PDA

View Full Version : Can the Reds win a title at GABP?



Redlegs
04-27-2007, 08:52 PM
I was listening to Pete Rose discuss the state of the Reds on opening day. He mentioned he didn't know if the Reds could win a championship while playing at GABP. Any thoughts?

dougdirt
04-27-2007, 08:53 PM
My thoughts are he is an idiot if he thinks they couldnt. They just need the right group of players. The park does not give anyone an advantage over another team. If you are the better team, you will probably win more games than the other guys.

Marc D
04-27-2007, 08:53 PM
I was listening to Pete Rose discuss the state of the Reds on opening day. He mentioned he didn't know if the Reds could win a championship while playing at GABP. Any thoughts?


Its not the ballpark, its the players.

Astros just played for a WS in minute maid park a few years ago, no?

BurgervilleBuck
04-27-2007, 10:09 PM
I was listening to Pete Rose discuss the state of the Reds on opening day. He mentioned he didn't know if the Reds could win a championship while playing at GABP.
What was his reasoning behind that statement? :confused:

Dracodave
04-27-2007, 10:28 PM
What was his reasoning behind that statement? :confused:

The ball flies out of the ballpark, with total disregard to the state of our pitching staff.

jimbo
04-27-2007, 10:52 PM
I think his point was more that the Reds will always have trouble signing quality free agent pitching because of the park, therefore they will have trouble winning a championship.

Chip R
04-27-2007, 11:25 PM
I think his point was more that the Reds will always have trouble signing quality free agent pitching because of the park, therefore they will have trouble winning a championship.


Of course they had no problems signing Arroyo and Harang to multi-year extentions. They may not have been free agents but they sure didn't have to re-sign with the Reds.

BurgervilleBuck
04-27-2007, 11:32 PM
Of course they had no problems signing Arroyo and Harang to multi-year extentions. They may not have been free agents but they sure didn't have to re-sign with the Reds.
Especially if Arroyo was so hot to get back in Beantown.

The home runs theory make sense but isn't Houston's ballpark a home run hitter's park, too? It didn't stop the Astros from getting Andy Petitte and Roger Clemens for a couple years.

Personally, I think Pete's talking some flannel.

Billy_Bearcat
04-27-2007, 11:34 PM
The size of GABP argument may have some merit. However, I think pitchers will come here if they determine that the organization is really hell-bent on being a winner.

BurgervilleBuck
04-27-2007, 11:38 PM
However, I think pitchers will come here if they determine that the organization is really hell-bent on being a winner.
I agree. I'd guess the hardest thing would be proving to potential FAs that they are committed to winning.

KronoRed
04-28-2007, 01:49 AM
Parks are parks, a good team would win wherever it plays.

jimbo
04-28-2007, 02:19 AM
Of course they had no problems signing Arroyo and Harang to multi-year extentions. They may not have been free agents but they sure didn't have to re-sign with the Reds.

I'm not saying I agree with him, just stating what he had implied.

thatcoolguy_22
04-28-2007, 04:57 AM
This question is ludacris. They could win a title if they played in Ryan I. Tornanut park in a suburb of Chicago if thats where they played.

RedsBaron
04-28-2007, 08:08 AM
While there probably is a slight advantage to a team having a more pitching friendly ballpark, the idea that the Reds can't win a pennant with GABP as their home park is silly.
During the 1970s Riverfront Stadium was a relatively friendly hitters park, and I seem to recall that the Reds did okay during that decade--maybe someone should remind Pete of that team; maybe he can recall them.

GoGoWhiteSox
04-28-2007, 06:44 PM
Can the Reds win a title at GABP? Yes. If the White Sox could win it all playing at U.S. Cellular Field (which is a hitter friendly park), then the Reds can do it at GABP.

D-Man
04-28-2007, 07:25 PM
Its not the ballpark, its the players.

Bill James did a study, and there is a relationship between playing in a pitcher's park and winning games. So Rose does have a point.

This phenomenon makes sense to me for three reasons.

1.) Developing young pitching is one of the most valuable things a team can do, and young pitchers have a narrow margin of error in a hitters park.
2.) If hitters don't produce in a pitcher's park, they will be exposed because their nominal stats will look putrid. They will be replaced pronto.
3.) Playing in a hitters ballpark might make you fall in love with your own players to the detriment of your team. You might hand your power hitting OFer an eight-figure contract, even though he would probably hit half as many homers in a pitchers park (see Dante Bichette).

Look at it another way. Why has Colorado only made it to the postseason once in fifteen years, despite lots of money, brainpower, and employing a variety of different models for building a team?

Dracodave
04-28-2007, 07:48 PM
Look at it another way. Why has Colorado only made it to the postseason once in fifteen years, despite lots of money, brainpower, and employing a variety of different models for building a team?

Comparing to Colorado to any other ballpark outside of maybe Arizona, is apple and orange agruement. Colorado's thin air promotes that ball to fly, and when you really didn't build your staff at ground balls/strike out pitchers. Well, we've seen those results.

I think if you ignore our pitching staff outside of Harrang and Arroyo until we get better pitching, then the hitter's park threoy stays. Till that day, it's a give and take agruement over wheither or not it's our staff or the park.

Our hitters when on, used to make any field a homerun paradise. So yeah, there are too many "if's" for you to pinpoint one stance.

gonelong
04-29-2007, 11:38 PM
I was listening to Pete Rose discuss the state of the Reds on opening day. He mentioned he didn't know if the Reds could win a championship while playing at GABP. Any thoughts?

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=777126&postcount=8
07-13-2005, 09:59 AM

I stated day one that they should have built the most cavernous park MLB would allow. It would allow you to capitalize on so many fronts.

The game is offensive minded right now. You can get defense and speed at a discount, while big bats and pitching are at a premium. You neutralize the other teams big bats and run them ragged. You don't have a pile of good catchers in the league at this point, you go contrary and run like rabbits.

Your pitchers put up pretty good numbers which allows you to trade them for a premium to what they are probably worth.

IMO, the Reds built a park that they cannot possibly string together any kind of year-to-year success story. Don't worry, the park will likely only stand for 30-40 years.

GL

mroby85
04-29-2007, 11:56 PM
i think the ball flying out at great american had a whole lot to do with the pitching staffs that were in it. arroyo, harang, etc. don't seem to have had that many problems. You could always point out a guy like eric milton, but he also gave up 5 home runs in an A-ball start.

Chip R
04-30-2007, 12:08 AM
i think the ball flying out at great american had a whole lot to do with the pitching staffs that were in it. arroyo, harang, etc. don't seem to have had that many problems. You could always point out a guy like eric milton, but he also gave up 5 home runs in an A-ball start.


Yep. The good pitchers don't have any problems pitching in any park. And the bad pitchers can't pitch in the Grand Canyon. If a FA pitcher doesn't want to come here because of the ballpark, perhaps he's not as good as advertised. A truly good pitcher would be confident he could pitch well here.

George Anderson
04-30-2007, 12:32 AM
For years we always heard Wrigley Field was the reason the Cubs never won. The theory was the heat from playing all the day games wore the Cubs players out and they ran out of gas come August. The Cubs still do play their fair share of day games but nothing really has changed for them in the winning department since lights were installed in 1988.

BurgervilleBuck
04-30-2007, 09:30 AM
It's all excuses.

hebroncougar
04-30-2007, 11:21 AM
The Reds starting pitching staff seems to be handling GABP just fine this year. Pete must be betting against them. ;)

fearofpopvol1
04-30-2007, 11:58 AM
If they can win on the road yes.

storrs19
04-30-2007, 03:00 PM
I just wonder how many more times we are going to run Uncle Miltie out there for another loss. He is 0-4 witha 4.71 ERA. He just does not fit at GAB, period. Since he is out of options I would just sit him rather than keep taking losses.

As for the bullpen, they were .479 in save situations last year before they got Eddie Guardado. Until Bray and Guardado get back I really don't expect much improvement in that area. So far they have lost 5 of our 13 games for us and in 4 of those we had 4+ run leads.

I have really been impressed with Loshe and Belisle's pitching and I figure Arroyo will come around. I don't figure Milton will because I just look at his track record.

15fan
04-30-2007, 03:06 PM
$10 says they can.

You in, Pete?

RANDY IN INDY
04-30-2007, 03:11 PM
Yep. The good pitchers don't have any problems pitching in any park. And the bad pitchers can't pitch in the Grand Canyon. If a FA pitcher doesn't want to come here because of the ballpark, perhaps he's not as good as advertised. A truly good pitcher would be confident he could pitch well here.

The problem with that is that some of the pitchers that you have to surround your "good pitchers" with, are not going to be nearly as effective in a park like GAB as opposed to some of the more "pitching friendly" ballparks. If you have 5 aces, you better have a big pocketbook.

flyer85
04-30-2007, 03:16 PM
The White Sox recently won in a ballpark considerably more HR friendly than GABP.