PDA

View Full Version : Fences


LAWSfan
10-31-2004, 02:41 AM
I got this idea from somebody's signature.

Starting Pitching watch:
Buehrle 16-10 3.89 ERA (2.63 away)
Garcia: 9-4 4.46 ERA (3.25 away with White Sox)
Garland 12-11 4.89 ERA (4.61 away)
Contreras: 4-4 5.47 ERA (6.21 away with White Sox)
Why are these ERAs so high? US Cellular Field! That's why!
Move the Fences back!

The White Sox led the AL in HR's in 2004. If they moved the fences back that would cut down on the HR's. This team is built around power. Unless they change the makeup of the team through trades, it will again be built around power.

The speed guys (Harris, Uribe) can't get on base and might never hit well enough or be patient enough to take a walk. And both are bad base runners and stealers.

So moving the fences back might help our pitching but would hurt the current lineup the White Sox have now.

TornLabrum
10-31-2004, 08:04 AM
I got this idea from somebody's signature.

Starting Pitching watch:
Buehrle 16-10 3.89 ERA (2.63 away)
Garcia: 9-4 4.46 ERA (3.25 away with White Sox)
Garland 12-11 4.89 ERA (4.61 away)
Contreras: 4-4 5.47 ERA (6.21 away with White Sox)
Why are these ERAs so high? US Cellular Field! That's why!
Move the Fences back!

The White Sox led the AL in HR's in 2004. If they moved the fences back that would cut down on the HR's. This team is built around power. Unless they change the makeup of the team through trades, it will again be built around power.

The speed guys (Harris, Uribe) can't get on base and might never hit well enough or be patient enough to take a walk. And both are bad base runners and stealers.

So moving the fences back might help our pitching but would hurt the current lineup the White Sox have now.The White Sox spent considerable money of their own during phase I of the current renovations to add seats and move the fences in. They're not going to move them back less than 5 years later when that process would have to involve the demolition of the added seating.

Wsoxmike59
10-31-2004, 08:46 AM
I am in 100% agreement with you LAWSfan. When Phase I was announced I vehemently disagreed with it and said as much on WhiteSox.com message board.

My argument was that there was already too much offense in baseball with these chemically enhanced sluggers.....why in the name of Ed Walsh are we moving in the fences as much as 17 feet down the LF line???

We were already building the future of the franchise around pitching. (basing that statement on all of Ron Schueler's draft picks from '98 and '99) So I argued that as a home field advantage, I'd keep the OF dimensions the same and they STILL could've tilted the bullpens 45%. (degrees)

The original dimensions of New Comiskey Park of 347 down the lines, and 375 to the power alleys meant that Comiskey Park played fair to both left handed and right handed hitters. The spacious dimensions meant that HR's had to be "earned".....no cheap basket shots on this side of town!! (Sorry Mr. Cub, we all know you would've wound up with 212 HR's had you played on the southside of town!!)

I knew we had a hidden gem of a ballpark when Roger Clemens had expressed a desire to come here after the 1996 season. He liked pitching in Comiskey....Ron Scheuler blew it by signing Jamie f*@&^! Navarro instead.

But as I've grown to expect from this franchise, we always ZIG when we should've ZAGGED.

FightingBillini
10-31-2004, 04:37 PM
We could move the fences in with no problem. They could move them back to where the seats end, accept for where the bullpens are. That wouldnt change the distance down the lines, but it would move the power alleys back around 10 ft or so. Also, I think that the fence in center needs to be pushed back to where the fan deck starts, the green area with the big door in about 5 feet deeper. That would be an interesting nook in an otherwise curved outfield fence.

That being said, moving the fences back wouldnt change all that much, as most homers this year werent cheap shots. They were landing 10 or so rows deep.

ChiWhiteSox1337
10-31-2004, 04:43 PM
I think the HR's going out this year had something to do with the newly remodeled upper deck. It definitely changed the air patterns of the stadium. The walls were moved in a few years ago and the HR numbers exploded this year after they changed the UD.

DSpivack
10-31-2004, 04:53 PM
I think the HR's going out this year had something to do with the newly remodeled upper deck. It definitely changed the air patterns of the stadium. The walls were moved in a few years ago and the HR numbers exploded this year after they changed the UD.
Home run number did increase this year, but I think they have been increasing ever since the fences were moved in. This used to be a marginal pitcher's park before the fences were moved in. Since I believe it is a pretty solid hitter's park.

MRKARNO
10-31-2004, 05:24 PM
I think the HR's going out this year had something to do with the newly remodeled upper deck. It definitely changed the air patterns of the stadium. The walls were moved in a few years ago and the HR numbers exploded this year after they changed the UD.

I agree with this. For some reason, the Wind blew out a lot more strongly more often this year. The fences have to be moved back to make up for this. They dont have to be moved back a ton, but even 10 feet would make a huge difference. There were a lot of times when I can remember a HR juuuust getting out. I dont think it would be too expensive to do this and we're not going to have a great pitching staff unless this is done. It wont get done; I'm sure of it, but it would be nice if it did. It would be nice however if we could have a nice pitching duel once in a while that isn't destroyed by a HR that goes out by two feet at the cell.

StillMissOzzie
10-31-2004, 06:17 PM
I think the HR's going out this year had something to do with the newly remodeled upper deck. It definitely changed the air patterns of the stadium. The walls were moved in a few years ago and the HR numbers exploded this year after they changed the UD.
I agree too. While I'm no architect (nor do I play one on TV), it seems the sealing of the open air spots in the UD with the glass blocks meant that wind coming in from the east, southeast, or south would hit the UD and, instead of flowing through, get turned around to head back toward the outfield.

Of course, I may be full of hot air.

SMO
:gulp:

PaleHoseGeorge
10-31-2004, 06:36 PM
Here's a question for all of you who advocate moving the fences out again. How?

The moat is gone, folks. They added seats right up to the outfield fence before the 2001 season. Furthermore the change they made in the distance is almost nil in the power alleys. Only in the corners was there a significant change in the distance from homeplate.

For the life of me I don't know what will ever make some of you people happy. The old ballpark was criticized beyond belief and the Sox have completed a series of retrofitted improvements to a 13 year-old stadium that are unprecedented anywhere in professional sports... and yet the bitching just keeps right on coming.

Here's a novel idea. Instead of building the ballpark to fit the players, let's consider which will last longer. The useful life of U.S. Cellular is at least 30 more years. How many of the current piles of trash on the 2005 Sox will still be playing ball in 2035?

Changing the ballpark to fit the players is a bass ackwards approach to solving this problem.

FightingBillini
10-31-2004, 07:22 PM
Here's a question for all of you who advocate moving the fences out again. How?

The moat is gone, folks. They added seats right up to the outfield fence before the 2001 season. Furthermore the change they made in the distance is almost nil in the power alleys. Only in the corners was there a significant change in the distance from homeplate.

For the life of me I don't know what will ever make some of you people happy. The old ballpark was criticized beyond belief and the Sox have completed a series of retrofitted improvements to a 13 year-old stadium that are unprecedented anywhere in professional sports... and yet the bitching just keeps right on coming.

Here's a novel idea. Instead of building the ballpark to fit the players, let's consider which will last longer. The useful life of U.S. Cellular is at least 30 more years. How many of the current piles of thrash on the 2005 Sox will still be playing ball in 2035?

Changing the ballpark to fit the players is a bass ackwards approach to solving this problem.
The stands were only extended a few feet in the outfield, but the fences were just moved in. The moat is still there accept for in the 'pens and the sports bar. Its just a little smaller. Also, there is a substantial distance in the power alleys. The distance markers still say 375, but they are about 20ft closer to center.
http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/USCellularField.html
The fences could be moved back from left center to right center.

I personally love the way the park is and all the renovations they have done to date. I was just posting in response to comments on the fences. They can be moved in, even if its just a few feet.

MRKARNO
10-31-2004, 07:31 PM
Here's a question for all of you who advocate moving the fences out again. How?

The moat is gone, folks. They added seats right up to the outfield fence before the 2001 season. Furthermore the change they made in the distance is almost nil in the power alleys. Only in the corners was there a significant change in the distance from homeplate.

For the life of me I don't know what will ever make some of you people happy. The old ballpark was criticized beyond belief and the Sox have completed a series of retrofitted improvements to a 13 year-old stadium that are unprecedented anywhere in professional sports... and yet the bitching just keeps right on coming.

Here's a novel idea. Instead of building the ballpark to fit the players, let's consider which will last longer. The useful life of U.S. Cellular is at least 30 more years. How many of the current piles of trash on the 2005 Sox will still be playing ball in 2035?

Changing the ballpark to fit the players is a bass ackwards approach to solving this problem.

I think that's a decent arguement, but I would argue that this isn't just changing it to fit this group of players, but any group of players in the future. It's totally better than where it was before. I think it's fair to say that the ballpark caused the amazingness of our offense at home (see Paul Konerko's home/road splits. It's frightening to see how bad he was on the road) and the patheticness of our pitching at home. I'll drop the thing out of my sig, but that doesn't change my opinion that our pitching staff will never be a great one unless it's comprised of groundballers and hall-of-famers playing half of their games in this ballpark.

TornLabrum
10-31-2004, 07:58 PM
The stands were only extended a few feet in the outfield, but the fences were just moved in. The moat is still there accept for in the 'pens and the sports bar. Its just a little smaller. Also, there is a substantial distance in the power alleys. The distance markers still say 375, but they are about 20ft closer to center.
http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/USCellularField.html
The fences could be moved back from left center to right center.

I personally love the way the park is and all the renovations they have done to date. I was just posting in response to comments on the fences. They can be moved in, even if its just a few feet.
You are wrong and George is correct. The stands in left field were extended all the way to where the fences are. If you look carefully, you will see that where the moat used to be, there is a narrow space between the fence and the stands covered by a board or some such thing. That moat used to be 10 feet wide. It isn't more than 18 inches to two feet wide maximum now.

The old bullpens were filled in with seats in both left and right field, and the bullpens are now taking the old moat space. You would have to tear out the seats where the bullpens were added, and the seats added in left center field.

Right field is a different story due to the Patio and Bullpen Bar. There are picnic tables in the moat there, towards the line and the bullpens were moved to their current location in right center field. Again, seating was added where the bullpens used to be.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-31-2004, 08:02 PM
The stands were only extended a few feet in the outfield, but the fences were just moved in. The moat is still there accept for in the 'pens and the sports bar. Its just a little smaller. Also, there is a substantial distance in the power alleys. The distance markers still say 375, but they are about 20ft closer to center.
http://www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/USCellularField.html
The fences could be moved back from left center to right center....
What on earth are you suggesting? You think the Sox are fudging on the shortened power alleys by moving the alley towards center field? This is nuts!

There was no appreciable difference in home runs hit at the Cell until after last year's renovations but the outfield moats were removed three years earlier! How does your little conspiracy theory explain this away?

FightingBillini
10-31-2004, 08:09 PM
If you look at the pictures on the link I posted, you can see the moat is probably 4-5 feet wide. They did extend the stands a few feet, but most of the new seats were in the former bullpens. Either way, they fences could be pushed back, even if it was 18 inches as you said. Once again, I was merely saying it was possible to do it. Those 2-5 feet arent gonna keep 450ft shots in the park.

This is no conspiracy theory. The markers were moved. The guys who made that website knows his stuff about parks. I am not saying anything was gained from moving the markers. Its just what happened.

santo=dorf
10-31-2004, 08:16 PM
__________________________2002________2003_______2 004_______
HR by Sox at home___________132_________130________145_______
HR given up by Sox at home___ 90 _________ 88 ________127_____
Total______________________222__________212_______ _272_____
% increase_____________________________-4.51%______28.3%:o: ___

Can anyone find the home runs totals from 2000 and 2001?

PaleHoseGeorge
10-31-2004, 08:22 PM
This is no conspiracy theory. The markers were moved. The guys who made that website knows his stuff about parks.
You and "the guy who made that website" have been watching too many episodes of the X-Files.
:cool:

The Sox are fudging the power alley distances...

TornLabrum
10-31-2004, 08:30 PM
If you look at the pictures on the link I posted, you can see the moat is probably 4-5 feet wide. They did extend the stands a few feet, but most of the new seats were in the former bullpens. Either way, they fences could be pushed back, even if it was 18 inches as you said. Once again, I was merely saying it was possible to do it. Those 2-5 feet arent gonna keep 450ft shots in the park.

This is no conspiracy theory. The markers were moved. The guys who made that website knows his stuff about parks. I am not saying anything was gained from moving the markers. Its just what happened.
What exact moat are you talking about? There is no moat aside from the bullpens in left field. The seats go almost up to the fence in left field. There is wood or some material covering the gap between the front of the seats and the fence in left field that is something like a foot or two wide.

In the description below, the writer notes that the outfield seats were moved about 12 feet closer to the plate. "Also, a few extra rows of seats were added in most of the outfield sections, moving the outfield wall about 12 feet closer to home." In case you haven't figured it out by now, that's where the moat used to be.

TornLabrum
10-31-2004, 08:48 PM
You and "the guy who made that website" have been watching too many episodes of the X-Files.
:cool:

The Sox are fudging the power alley distances...
It's called selective reading.

If you scroll down to the picture that shows left field, there is clearly a bullpen in the corner. When you get to the end of the bullpen, the seats clearly go almost to the fence where the moat used to be. There is about a 1-2 foot gap, which clearly fits what the auther of the website said: "Also, a few extra rows of seats were added in most of the outfield sections, moving the outfield wall about 12 feet closer to home."

Now how those seats got 12 feet closer to home by the addition of extra rows of seats, I'll never know. Perhaps Billini can explain it to us.

FightingBillini
10-31-2004, 08:58 PM
Very well. If you look at center field, it is the same distance as before. THe fences flare in on either side of center due to the new seats put it. The stands were extended by....12 ft. The moat was formerly....10 feet. Therefore, the fences were moved in. Since the fences were moved in, the distances are shorter to all areas, including the power alleys, even if by a few feet.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-31-2004, 09:01 PM
It's called selective reading....Now how those seats got 12 feet closer to home by the addition of extra rows of seats, I'll never know. Perhaps Billini can explain it to us.
Well, far be it from me to ever speak for Billini about this heretofore never known conspiracy to hide shortened power alleys at U.S. Cellular but...
:cool:

Billini claims the 375-foot markers have been moved deeper into center field. The "old" power alleys are now much closer to home plate than 375 feet, 12 feet or so.

It's ingenius, really. The Sox make the true power alleys shorter and trick everyone into thinking they're 375 feet away by moving the markers half-way up towards the rocket launchers on the centerfield scoreboard.

:veeck
"Why the hell didn't I think of this!"

And here's the best part, Torn... not only do the Sox have shorter power alleys, but nobody takes advantage of them for three full seasons! Pretty effective for throwing everyone off the scent of the trail, don't ya think? But not for that bloodhound of an investigative sleuth, "that guy who created that website."

:)

LAWSfan
10-31-2004, 09:12 PM
I'll drop the thing out of my sig, but that doesn't change my opinion that our pitching staff will never be a great one unless it's comprised of groundballers and hall-of-famers playing half of their games in this ballpark.
Hey listen I wasn't calling you out at all. I didn't mention you as the person who had these stats in their sig. I didn't know those stats until I saw one of your posts. I found that stat very interesting and thought it would make a great topic, (which it has) I don't want cause any waves, especially since I'm new. Keep those stats in your sig if you want.

MRKARNO
10-31-2004, 09:16 PM
Hey listen I wasn't calling you out at all. I didn't mention you as the person who had these stats in their sig. I didn't know those stats until I saw one of your posts. I found that stat very interesting and thought it would make a great topic, (which it has) I don't want cause any waves, especially since I'm new. Keep those stats in your sig if you want.

Nah, I think I've made my point. My real point is that Buehrle is an extremely good pitcher and not calling him and number one pitcher is a travesty. He does not get enough credit around here and if you think he'd be a number three if we added Pavano or Clement or any of those pitchers, you're nuts. There's only one pitcher who has been mentioned as coming to the White Sox that I think Buehrle would be a number 2 to and that is RJ.

TornLabrum
10-31-2004, 09:37 PM
Very well. If you look at center field, it is the same distance as before. THe fences flare in on either side of center due to the new seats put it. The stands were extended by....12 ft. The moat was formerly....10 feet. Therefore, the fences were moved in. Since the fences were moved in, the distances are shorter to all areas, including the power alleys, even if by a few feet.
Let's make one thing perfectly clear: The 12 foot figure was by your guy on his web site. Here is what was actually said in a 2001 article, quoting a spokesperson from the ISFA: "Last year, as part of a smaller $8 million renovation, officials eliminated a 10-foot 'moat' between the fans and the outfield fence to make the park 'more intimate,' the spokesman said." Nothing was said about 12 feet.

You are also moving the fences, so to speak. Where is the five-foot moat you insisted was in the outfield?

nitetrain8601
10-31-2004, 09:46 PM
Why are we arguing this issue? The fences won't be moved back, at least for a long time. Deal with it.

StillMissOzzie
10-31-2004, 11:22 PM
What on earth are you suggesting? You think the Sox are fudging on the shortened power alleys by moving the alley towards center field? This is nuts!

There was no appreciable difference in home runs hit at the Cell until after last year's renovations but the outfield moats were removed three years earlier! How does your little conspiracy theory explain this away?
1) That is EXACTLY what the website suggests. Not only fudging on the NEW power alleys (to preserve the 375' distance) by moving them closer to CF, but suggesting that the OLD distance/placement was not quite accurate.

2) As I mentioned earlier, I think that the HR outburst is much more due to the sealing of the UD than it is with the fences being a little bit closer.

SMO
:gulp: