Feeding Off The Green Monster
Yankees vs. Red Sox, since Opening Day 2003, up until tonight’s game, not including the post-season, via Baseball Musings’ Day By Day Database:
When you look at the numbers for the Red Sox, you want to say, at first, “Wow, Fenway Park really helps the Boston hitters!” But, then, when you look at the Yankees’ batters in Boston, you see that Fenway does not help them (as compared to hitting in the Bronx).
Actually, if you look at the Park Factors for Fenway Park, since 2003, they say that Boston is a hitter’s park – but, it’s not a huge advantage for the hitters. (At the least, it’s nothing like you see in Texas, Colorado, or Philadelphia.)
Well, back in 2003, there were complaints that the Red Sox were stealing signs at Fenway Park.
Could that be the reason for the 110-point difference in OPS (for the Sox batters in this study)? Nah, it’s just that Boston hitters really know how to use the Green Monster to their advantage, right?
Personally, I think the Yankees should test out this theory next time they’re in Fenway. They should really work hard at coming up with a system of pitch signals that can’t be easily stolen. And, they should work up a way to conceal pitching-target location until the last minute possible.
Look at it this way, it couldn’t hurt, right?
We’d have to see how the Sox have done against the rest of the league…
I’m sure the Sox leading the loop in runs scored (2003, 2004 & 2005) may have something to do with their success.
AVG, OBP, SLG, courtesy of retrosheet
2005
H: .280 .361 .459
A: .281 .352 .450
2004
H: .304 .378 .504
A: .260 .342 .441
2003
H: .316 .392 .527
A: .263 .328 .456
2002
H: .273 .344 .433
A: .280 .346 .454
2001
H: .274 .343 .452
A: .259 .325 .426
Has there been any park effects from the seats added to the Green Monster, like when the Sox added the pressbox seats?
Raf, I’m only concerned with 2003 forward – when the new management came in.
What are the stats that you posted? Sox hitters home and road stats? Do you have a link?
I just added the rest of the years for context. The stats posted were Sox H/R splits. They can be found at retrosheet;
http://www.retrosheet.org/boxesetc/WBOS02005.htm
I worked my way back to 2001
Steve, if I recall correctly, 2003 was the year when Lou Piniella, still with Seattle at the time, “discovered” the TV set in the Sox bullpen. While nothing was ever made of it (Bud wouldn’t do that to a crony…ahem…friend), the TV was removed posthaste. The Sox management at the time said the TV was there for “entertainment” purposes for the grounds crew (?) and that sign-stealing was the furthest thing from their minds. I believe Mike Timlin gave a tip of the cap to that explanation. Of course, legendarily, the Green Monster scoreboard has been known to have some light malfunctions and inexplicably opened panels once in a blue moon.
Sometimes statistics can be carried too far. Even to the point of, “There is nothing significant here.” You may have reached that point. The games are not played in little boxes. Who plays them is more important than how many of what they’ve done. Tonight was such a pitchers’ duel!
The games are not played in little boxes. Who plays them is more important than how many of what they’ve done. Tonight was such a pitchers’ duel!
==============
The results of those games are put in those little boxes. Based on those results, you set expectations.
The game you referred to was a perfect example. I’m sure many anticipated a low scoring game. It wasn’t. But I’d be willing to wager, that there won’t be many games where Beckett goes 1.1 innings and gives up 8 runs