Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 17:05:25 GMT -5
Based on your experience, how much of a factor does a ballpark's ratings impact player performance? Do you factor these when evaluating players for your team?
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Jan 9, 2017 17:31:06 GMT -5
I absolutely factor it in. Carolina's Krispy Kreme Park kills lefty hitters- reducing their productivity 10%.
I always consider where a player has been playing when looking for players in free agency or trade talks. Sometimes the gaudy numbers aren't as good as they appear to be
|
|
|
Post by earlweaver on Jan 9, 2017 18:23:32 GMT -5
at the risk of sounding dumb, i don't!! I have no clue how my ballpark plays!!
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jan 9, 2017 19:51:24 GMT -5
at the risk of sounding dumb, i don't!! I have no clue how my ballpark plays!! Reigning World Series Champion! That's good enough for me! My 2c.. Unless you are in a really skewed park, the quote above is probably valid. Although I do tend to cater to mine to a degree (when I'm losing).
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Jan 9, 2017 19:56:01 GMT -5
Most ballparks just aren't that skewed. Baltimore, for example, drops doubles of their players by 5% and triples by 10%, making gap power slightly less valuable. In contrast, they increase home runs for their batters by 5%, making power and movement that much better. But again, this is a 5% shift; increasing a 40 HR player's total by 2 just isn't that big a deal.
Short answer: park factors count. Just usually not by that much.
|
|
|
Post by BlueJaysGM_Fin on Jan 9, 2017 21:14:57 GMT -5
In our ballpark, RHB increase the likelihood of a home run by 15% (1.150), 12% (1.120) for LHB. I tend to look for pitchers with groundball tendencies, and higher in movement. But hitting for average and triples are much lower than neutral (.959).
It's clear it is to each their own. And the beauty of the game is you can win many different ways. One comment that continues to echo from more experienced and seasoned PBL GMs when new GMs join the league, determine your strategy and stick with it. Don't waffle. See New York, Mets for exhibit A of waffling and not committing to a strategy early enough in our history. I joined in 2026 and should have waited to determine my strategy but i wasn't patient enough. Years of losing ensued, with only one paltry playoff appearance to show for it.
Find a strategy and stick to it Greg!
|
|
|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Jan 10, 2017 1:53:36 GMT -5
Our park is a hitters park, but it is pretty neutral between lefties and righties. It's never impacted the way I constructed my team, as I still liked to target strong pitchers, since even if they struggle a little bit more, our opponents pitchers will struggle more too, and then it's just all relative between the two pitchers still.
I'd say the only time to really worry about park ratings is when you have a situation like Carolina, when a park is skewed towards lefty or righty batters.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Jan 10, 2017 13:35:43 GMT -5
I love outfielders with range to cover all that terrain in SD
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2017 20:13:09 GMT -5
In our ballpark, RHB increase the likelihood of a home run by 15% (1.150), 12% (1.120) for LHB. I tend to look for pitchers with groundball tendencies, and higher in movement. But hitting for average and triples are much lower than neutral (.959). It's clear it is to each their own. And the beauty of the game is you can win many different ways. One comment that continues to echo from more experienced and seasoned PBL GMs when new GMs join the league, determine your strategy and stick with it. Don't waffle. See New York, Mets for exhibit A of waffling and not committing to a strategy early enough in our history. I joined in 2026 and should have waited to determine my strategy but i wasn't patient enough. Years of losing ensued, with only one paltry playoff appearance to show for it. Find a strategy and stick to it Greg! Thanks Fin.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Jan 12, 2017 21:43:25 GMT -5
Per the online manual:
"Ballpark factors are based on a 'norm' of 1.000. That is, a ballpark with all 1.000 factors is essentially a 'neutral' park where hitters will all perform similarly. As the numbers increase, that factor becomes more common. So, for example, if your AVG Overall factor is 1.100, you can expect that if you had identical players in this park and a neutral park, the player in the park with the 1.100 AVG Overall factor would have a slightly higher average. The modifiers are not straight percentages. So, a 2.000 doesn't mean you will do 'twice as well.'"
I take the last sentence to mean than a 1.100 factor means that batters should be expected to perform better than average, but not 10% better. Less than 10% better, but better nonetheless.
For the Giants, AT&T park is generally considered a pitchers' park, but the factors for batting average, 2B, and 3B are close to average. Home run frequency is much much lower than average (.826 overall), but I wouldn't say that it is 17.4% lower. Nevertheless, I know that my players most likely will never lead the league in home runs. I plan accordingly. One characteristic I look for is gap power (Triples Alley) to compensate for lower HR production.
|
|