballpark in 2003 to one of the best pitcher's parks in baseball last season. We'll have to see if further evidence can support this as well.
Also coming in as (slight) surprises were the Yankees, Devil Rays, and Pirates, who all ordinarily have lineups that fit their stadium a little better. None were overwhelmingly in the red at home, but these are all teams I'd expect to have a better time hitting the ball at home than on the road. The Cleveland Indians came in as a bit of a shock as well, as Jacobs Field used to be one of the better hitter's parks in the league.
In Their Defense (Team Home ERA vs. Road ERA)
* Higher ERA at home = Positive Number
Colorado 1.50
Baltimore 0.49
Chicago White Sox 0.36
San Francisco 0.22
Chicago Cubs 0.20
Toronto 0.15
Texas 0.15
Anaheim 0
Cleveland -0.18
Boston -0.23
Oakland -0.23
Minnesota -0.27
Philadelphia -0.30
Houston -0.30
Milwaukee -0.31
Atlanta -0.32
Detroit -0.37
San Diego -0.37
St. Louis -0.42
Arizona -0.56
Kansas City -0.56
Los Angeles -0.60
Florida -0.73
New York Mets -0.73
Cincinnati -0.92
Seattle -0.94
Pittsburgh -0.99
Tampa Bay -1.13
New York Yankees -1.19
Getting Attacked
Once again, I'm sure few (if any) of you will be surprised to find out that the team that allows the highest amount of runs at home as compared to on the road is those lovable Colorado Rockies. The Orioles, who scored more on the road than they did at home, certainly showed their pitching issues here, allowing almost half a run more per game at home than they did on the road. Again, however, there's a big surprise in our rankings involving that "pitcher's park" that changed its name last year.
Maybe when SBC changed the name of former Pac Bell Park they did something to juice the baseball as well. The Giants not only scored 0.34 more runs at home, but they allowed nearly a quarter of a run more there than they did on the road. The White Sox, Cubs, Toronto, and Texas round out the list of teams that allowed more runs at home than on the road, but none of them are that surprising, nor are the numbers overwhelming.
Meeting in the Middle
Again, we had a team that allowed the exact same ERA on the road as they did at home. The LAAA (or whatever we're supposed to call them to avoid completely losing our breath just saying their name), or Anaheim Angels as they were known last year saw Edison Field play as a pitcher's park when they were batting, but saw the stadium as completely neutral when they were on the hill.
Home, Sweet Home
If you would have bet me in the preseason last year that the top five home ERAs in comparison with their road counterparts would belong to the Yankees, Devil Rays, Pirates, Mariners, and Reds, I probably would have given you my life savings. The Yankees carried a rotation of five righthanders for much of last season, but weren't plagued by the short right field porch as much as you'd think. Tampa simply appeared to be more comfortable when pitching at home, while the Reds and Pirates built staffs that were well suited to their home stadiums. Seattle.... well.... let's just say I would have expected them to pitch better at home, as Safeco plays great to pitchers.
Other moderate surprises? I would have imagined that the Dodgers, Marlins, and Tigers might have been lower on this list (or had a stronger ERA at home), while I would have expected the Cardinals, Brewers, and Diamondbacks to be a little closer to neutral.
Combining Their Efforts
* Hitting RD + Pitching RD Combined
Colorado 3.46
Texas 1.66
Chicago White Sox 1.18
Chicago Cubs 0.98
Toronto 0.94
Boston 0.82
San Francisco 0.56
Baltimore 0.22
Milwaukee 0.21
Arizona 0.17
Minnesota 0.15
Oakland -0.02
Houston -0.21
Philadelphia -0.21
Atlanta -0.43
Cleveland -0.61
Anaheim -0.63
New York Mets -0.73
St. Louis -0.75
Los Angeles -1.03
Kansas City -1.11
Detroit -1.12
Tampa Bay -1.15
New York Yankees -1.24
Pittsburgh -1.24
Florida -1.35
San Diego -1.73
Seattle -1.83
Cincinnati -1.91
Analyzing the Field
Coors Field - If I need to tell you to avoid using most (if not all) of your starters in Coors Field, this column isn't likely to help you enough to win this season. Combined, the Rockies and their opponents scored nearly 3.5 more runs per game in Coors than they did anywhere else.
The Ballpark in Arlington - We all know that TBIA plays as an extreme hitter's park, and this should come as no surprise. The one positive note here? 1.51 of the 1.66 more runs per game that were scored when the Rangers played at home were scored by the Rangers themselves. Their pitching staff found a way to make it almost neutral to road teams.
Comiskey Park & Wrigley Field - Though I'm not sure I was expecting these to be the third and fourth best hitter's parks respectively by this study, I figured they would play as hitter's parks. The ball tends to fly in Chicago during the summertime, and both teams have built their offenses to suit their parks. The Cubs may drop lower on the list with a healthy season out of their pair of aces, while Comiskey should yield a ton of runs regardless of who's pitching.
Skydome, Fenway Park, Camden Yards - If the powerful offenses that dwell in the AL East don't scare you enough, consider that these three stadiums finished fifth, sixth, and eighth as hitter's parks respectively in our study. Only Camden Yards could be considered as a possible abberation, as it normally plays pretty neutral, though 0.22 more runs per game (combined between both teams) isn't overwhelming.
SBC Park - Along with what turned out to be our top hitter's park (coming up later), SBC was a huge surprise to me. All of the talk that it was such a great pitcher's park was true at one point (it played top three from 2000-2002), but it played as an absolute neutral park in 2003 and the seventh best hitter's park in 2004. Whether it can go back to its Pac Bell roots this season remains to be seen, but I would think it's more likely it returns to being neutral.
Miller Park, Bank One Ballpark, Metrodome - It's not really that surprising that all three of these stadiums played as neutral hitter's parks, but it's impressive to see how well all three teams have built their teams around their home parks. All three were significantly better both offensively and defensively at home.
Oakland Coliseum - In a stadium I expected to be tailored to pitchers, the A's had the most neutral stadium of all. At just -.02 combined runs scored per game, they were a better team overall at home, but the total runs that they and their opponents scored were about the same overall.
Minute Maid Park, Citizens Bank Ballpark - In perhaps the strangest thing about our entire study, Minute Maid and Citizens Bank were dead even everywhere. They tied both in runs scored differential (home vs. road) and ERA differential. Both are slight pitcher's parks according to our study.
Turner Field, Jacobs Field - As we start to head into the pitcher's parks, we can note that these are the first two teams that both scored more runs on the road and allowed fewer runs at home.
Edison Field, Shea Stadium - They took different routes, as both were dead even in one of our two categories. The ironic part is that you would have expected their roles to be reversed. Anaheim scored .63 fewer runs at home than they did on the road, while allowing the same amount of runs.... and they won their division. The Mets finished eighteen games under .500, despite scoring the same amount of runs on the road at home and pitching significantly (-.73) better at home.
Busch Stadium, Dodger Stadium - Here are a pair of division winners that were among the top five road teams in MLB last season. I guess it's not all that surprising, as both teams scored an average of about .35 better per game on the road than they did at home, but they combined to allow a half run less each at home as well. Both the Redbirds and Dodgers were teams built on pitching and defense (though they both put some runs on the board as well), and fit their stadiums quite nicely.
Kaufmann Stadium, Comerica Park - I guess it's not that surprising that the Royals have seen the average amount of runs scored drop since moving the fences out at Kaufmann, and Comerica is probably about as canyonous an outfield as there is in MLB. Combine that with the fact that both teams play in the AL Central (only Cleveland and the White Sox put up a lot of runs), and it's no surprise to see that there was at least one more run scored in each of their road games than there were at home.
Tropicana Field, Yankee Stadium, PNC Park - All three of these factors are a bit surprising, and they're all built on how their pitchers performed at home as opposed to how they performed on the road. The Rays, Yanks, and Pirates all allowed about a run less at home than they did on the road, while their offensive production was actually pretty similar to how they performed on the road.
Pro Player Stadium, Petco Park, Safeco Field - With the possible exception of Dodger Stadium, most people would expect that these three West Coast parks would be near the top of our list of best pitcher's parks. All three have deep fences and field stellar defensive squads, and none of them crush the ball themselves. Whether you think you'll get a W out of it or not, they're great places for a spot start.
The Great American Ballpark - TGAB is to last season's pitcher's parks as SBC is to last season's hitter's parks.... nobody would have expected this. However, the numbers are all there, and they're eerily consistent. Both the Reds and their opponents scored approximately a full run less each than they did when Cincinnati was on the road. The fences aren't that deep, so maybe there's some kind of backdrop that makes it more difficult for hitters to pick up the ball coming out of the pitcher's hand or something. Either way, it helps that Cincinnati preached contact to their pitchers, forcing them to value the groundball more than the strikeout and keeping their pitch counts down. It's doubtful that this park plays nearly as well for pitchers in 2005, but you never know.
So when you're fearing that Reds lineup with a healthy Austin Kearns, Adam Dunn, and (gasp) a healthy Junior, remember.... not all parks are built the same.
We'll be back next week with a detailed look at some of the offseason movers and shakers with our Hot Stove Report!
Posted by James Meyerriecks: Jan 12 at 10:28 PM
Fantasy Baseball 
Contact James Meyerriecks
Email this article
Print this article
| 
Actually, I said it would most likely revert to being neutral again, rather than return to its former status of one of the top five pitcher's parks in the game. I guess the key is that I think it won't play nearly as well for hitters as it did last season, when it was the seventh best park by our study.
Honestly, it's a park built for flyball pitchers, as the ball simply doesn't carry there (particularly to right). Another season of Brett Tomko and a healthy Jason Schmidt should see each of them thrive more at home than they do on the road for this reason (both allow a lot of fly balls), though San Francisco's outfield defense has weakened with the addition of Moises Alou as a replacement for Dustan Mohr and Michael Tucker. Alou will hurt the Giants offensive numbers in terms of home production vs. road production as well, though, as he tends to swing for the fences. SBC Park is not ideal for that.
The park should play relatively close to what it did in 2002, when it was right about where the Oakland Coliseum was in our survey (slightest of pitcher's parks, but pretty much dead even with home/road splits). I simply believe that last season's numbers (and it wasn't just our study.... the park played at 103 according to bballreference.com, where anything over 100 is a positive for hitters... it was either 91 or 92 in its first three years) were a bit of an anomale, and it should start to play a bit more like it used to. As far as I know, they haven't changed the dimensions at all in San Francisco, so there's no real reason for hitters to suddenly be thriving there. It should be interesting to see how it pans out, though.
Well, if YOU are going to watch baseball at Stade Olympique this season, I think we owe it to Anita to have the EXPOS' home stats.
Very good point about the reduction of the foul territory in Dodger Stadium. There should be a slight rise in how many runs are scored in Los Angeles this season because of it, as a lot of foul balls that would ordinarily be caught may reach the seats instead.
As for the Expos/Nationals, they were left off the list because they won't be playing in either Olympic Stadium or Hiram Birhorn Stadium, and RFK hasn't seen a baseball game since the Nixon administration. Using the numbers from back in 1971 before the Senators packed up and went to Texas wouldn't seem very fair, and the inclusion of their stadium in Montreal and San Juan would have seemed pretty much irrelevant as the article was meant as an advisory tool for the 2005 season.
For those who are interested, RFK played pretty much completely neutral from about 1962-1966 before turning into a pitcher's park (for the era) from 1967-1971. Considering that the dimensions on stadiums back then usually played a bit deeper than they do now, I would suspect that RFK will play as one of the top ten pitcher's parks in the league this season. That's far from a guarantee, though, as baseball hasn't been played there in almost 35 years.