April 17, 200421 yr I can't understand that about Juan either. To me he's looked great with the stick so far this year and also out in Tucson. I am just waiting patiently until we start to discover the D'Angelo Jimenez qualities about him... Shhhhh....
April 17, 200421 yr Uribe is not so much Jimenez as he is Angel Berroa circa 2 years ago. if that turns out to be true that would be so nice!
April 17, 200421 yr The current distances of the fence are already longer than most ballparks. So your "6%" is already accounted for. If Coors will make Miles such a great hitter, then why didn't it do the same for Uribe?? No they aren't that's what my post said. 400 plus the 6% is 424, not 415 like it is now, ect.
April 17, 200421 yr No they aren't that's what my post said. 400 plus the 6% is 424, not 415 like it is now, ect. I'm no mathemetician, but I would think that the total area of the outfield of Coors Field is close to 6% larger than the average park. An even bigger outfield would have an adverse affect on pitching and cause even more runs to be scored. As recently as a few years ago, they were considering moving the fences in, figuring it would cut down on runs scored.
April 17, 200421 yr Rex is right with the outfield situation. To sum it up, Coors Field has a Park Factor of 1.126, highest of any park in the majors. To break it down mathematically, say that the average park gives up, say 500 runs, just to be easy with the math. With a PF of 1.126, that can translate into Coors scoring 112.6% of runs in a "neutral park". So 500 x 1.126 = 563 runs, 63 runs more than a neutral park.
April 17, 200421 yr I'm no mathemetician, but I would think that the total area of the outfield of Coors Field is close to 6% larger than the average park. An even bigger outfield would have an adverse affect on pitching and cause even more runs to be scored. As recently as a few years ago, they were considering moving the fences in, figuring it would cut down on runs scored. That was exactly what I said if you read my post again. That you can't move the fence because more runs would be scored on doubles and triples, but that the guy who says it's easier to hit home runs, has a valid point physics wise.
April 17, 200421 yr That was exactly what I said if you read my post again. That you can't move the fence because more runs would be scored on doubles and triples, but that the guy who says it's easier to hit home runs, has a valid point physics wise. so we agree or disagree? im confused........ lol
April 17, 200421 yr He had a pretty good day today going 4/5 scoring 3 runs with a double and triple. Albeit in a losing cause.
April 18, 200421 yr He had a pretty good day today going 4/5 scoring 3 runs with a double and triple. And just like that, he's up over .300 with a .350 OBP. A home run short of a cycle.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.