For the past few weeks – well, really since the ballpark first opened in 2009 – the Citi Field fences have been a hot talking point for fans. The first fences were too damn big. The team built the ballpark so Jose Reyes could hit triples in it, said others.
Prior to the 2012 season, the Mets moved in the fences in left and right field, making the place play more fair. The team was catering to David Wright and Ike Davis, players who had supposedly been effected by Citi’s spacious dimensions, the same people said.
Two weeks ago, the news officially broke that the team would be moving the fences in once again, this time only in right field. Folks rolled their eyes and complained that the team was doing it for the benefit of Curtis Granderson. How, if the team is built on good pitching, does moving the fences in make sense, some chimed in.
The idea that the dimensions of Citi Field’s fences have ever been catered to benefit one or two players is absolutely absurd. It may actually be one of the strangest arguments I’ve ever come across. I can’t quite pin down the origin of it, but the first reference to it is a thread on IGN from April 4, 2009.
Anybody who has ever read anything that I’ve written about Mets ownership knows my disdain for Fred and Jeff Wilpon. But even they are not stupid enough to not realize that the team will be playing in Citi Field long after any player currently on the team will don orange and blue.
They messed up the original dimensions of the stadium pretty badly, to the point where changes were necessary to make the place play more fair. They made conservative changes, have realized that that isn’t enough, and are now making more changes, and they deserve to be applauded for that. Hey, they’re actually spending money on something.
The other argument against the walls moving in I can actually understand the logic behind. It would seem on the surface, that making it easier to hit home runs would hurt the team’s pitching, because as detractors like to point out, the other team gets to hit there too (duh).
But that argument doesn’t really hold water.
What the case actually is, is that moving the fences in helps a team built on power pitching like the Mets are. The pitching staff that allows the least amount of contact has the upper hand in a ballpark that plays more friendly to hitters.
Last year, Mets pitchers as a whole struck out 21.1 percent of the batters they faced, 3.4 percent more than the league average of 20.4 percent.
With a league-average flyball rate and FB/HR rate in 2015, Mets pitchers would have a significant advantage over the away pitchers at Citi Field. Empirically speaking, the Mets strikeout pitchers will have an advantage over their average counterparts, because while they may likely give up a few more home runs, that will be made up for by their superior talent and less frequent hit.
So it’s time to stop the hate on the ever-changing dimensions of Citi Field. There’s things to rip the Mets for, trying to right a wrong is not one of them.
Joe with all the technology and supposedly expertise available to the Wilpons and Co. and after spending nearly a billion dollars, why is they continue to tinker with the dimensions in Citifield? How many MLB teams change their dimensions every 2 or 3 seasons? Then again. How many minor league teams do you know change their dimensions as often as the Mets? Finally. I do agree its not about the team composition that these changers are being made. So what’s the real reason behind it? Surely it’s not to add more empty seats? Is it?
Simply put, they messed up by making the dimension too deep twice. Our hitters got psyched out. We did not score at home as much as on the road, by a lot. We lost a lot more at home. They’re doing the right thing, and likely will under-do it again (e.g., should move CF in by 6-8 feet, too) but this time it will be close to correct. Pitchers adjust, hitters thrive, we win.
Maybe the Mets didn’t score as many runs because they lacked the talent? It’s easier to find players who have the ability to get on base. Try finding an R.B.I. guy who hits in the clutch. Maybe they have one in Duda now? But Wright and Granderson have to hit to their expected levels. Otherwise…Rock dude I hope to be as optimistic as you. Let’s see what happens this off season?
Rock Dude, I’m not sure that the dimensions had any major impact on the W-L split more than any kind of random variation, but I do think the mental aspect was there. Look at David Wright’s numbers before the first move of the fences and after – it’s like night and day, especially with the strikeout numbers.
I’m sorry Joe, but that holds no water. This a cheap tactical move endorsed by Alderson to drum up the long ball…which I don’t believe it will do. The entire front line of this team can’t walk and chew gum at the same time, unable to get anything in some sort sync. The fact is we have an outrageously good center fielder who makes a living saving runs by navigating a lot of greenery and hitting to gaps. We hurt ourselves reducing his situation, and center field is a hugely important position with a ton of daily traffic. The other thing is, these moves look half-baked. Who the hell signed off on the original plans? If you want to drum up runs, then move the damn walls really in. What we end up is getting some milquetoast hybrid that pretty much is the perfect distilled essence of the Wilpon’s and, I’m afraid, Alderson. They will spend a few million bucks or whatever with more dumb fence mods, which look like about 5 feet (by the way, that only will put fans further from the game…in a section dominated by the most loyal of all Mets fans — 7line army) but yet pass on the golden opportunity to hire Maddon who immediately brings 7 wins to the team.
you are not very bright, are you?
Sorry Chris but the Mets have a “manager” in place already. And he’s worth at least 1 win per decade. The Mets still have to pay Collins one more year (probably a lot for them). Ooh! I forgot.the Cubs want to win now And they fired their manager who had 2 years remaining on his contract! Some teams have the balls to make a move like that! Others have yet to figure out what they’re used for.
…and maybe never do.
If this team finishes ’15 with under 81 wins…
I’m for giving Collins a chance to try and win with a team that actually has talent on it. His rack record with the Astros and Angels (well, not so much in 99) show that he can guide teams to winning seasons if they have talent, and he’s kind of been the sacrificial lamb the past 4 years with the rebuilding effort. As much as he’s made confusing decisions, I think it’s only fair to him that he gets one shot with a decent team to see what he can do. I realize that that’s a minority opinion though.
The team has only 1 purpose, to win baseball games a deliver a world series championship to the Mets. Any decision that is made which hinders that goal is bad in my eyes. Collins is owed nothing…he has been paid in full for his services, and under contract would continue to do so. Opportunities that come along so rarely, like hiring one of the best possible personnel available, need to be seized. Let me flip that perspective on you. Wouldnt it be nice to see Tejada get a real chance on a quality team because he is under Mets contract? Should we feel bad because we might replace him with someone like Cabrera or Tulo?
Didn’t Collins know what he was getting into when Alderson first hired him? Wasn’t the team in transition and rebuilding? Yes? So how is Collins and his philosophy of Not to play rookies for they may get you fired in line with a rebuilding program surrounded by youth and inexperience players. How is he mentoring them by having them sit on the bench to gain valuable experience? Seems to me that the GM and manager are not on the same page.
I couldn’t disagree more.
The ballpark dimensions is not something you mess with, even if you don’t like it personally. There is no such thing as the “right” or “wrong” dimensions, and there was nothing ostensibly wrong with the current dimensions.
If you want to improve the team, get better talent.
I agree with the “better team, get better talent” sentiment, but this is more about making the park play more fair.
I am a a little confused Joe. You say making the park more fair to play. To whom? Both teams play with the same dimensions. How can the Wilpons have so little grasp as to the dynamics of their own team? They see them play day in and day out. Don’t they? Designing Citifield (playing dimensions) with no consideration for what you had in place is beyond comprehension. It was bad business decision. Why else keep changing the outfield? They took away Wright’s home run power to right center and it played on his psyche and his swing. God bless Fred for consistently screwing up even the simplest of tasks.
To the hitters. Not to one team or another. http://www.parkfactors.com/NYM
Designing Citi Field’s dimensions with any kind of consideration for what players were on the team was exactly NOT what they should have done, and was not what they did. They wanted a pitcher’s park and they went way overboard, now they’re trying to fix it to get closer to neutral, which was how Shea Stadium played.
Editor’s Note – Please do not use capitals in your post, as it is a violation of our Comment Policy.
I’d argue there are 2 different issues: Designing a fair park and making changes to an existing park.
I’m indifferent on the first issue. In a perfect world, i’d like every park to be cookie cutter in both dimensions and all be completely neutral in all aspects, but it’s of course not feasible, so we might as well embrace uniqueness.
I’m completely against the second one. Once you build a park, it should be set in stone and no modifications should ever be made. Since all parks cant be the same and fair, there shouldn’t be any incentive to do so.
Citi Field was designed with ridiculous angles that benefited no one. Hitters couldn’t bang homers, and defenders had difficulty playing near the walls. It looked and played like a gimmick. Like many things, the simplest solution was not the Wilpon solution.
I always felt that Citi Field suffered from “executive tampering” in its design. I’m convinced that the way the left field foul pole/home run line did a cha-cha-cha smacked of too-far-down-the-road adjustments made after construction had started. All of the twists, angles, ramps, varying fence heights, etc. reminded me of a miniature golf course. I kept waiting for Jeffie to put a windmill behind second base.
There may be certain circumstances that contribute to problems people like David Wright and Jason Bay encountered trying to launch the ball out of the park. When Gary, Keith & Ron broadcast from center field, they mentioned the wind blowing in through the gap out there. I know this is a silly thing for me to ask for in this age of cable news, but wouldn’t it be nice for someone to gather some–what are those things called?–facts about how the ball carries in the stadium? Maybe someone could be sent out to report on what the conditions are? We could call that person a–oh, I don’t know–reporter or something like that.
Maybe I’m just dreaming about all of these things. On the other hand, if we did anything else, could we call ourselves Mets’ fans?
Editor’s Note – Please do not capitalize words in your post, as that is a violation of our Comment Policy.
That’s exactly my point Joe. They spent 100’s of millions of dollars on a ball park with zero consideration for their team. I understand they wanted a pitchers park, but that was on the border of ridiculous. So you make a small mistake and you make the necessary adjustments. I would think that most new ball parks have issues that require a little tinkering. This is the second major adjustment the Wilpons are making to the dimensions in the outfield in less than how many years?