tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5985668569918053928.post4363198192255701128..comments2024-01-24T05:19:09.805-06:00Comments on This Game Of Games: An Eighteen Foot High FenceJeffrey Kittelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02367989375750209078noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5985668569918053928.post-8754369116937613692011-09-13T12:18:43.633-05:002011-09-13T12:18:43.633-05:00If the playing field was small, I'd expect to ...If the playing field was small, I'd expect to see more homeruns (but fewer inside the park homeruns) and fewer doubles and triples. Balls that clear the fence in a small park go to the wall in a bigger park and allow for more baserunning. If it was small, I'd expect to see more offense, especially if the decrease in the playing field surface came at the expense of playable foul territory. <br /><br />While my assumptions may be wrong, the real question is whether or not the Union Grounds was actually small or not. The idea that it was small kept coming up in the press but one of the old-timers (I forget who) visited the park, mentioned that he had heard it was small but then declared that it wasn't. Also, B-Ref doesn't find any statistical evidence that it played small. <br /><br />I think that looking at the Maroons' home record will shed more light on this but I'm not certain. They were so much better than their competition that it probably skewed the numbers a bit. Everybody on that team hit 30 doubles and I'd say that was a function of league quality rather than park effect but we'll see.Jeffrey Kittelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02367989375750209078noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5985668569918053928.post-52457093346403290782011-09-13T08:22:13.515-05:002011-09-13T08:22:13.515-05:00Generally speaking, contrary to our own expectatio...Generally speaking, contrary to our own expectations, a large park was considered favorable to more extra base hits of all kinds, because out of the park homers were rare, but a line drive that got between the outfielders (who played close by our standards) would roll and roll and roll instead of being corralled by the fence. When a fence was exceptionally close, though, hitters could put the ball over the wall for home runs relatively frequently.<br /><br />I think complaints that a ball park was too small were not indications that people didn't want to see offense, but rather that a ball out of play was considered no fun, even if it went for a home run, and they thought it more exciting to see batters run out long hits.David Ballnoreply@blogger.com