Centerfield

That's terrible. It was the cancer from the chewing tobacco right?

But now instantly moves into the top slot as the newest dead Met. I'll forever associate Zimmer with the Cubs.

Frayed Knot wrote: I have no problem with the current dimensions - and the idea that changing them in some fashion or another will somehow benefit NYM bats while not simultaneously helping opposing bats and hurting NYM pitchers is, at best, akin to chasing your tail. That's never been the idea. The theory is that the dimensions fuck with our hitters more since they play 81 games here, while the opposition simply moves on after 3 games. By changing the dimensions, you unfuck our hitters. Sure, the opposition will get a benefit, too, but the idea is that revised dimensions will benefit our hitters more than they will benefit our competition.

Not bad right? The lack of movement hasn't been as bad as I had heard it would be. The guy has pretty good hands and a strong arm. What say you guys?

Edgy MD wrote: I mainly don't like the railing fence right on top of the wall on the Party City Deck. It allows an outfielder to reach above the wall, but not over and behind it. So I'd like to see the wall brought in two or three feet. (I imagine the railing fence can't really be pushed back without eliminating seats, but perhaps.) Agreed on this. Plus you then have to go to replay since the ball bounces back in. I don't know why it is so difficult to just make a wall.

Yeah, I hate those notches in RF. Completely pointless. I'd love to see RF be moved to restore Wright's opposite field power. Seems like d'Arnaud would benefit from that too. And moving them in would certainly help Granderson. I heard Ron Darling make a comment that the team was looking forward to the amount of road games coming up, and that the hitters felt like that could give them a chance to get into a groove. I think that these dimensions are certainly in these hitters' heads.

Wow, a mental mistake by Jeter. That is rare indeed. I can't even remember the last time that happened. Wait, what are you saying? Last Friday? Impossible! http://www.nj.com/yankees/index.ssf/2014/05/yankees_derek_jeter_admits_costly_mistake.html

The thing that drives me crazy. Jeter runs after a ball, catches it, then dives into the stands. Hurts his face. Everyone talks about it for years. David Wright runs after a ball, dives into the stands, then catches the ball. Doesn't get hurt. No one remembers.

Rick Reilly wrote: He was like a good magician. You could never figure out how he did it. He was the best player in baseball for a good 10 years straight and yet he never won a batting title, never won an MVP, never was the highest-paid player in the game. The only thing he did better than anybody else was excel: five rings, 13 All-Star games, the greatest New York Yankee since Mickey Mantle. He spoke to the media every day, yet managed to say nothing. He dated the most traffic-stopping women, yet never seemed to wind up on Page Six or TMZ or "Extra." Reilly is right about one thing. He really was a magician. He has convinced fans and media that he was arguably one of the game's best players despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. (Since Jeter entered the league, Bonds was the WAR leader 5 times, ARod 4 times, Pujols has done it 3 times. Jeter has led the league in WAR once. As has Jon Valentin. Bonds, Pujols and ARod have littered the top ten on a yearly basis. Other than Jeter's league leading 1999, he's only cracked the top 10 one other time. The two appearances are fewer than Chuck Knoblauch). So yes, if Jeter was really the best player in baseball for 10 years, he managed to do this while fooling every statistic in baseball. By all accounts, Jeter is a really good guy. The media says it, people I have met who worked with Jeter for their charities confirm this. When we met him in person, he was really great to my son. But the guy is not a saint. He is sensitive, had a bitter fued/rivalry with Alex Rodriguez that had it's origins in needing to be better than his "friend". But somehow he got the world to villianize any of this competitors, and deify himself. In a time when the media was looking to be as cynical as possible, he somehow got them to paint a halo above his head. He refused to move from SS despite A-Rod being a much better choice. If the reverse had happened, A-Rod would have been skewered. This was swept under the table. Jeter was a terrific ballplayer and a great guy. What I despise are those that need to turn him into a God. I don't know that I can blame him for what idiots say about him. (Look at that! His powers even worked on me!)

There have also been a steady stream of Asian Mets as well.

And to speak to the original article, that's really dumb. Point 1: When you have large expanses like Citi Field, you bring in line-drive hitters and settle for the occasional homer while working out runs through extra-base hits and smart baserunning. Every hitter strives to be a line drive hitter. I have also never heard a team say "We hit HR's. Let's make dumb plays on the bases." Also, HR's are the most efficient way to score. I don't know that you want to intentionally take that away from a team. I'll be in favor of the plan so long as the other team promises not to hit HR's as well. Point 2: Instead of Wright watching his long fly balls die on the warning track, perhaps he should start thinking about hitting to spots. Perhaps Granderson should think more average than power when playing at home. If Wright (or any other player) had the ability to hit to spots, he would bat 1.000. It's hard enough to hit the ball, impossible to hit to a certain spot, and even more impossibler to hit to spots when the spots are gaps 380 feet away. Ballplayers try to hit the ball hard. Where it goes is left to the man upstairs. Yes, let's tell Granderson that he should try to make fewer outs when playing at home.

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Well, there was Ike Davis in the second half of 2012. True. And to put a point to the other side, I have never heard Davis suggest that the Citi dimensions had anything to do with his struggles.

A parallel to this could be Mike Hampton, who was terrific before and after his time in Colorado. But while he was in Colorado, he was terrible. Many said it wasn't Coor's Field, since he was terrible on the road during those years as well (in one year he was even worse away from Coor's). But the minute he went to Atlanta, he returned to being a pretty good pitcher. There can be many factors, but there is at least the suggestion that his struggles were based on Coor's, and that he was screwed up to the point he took his bad habits on the road with him. Of course, by that theory, Jason Bay should be lighting it up someplace now, and he clearly isn't, so take from it what you will. Anyway, I'm repeating myself. I just don't think that any numbers can easily prove or disprove one side or the other. Which I guess is why we debate this every year.

Thanks Ceetar. That's very helpful. After reading through these, I don't think the answer is very clear cut. Let's start with the easy numbers: In 2004-2008 their last 5 years at Shea, the Mets were in the top half of the league in HR's (ranked 15, 12, 7, 14, and 11). In 2009, the first year at Citi, they dropped to last in the majors. From 2009-2014 (5+ seasons) they have hovered near the bottom of the league, never rising about 23rd. Now, in 2009, they were killed with injuries, and shirley this had something to do with it, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that the park has something to do with this phenomenon. smg and Ceetar have posted numbers from fangraphs that demonstrate that Citi (since the dimension adjustment) has a positive Park Factor in terms of HR's (meaning that the Mets are more likely to hit HR's at Home than on the Road.) But we kind of knew this since many have pointed out that the Mets HR splits are not that drastic. But because Park Factor is calculated by the Home/Away splits of the guys wearing orange and blue, it cannot account for the effect, if any, that the park has on the overall performance of a hitter. magadan has suggested (and I tend to believe) that if the park is unfair, it takes a psychological toll on the hitter. The hitter develops bad habits. The hitters take the bad habits on the road with them. Suddenly, they suck everywhere. As stated above, this creates a disadvantage for the Mets since their hitters are all screwed up in the heads, while the visitors are just passing through. Unfortunately, I don't think there is any real way to measure it. There is anecdotal evidence for sure. Many players have talked about it. The manager talks about it. It makes sense in theory that if you hit a ball hard, and are not awarded with a HR, you subconsciously start swinging harder. But I don't know if there is a way this can be proven (or disproven) in any substantial way. Wright went from being an MVP caliber player, to a good (but not great, right Fred?) player. There is Bay and Granderson, and Ike Davis completely falling apart. I have a hard time convincing myself that this is all coincidental. If the park is fair (or conducive to HR's as the PF suggests), shouldn't there have been at least 1 guy in the last five years that busts out and surprises us by having a power surge?

smg58 wrote: Is now a good time to point out that the other team has to hit in the same park that the Mets do when they come here? Or that FanGraphs (you know, the most number-crunchy of the number-cruncher sites) rates CitiField as 103 for favoring home runs since the fences were moved in (100 being average, and above 100 increasing the likelihood of home runs)? Or that the park in Flushing is less of an extreme than the park in the Bronx? Do you have a link to this? How is that number calculated?

I hated Andy Van Slyke and I hate his son.

I read the thread title as "Knocked Up Babe". Thought to myself, "Oh no, Edgy gonna be a baby daddy with one of his bimbos."

You'd be hard-pressed to compile a team of ex-Mets on any other team that can rival the ex-Met Dodgers: 1. Rickey Henderson CF 2. Jeff Kent 2B 3. Mike Piazza C 4. Darryl Strawberry RF 5. Gary Sheffield LF 6. Gil Hodges 1B 7. Robin Ventura 3B 8. Jose Vizcaino SS 9. Pedro Martinez P

There was this game last year against Philly: http://www.leaptoad.com/mets/gamedetail.php?gameno=8212 Dillon Gee chased after 3 innings, 7 runs. Gave up 3 HR's in the first inning.

Like the swimmer who said to his friend, "I don't have to outswim the shark, I only have to outswim you.", thank god Nuno was even worse. I don't know. Nothing I've ever seen from Wheeler leads me to believe he is going to be a top of the line starter. He throws free and easy, but his fastball is not a swing and miss pitch, and his secondary pitches are lacking. On the other hand, from what little I've seen of Montero, he seems to have great control, changes speeds and keeps hitters off-balance. I am hoping he can be like a Super Gee.

I'm really excited to see Montero. I think he's going to be better than Wheeler.

Great thread guys. Lots of fun to read.

"Our infield defense is awful! We have to do something about this! Go get me Flores!"

Remembering one of my favorite Onion articles ever. http://www.theonion.com/articles/struggling-mets-combine-to-form-carlos-voltron,2563/

Great job BG. I think Lagares would have had a great shot at this had he not gotten hurt.