The Psychology of Petco Park

by Marver on Aug 13, 2011 7:53 PM PDT

An excerpt from my blog:

"Recently, Padres General Manager Jed Hoyer spoke, during an interview with AM 1090's Darren Smith, about the psychological effect that Petco Park has on the San Diego Padres:

It seems like we don't have the same approach or confidence at home...[it] is a challenge and I do think we need to approach the mental side as well as the physical side [because] we swing with more confidence on the road.

Jed isn't stating anything Padres fans haven't heard before. Padres and opponents alike have made numerous comments about the psychological effect of Petco Park:

When we get on that plane out of San Diego, every hitter is a happy hitter. - Adrian Gonzalez

The more I try to figure [it] out, the bigger headache I get. - Phil Nevin

It isn't anything new that Petco Park stifles offensive production -- a cursory look at ballpark factors or team run totals proves this point quite well -- and for those who follow the Padres, it's nothing new to hear the team talk about the "mental" aspect of playing at Petco Park.

However, whether or not the psychological aspect actually translates into a disproportionately poor result at home is yet to be shown."

The rest can be read here: http://fedupfriarfans.blogspot.com/

This FanPost was written by a member of the Gaslamp Ball community and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Gaslamp Ball managers or SB Nation.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

This should have been Fanshot

Where the rest of the random articles from random ~~crazies~~ people go.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Aug 13, 2011 8:13 PM PDT reply actions

...

Instead of equating a different opinion with “crazy”, perhaps you should evaluate the content on the basis of thought and analysis. Pre-conceived notions are often wrong; refusing to switch them and dismissing the person as “crazy” seems to fit the definition of crazy itself:

senseless; impractical; totally unsound

by Marver on Aug 13, 2011 8:22 PM PDT up reply actions

Using the word "crazies" was a matter of opinion.

It sounded more scholarly than “loonies”. In the same vein, your belief that dismissing someone crazy “seems to fit the definition of crazy itself” is your own opinion. When something “seems” to be one way, it may in fact be wrong.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Aug 13, 2011 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions

ya and this comment could have just been made without having to call someone a name

Seriously, we get it….you’re cool in the blog world when you cross one silly word out and put something else in its place to.rip on someone, but how about just avoiding the dick wave and politely reminding the errant blogger of his mistake.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Aug 14, 2011 12:23 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

Plus, advertising your own blog on a blog?

Cheap.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Aug 13, 2011 8:14 PM PDT reply actions

Naw

I have a bunch of friends who are interested in reading my commentary on the Padres. Giving them a direct link to each post I’d make here makes a lot less sense than just making a blog. The content from there is definitely relevant to this blog, and the discussion about the “mental” aspect of Petco Park is a current discussion on this board.

by Marver on Aug 13, 2011 8:20 PM PDT up reply actions

Hmm..

Wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to send them the link to your blog? I mean, they are your friends. I’m sure there’s a way. Or are you going to keep advertising here so your friends can say “Oh hey, I should look at Marver’s blog!”

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Aug 13, 2011 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions

What?

I wanted to make posts here about Padres things I am investigating. There are smart people here with good feedback, so I figured I’d utilize that.

In order to channel my friends to them, it makes a lot more sense to have all of my posts centralized somewhere — like my own blog — than it does to keep sending them links to my posts here, since they would have little ability to easily see my other articles here (as there are articles from a lot of different people here).

by Marver on Aug 13, 2011 8:32 PM PDT reply actions

I know

But since this is not an article written for the blog, it should have been Fanshot in the first place. This is like posting an article from ESPN. It’s in the wrong section.

Why ask a failed romance to come watch your successful one? You know, that's like inviting the Seattle Mariners to a World Series game. It's just weird for everyone.

by Friar Fever on Aug 13, 2011 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions

Noted

by Marver on Aug 13, 2011 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions

do you really care that much, dude?

wow.

"Chris (Denorfia) is the scrappiest player I've seen since Shoeless Joe Jackson." -Lee 'Hacksaw' Hamilton

by The Kipper on Aug 14, 2011 3:56 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

I'm thinking about creating a blog

and expressing my anger about people who fanpost, when they obviously should have fanshat
then I will ~~fanpost~~ ~~fanshat~~ ~~fanpost~~ ~~fanshat~~ write about my new blog here on GLB

On the other hand, you have different fingers.

by Hormel on Aug 13, 2011 10:14 PM PDT reply actions 2 recs

The Padres need to...

If they have not already, hire a dedicated team phychologist to work with the Hitting coach to find ways to overcome this mental block that seems to be a self fulfilling prophecy of hit supressing PetCo park.

Anyone who spikes a ball after tagging out a douche like Andres Torres is OK by me.

by MrDanielX on Aug 13, 2011 11:10 PM PDT reply actions

Read the article

There doesn’t appear to any measurable effect on the Padres hitters. While they may be frustrated, etc. with the park, it doesn’t show up in the numbers.

by Marver on Aug 14, 2011 1:30 AM PDT up reply actions

Well couldnt it be argued

That the fact they are performing at the same level or slightly better than their opponents in terms of percentage of road value, yet letting the affects get to their head mean that it is exactly that—Psychological? When they realize thats the way the park plays but use it to their advantage, then they can stop worrying about how it plays.

Also, historically the offensive performance at petco is at a nearly identical rate for both the padres and their opponents. However, THIS YEAR, it is significantly different. Opponents are hitting at the historical norm of .240. The Padres are hitting .211. Furthermore the Padres are hitting .260 in their road games, which is the same average their opponents are hitting in those games. Therefore, the drop off THIS YEAR, is more than double their opponents drop off from games away from petco. Quite significant.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Aug 14, 2011 7:59 AM PDT reply actions

You can either

try to fit the statistics to a theory, or try to fit a theory to the statistics.

The Padres have played 59 home games this season, which is less than 10% of the number of games the Padres have played in Petco total. If you wanted to make the argument that this team has the psychological effect actually translating into a statistical difference — which is very dubious with a 59 game sample — then go ahead; but all that does is strengthen the long-term statistical analysis of the psychological effect.

That’s because, prior to this season, the fact that the effect has no bearing on the statistics — from the hitters standpoint — was even more accentuated.

Either way, the statistics don’t bear that the Padres’ hittters are more susceptible to the pitching confines of Petco Park than the opponents.

by Marver on Aug 14, 2011 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm not saying their hitters are more susceptible to the pitching confines

I don’t think the stadiums dimensions should be modified either. Im just saying the fact that the Padres THINK it is worse on them…is all in their head, or…Psychological. It doesnt affect them at all.

This year certainly something is happening differently though. The reasons for that are more than likely just statistical variance and luck. But the variance is existent this year.

Scowling at Padres Losses since 1981

by Nater Tater on Aug 14, 2011 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions

i can think of one difference little Buddy

And there’s a reason no one ever used to give me multi year contracts.

"Well, he ought to go home and find somebody else to bang." Jerry Coleman

by cubbuster on Aug 14, 2011 11:13 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

You can look at the overall stats for Petco since 2004

to evaluate whether it makes sense or not to change the dimensions (it doesn’t), but the make-up of the team changes year-to-year (obviously), so you’re only going to have an 81-game sample with more or less the same players…. Even then there are players coming and going….

So you could then look at an individual player’s statistics from year to year for how he has done at Petco — and that COULD be revealing, but the players hitting around you can also affect your performance….

Anyway, the .211 batting average at home this year is significantly worse than the average since ‘04, and that’s simply undebatable….

Can they turn it around in the next (and last) 22 games of 2011 — go crazy and get up more than just a few points CLOSER to the average of about .240…?… Seems pretty darned unlikely, but one can hope…. ;)

by jctess on Aug 15, 2011 3:07 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs