Seattle Sports Insider

Dr's Forecast: 'Perfect Storm' Warning

We were getting sick of 1-0 Felix victories, anyway

Posted by

1/31/13

Lonnie of MC sez,

.

At FanFest I took a look at where the wall will be and blast if it doesn't look like a short porch to left. Maybe it's because I am more used to seeing the great expanse of Coors Field, but that left field fence at Safeco sure looks like it needs a very large green wall behind it.

Others have said similar.

The Mariners' stat guy, forget his name but he's got an assistant GM title, like Paul DePodesta did in Oakland. He was just on the radio again, saying Safeco will go from 28, 29, 30 as a pitchers' park to about 20 as a pitchers' park.

Other blogs: I dunno.

SSI, the day the dimensions were announced: Lock and load for arena baseball.

Just so we're on the record. So then when it's May 15 and we're all agape at the runs, SSI gets the assistant GM job, right :- )

.............

My coefficient of confidence is -- oh, 70%, 80% -- that Safeco is about to become a hitters' park. There's another real good chance that this will coincide with a sudden jelling of the offense. By May we could all be in a giggle-fest.

Zduriencik himself has been consistent: he has no idea what the effect will be. But he thinks it will be greater on the M's hitters than on the enemy -- the other teams come in, play three days, and leave. The field did NOT get into the Rangers' heads.

But with the Mariners, since about 2004-05 or so, it's like "my next hitting slump begins Tuesday, when the homestand opens." It doesn't matter whether you or I like the idea of sports psychology or not. The fact is that the Seattle Mariners have had disappointing offenses every year.

Therefore, the new dimensions have every prospect of making the Seattle Mariners a better team, relative to their competition. The football bounces the same for everybody, but the playing conditions are another story. Home-field advantages exist in sports ... as do home-field DISadvantages.

.............

So Lonnie's observation that subjectively, the porch looks very inviting? That's important. It's a first return that tends to confirm Dr. D's suspicions about 2013.

I wouldn't bet anything I was afraid to lose, that Michael Morse wasn't going to finish in the top 5 in the MVP voting. A Bret Boone season wouldn't be at all farfetched.

BABVA,

Jeff

Comments

Projections

This is precisely why I believe that the projection systems win factor for the M's is gonna be way way off this year. How do you factor park factors for a park that hasn't been played in? How do you project a three year floating average for young players like Montero, Seager, Saunders, and Ackley when thei development has been stymied by their old home park?
While GMZ may say he doesn't know the effect the park will have, his off season of interest in Upton, Morse, Shoppach, et al, puts his money where his mouth won't go. This team believes that this field will no longer suppress right handed mashers.
I'm predicting a huge up year for one Mr Jesus Montero. Watch out boys.

Montero

Montero will be an interesting one to watch. He hit a LOT better when he was behind the dish in 2012 and he's going to catch quite a bit, at least until Zunino is ready. Could be a productive year for him.

Danger Pollyanna, Danger!!!

Hey, I get the optimism.
And I also see some logic to Doc's argument.
But, the park effects on bbref are broken into PPF (pitching park factor) and BPF (batting park factor)
While it "may" be true that the park does not get into the heads of the Rangers when they visit for 3 days, the simple truth is that every ball park factor I've seen, the skew between PPF and BPF is consistently small. (0-2 points).
The PPF/BPF splits for Seattle recently?
91/90
92/90
95/93
95/94
97/96
The math says, if Safeco turns into a 95 PPF ... it likely turns into a 95 BPF (give or take a point).
The Rangers may not have to play half their games in Safeco ... but Felix and Iwakuma and Wilhelmesn, et al do. Vargas may be gone, but his home/road splits are demonstrative of how much of an edge "home" was for a "pedestrian" MOR pitcher: Home ERA: 2.74 --- Road ERA: 4.78
Felix was not immune from the impact: Home: 2.78 -- Road 3.43
What happens to the optimism is Blake Beaven is running a 5.11 ERA (like he did last year on the road), or Iwakuma is up at 4.20?
Yes, there will be more runs by the offense. But, why will the pitchers (who ran a 4.59 ERA on the road and a 2.97 in Safeco last year), not suffer due to the change?
What I fear is that the change in park, while helping the young hitters, (mostly in 2nd or 3rd season), is going to smack the pitchers, (mostly a year or two BEHIND the hitters in development). So, how much patience are fans going to have when Beavan or Paxton or Hultzen are sporting ERAs above 5.00? How much easier was it for Pineda, Fister and Beavan to deal with the growing pains of learning their craft when aided by Safeco? (Pineda had a 4.40 road ERA). In 2010, Fister ran a 3.61 at home and a 5.06 on the road. He ran a .284 to .338 BABIP split during that year he was developing.
Of course, Fister developed very fast and got even better with Detroit. But, what if HIS first season numbers had been closer to Noesi's? What impact does that have on HIS development?
Seattle "developing" pitchers have been "getting away" with mistakes in Safeco they will no longer get away with. The veteran pitchers will also be punished more for their mistakes.
While the Ranger hitters may not have had psychological damage ON TOP OF the actual Safeco effect. they did, nevertheless, suffer the very real park effects, as Seattle pitchers benefited.
In the end, I think it all balances out. But I do think for "developing" players, Seattle hurlers have been aided (and won't be any longer), and hitters have suffered (and won't any longer).

Park changes

Sandy,
I completely agree that there exists an inverse relationship between hitters and pitchers regarding home park effects. However, given the current roster and minor league system - changing SafeCo to a more balanced stadium seems a no brainer to me.
1) The Ms have one of the top 5 right handed pitching (in some cases overall top 5) prospects and two of the top 10 left handed pitching prospects.
2) the organizational depth at pitching starts at Felix, includes a young cost controlled talented deep and balanced bullpen, and plenty of spaghetti at the wall types who could leap a plateau in Ramirez, Beavan, Noesi, Mauer, etc.
3) Perception will also make it easier to add pitchers in FA instead if bats
4) as noted by the times recently, last year the Ms gave almost four full time player equivalent at bats to complete offensive black holes. They had one major pitching black hole.
5) the Ms are loaded with bats about to enter their productive primes that will be greatly aided by the park changes. Montero, Ackley, Seager, Smoak, and Saunders have the potential to be a dynamite young core.
I'm excited to see what the sports psych boost does. I'm with doc on betting the over for it.
Last point - everything this team has done this offseason seems to me like setting the table for Montero. Moving out Jaso, bringing in middle of the order bats to slide him into a more comfortable 5 or 6 hole, giving him the full time catcher role, moving in the fences, etc. I expect huge things. Huge.
- Ben.

Z proving its 90% mental?

Get the park out of the hitters heads, put them in better positions to succeed, relying in guys that are used to being relied on in the MOTO, adding veterans with positivity and faith in success. Alot of mental aspects to the changes.
I do think there's more positive effect on hitters believing they can hit there than the negative effect the changes will have on pitchers. Confidence is a key to success in anything. We've been talking for a decade about hitters moving on to greater success with other clubs and only recently realized we probably should have been talking about them moving to other parks. I'm not talking about small change or even equal to park factors, I'm talking about it being a level beyond just Beltres Safeco stats adjusted for park factor. Believing they can hit here and adding that they're mostly in the right batting order spot with better protection and positive attitudes from guys who've been around. Hitting wise it could cascade this year.

simple math says you're wrong

Sandy,
Must you always barge in here only to disagree with unnecessarily tough name-calling? Doc is no pollyanna - though I would say he's an optimist.
And math says you're wrong. The Mariners have always placed enough of an emphasis on team defense that the entire defensive equation will not shift just because the park does. A big part of the reason Seattle's pitchers do well is that they run low BABIPs...in part because the pacific air helps on fly balls, i part because they keep the infield grass long and damp and in part because they always have good fielders at the skill positions. Which they still do in 2013 (Ryan, Ackley, Seager, Saunders, Guti...all well above average defensively). NONE of those things change because the fences come in...the only thing that changes...HR/Fly. Seattle's HR/Fly was near the bottom in baseball the last few years...it will come up some. But you're making a beginner's mistake to assume that road stats are the perfect representation of what a player will do in a neutral environment. Lest you forget...take Safeco out and the entire AL becomes a hitter's park.
Safeco is not going to play as a hitter's park...it will probably become no better than a FAIR park...and that...can only help the Mariners. They have a flotilla of outstanding pitching prospects and a bunch of hitting prospects who should be good but were horrible at home last year...so horrible that it can't all just be the park killing their hits...some of it HAS to be psychological.
If you want to go on snarkily calling people names and then using beginner's logic to claim superiority, you go right ahead, but I for one am starting to get tired of it.

pitching in Safeco vs. on the road

When guys used to hitting at Coors go on the road, they have "trouble with the curve" because bendy stuff bends so much more in Dodger Stadium. I think a similar thing happens to many Ms pitchers - they pitch enough differently on the road, being more careful, that they ARE less effective - a self-fulfilling prophecy.
With a park that is closer to fair (I still believe it will be slightly pitcher-friendly because of the marine air), the splits may resolve themselves downward as the pitchers can stick to one motion, one repertoire, and don't worry as much about where they are. Clear the mechanism! Parks get into pitcher's heads, too.

The funny part about moving in the walls...

Is that it actually shows CONFIDENCE in the players. Jack is doubling down on his belief that he chose the right guys - that he has a bunch of Beltres or Cirillos who hit everywhere BUT here - and he's making it easier on them to succeed at home and carry that success onto the road.
We were an average offense on the road last year, and one of the worst at home. Road numbers aren't everything, but they are an indicator. Most players hit better at home, unless you play for the Padres or Ms anyway. I agree that the move is psychological and aimed squarely at not crushing a young team. Not everybody has Raul's topspin swing to compensate for the park, or Edgar's ability to hit equally well at home and on the road.
Getting the park to play fair with the kids is a big deal. We're still built for the park with good defenders all over the place (the new Raul/Morse acquisitions aside) and a strikeout/groundball pitching staff rather than a flyball one will help too. Paxton and Erasmo are groundball pitchers. Iwakuma's a huge one. Hultzen's even, and Walker's a lil better than even. Felix will be fine.
Vargas was a bit of a flyballer and Beavan's more of one - neither will be in our rotation this year (unless the Ms hate me and stuff Beavan in there to hold a spot). Noesi's a flyballer with a huge HR problem even before the fences were shifted. He's a dead man walking without a revamp of his approach and some brain rewiring.
But Jack is definitely buying in on his hitters, it seems. He knows he doesn't have any 40 HR mashers on the way, and that cadres of 40 HR mashers are a thing of the past with HGH testing now in the game anyway. What he needs are HITTERS, and it sure looks from this angle like our hitters (and others around the league, judging from our FA returns) have hated this park.
The park was built to compete in the Steroid Era, and this is no longer that era.
40+ HR seasons, 1995-2003: 105
40+ HR seasons, 2004-2012: 51
The park's defenses are unnecessary. We can take down the Wall of Flaming Death and still trust that our alligator-filled moat and patrols of armed guards can do the trick.
And maybe the good people of Seattle won't have to sit through another retelling of The Worst Offense In The DH Era again. That story's pretty stale with the home crowd. If Jack's right about the talent in his hand-picked hitters, the offense could actually be pretty good once they stop setting themselves on fire at home. At least this way we'll get the chance to find out.
And honestly, offense is more synergistic IMO than pitching. Defense is a synergy, but pitching? A pitcher can adjust to an average park, especially since Felix will be the only one truly used to pitching in Safeco at this point. We've gutted the rest of the guys. The pitcher with the most game appearances at The Safe other than The King is Wilhelmsen, right? The staff doesn't have any bad habits to break - they'll just step foot in the park, get used to it, and move on.
But if a less-imposing field can convince the hitters to be the ball instead of the bug on the windshield, we might have one of those surprise seasons after all.
~G

apologies ...

Sorry if the use of the word Pollyanna is taken as some kind of extreme pejorative rather than just a cutesy title. Wasn't intending insult.
But, Doc said; "Therefore, the new dimensions have every prospect of making the Seattle Mariners a better team, relative to their competition." The key word is relative to the competition. The implication I read into this was an implication that Seattle's offense is going to improve "significantly" more than opposition offense. We can agree to disagree on that point. As to the concept that simple math refutes my position, you, of course, didn't bother to include any actual numbers from 2012 in your post, so what were they?
Here are the BABIP splits for hitters and pitchers.
Hitters: .263 / .287
Pitchers: .273 / .295
So, there is some numerical evidence to support the notion the hitters are getting the worse end of the park effect stick. They show a 24 point skew in BABIP. However, the pitchers show a 22 point BABIP skew.
The "simple math" as you call it, of BABIP, suggests that the psychological impact of Safeco impacted the hitters by 2 BABIP points more than the pitchers.
The normal (league wide) skews in BABIP home road are:
Hitters: .295 / .291
Pitchers .291 / .296
I don't get why the numbers don't exactly match - but the 4-5 point BABIP edge makes sense to me as representing both defensive advantages of park familiarity and also general edge for roster construction in sync with park details.
What I really, really do not understand is how one can be absolutely certain that Mariner hitters were significantly hurt psychologically by the park effect and be utterly dismissive with the concept that the pitchers were positively influenced by those same effects?
I am not dismissing the notion that the park got into the hitters heads at all. I am suggesting that whatever portion of the home/road skew impacting hitters psychologically was EQUALLY impacting pitchers positively.
Wilhelmsen's H/R BABIP split? .228 / .307
Erasmo - .211 / .272
Beavan - .279 / .286
Iwakuma - .275 / .293
Noesi - .256 / .283
In looking at the "relatively new to Safeco" pitchers, only one had a superior BABIP at home:
Furbush: .250 / .226
===============
I am absolutely willing to accept that the "real" park effects created psychological effects which exaggerate the final park effect number. I am not willing to accept that pitchers are immune from this impact. When I see Doc suggesting that the Ms will improve as a team "relative to the competion", that reads to me that the hitters will remove the added psych impact, but the pitchers will not lose it, (either because they have not been getting any such benefit - or because of some other unstated reason).
In all honesty, I like the chances of the Ms making a major step forward this year. The hitters are young and positioned to make a leap forward en masse. There are so many near ready arms that even if there are early stumbles, the club has a lot of bullets in the gun to fire at the target. I just don't believe that park effects impact only half a ball club. I also have little doubt that if the Ms do make a huge move forward this year and win 95 and make the playoffs many will attribute this to the remodeling, (even if the park effects continue to show the 93/92 or 95/94 park effect splits. Me? I'll attribute it to having built a really good foundation with solid talent with a lot of potential to improve and giving them the time to do just that.

It's Zduriencik's point more than mine

Go to 710 Hot Stove - his last podcast, he spent quite a bit of time on that. Other teams come in, they go home, the park doesn't affect them, sez Jack. That theory was the basis for the Mariners approving the change in dimensions -- the Mariners' organizational position is that it will probably help the Mariners more than it would help the rest of the league.
Maybe he's wrong. I don't see why it calls for spluttering protest, as it were. ;- )
Personally I suspect they're right. For about the last 12 years, I've been sitting in the third deck watching Mariner hitters psyched out by Safeco Field.
We'll see. If they are right, and they have a big offensive first half, I'm sure people will credit it to anything other than Zduriencik's theory..

why on earth would you focus on BABIP?

Sandy...why would you bring BABIP up in a conversation where I cited BABIP as a factor UNLIKELY TO CHANGE with the new park configuration?
You want to see psychological impact...check ISO
The Mariners were fifth in baseball in road homers...and near the bottom at home. THAT is the psychological impact Z is talking about. And before you ask...no the pitchers did not have such extreme HR splits.

Well....

Opposing players are in and out and can rack up short comings while playing at Safeco Field as anomalous. Players who play at Safeco for 82 games see the effect on a hit ball much more often. Comparing what visiting players think and do against the home town nine is unfair since the variables are different for each. Jack Zduriencik must do what he can to put butts in seats even if it means over hyping a change.
But then, I could be completely wrong...

Smoak & Safeco

One M hitter that undoubtedly let Safeco into his head last year was Smoak. He was quoted after some long flyouts that he had hit the ball as hard as he could and he couldn't clear the wall in the alleys. If bringing in the walls clears Safeco out of Smoak's head, and that is all it does, it is still successful in my book. The M's need Smoak to succeed -- Morse and Morales are on 1-year contracts, and a switch hitting 1st baseman with power from both sides is a solid asset that could help the M's for years to come.

Negative vs Positive reinforcement...

"I am absolutely willing to accept that the "real" park effects created psychological effects which exaggerate the final park effect number. I am not willing to accept that pitchers are immune from this impact."
Sandy,
You are trying to equate the crushing effect of blasting a pitch to see it die in a outfielders glove at the base of the wall to the bemusing effect of watching the same from the pitchers perspective. Or the frustrating grind of hitting line drive after line drive into the sea air and watching them hold up and get caught vs. a pitcher just seeing another out. The two are not comparable in the least in terms of psychological effect. And that is before we even get to the basics of negative reinforcement vs. positive.
As a parent to several young children I am always on the look out for the best ways to foster good behavior and squelch bad behavior and it is fairly axiomatic in the parenting world as well as in the psych world that negative stimulus is much more effective than positive stimulus (I didn't say one was better than the other for the child, just speaking to the effectiveness). Most experts tend to agree for instance that it takes twice as many words of affirmation to repair or offset one word of disapproval. Even when a negative word is needed one is supposed to couch it in positive terms and / or surround it in a "Positive Sandwich". There are others that think even 2 to 1 is not the correct ratio, but more like 5 to one. Meaning negative stimulus is FIVE times more detrimental to the psyche than positive stimulus is beneficial.
I guess if we were going from one extreme (Safeco) to the other (Coors pre humidor), then you could say the switch from negative reinforcement on the hitters to negative reinforcement on the pitchers would cancel each other out, but we are going from extreme pitchers park to... slightly less of an extreme pitchers park. The relaxing of the negative reinforcement on the hitters will be VASTLY more felt than the slight remission of the positive reinforcement of the pitchers.
Even further. If SafeCo is becoming a crutch for some pitchers (Vargas or Beaven perhaps?) then that is something we want to REMOVE. We want to be finding and playing the best pitchers period, because most of SafeCo's help will be mitigated when it counts anyways (like the playoffs), so if having the original SafeCo dimensions causes us to invest extra time in mirages like Beaven and not in possible aces like Paxton, then taking away that crutch is actually a net positive for the team, even if it specifically hurts Beaven.

Certainly in Strat-O-Matic you'd give back hitting gains ....

... when your pitchers took the mound. Obviously for VISITING teams, Zduriencik is assuming this is exactly what will be the case.
..................
It's possible that Vargas specifically had his mentality warped, in a good way, by Safeco.
As to the overall effect, teamwide, the observation of those on-site in Seattle (as opposed to the conjecture of those off-site, who rarely see the games) is that the stadium doesn't seem to have had nearly AS LARGE an effect on the pitchers as it has had on the hitters.
One example -- Doug Fister didn't turn out to be a Safeco mirage when he was traded out of here. It's hard to recall pitchers who collapse when they leave Safeco. But when hitters leave, they routinely find their confidence again, rebounding in a matter of a few games. Beltre, Olivo the first time he left, Spiezio IIRC, Cirillo IIRC, Rich Aurilia for sure, a dozen more at least, draw up your own list.
...................
The M's, and I, could be mistaken. But it certainly has looked like many right-hand hitters have had their psyches crushed here, and it has not looked like the inverse has been true with pitchers.

what's the ratio ...

We all agree there is a "real" park effect - the LF winds knocking down fly balls.
This reduces HR totals - and also lowers BABIP. Both of those conclusions are supported by years of data.
Your position is that IN ADDITION to the real park effects, there are psychological effects that adversely impact Mariner hitters - and in a way significantly more acute than they impact Mariner pitchers.
So ... some questions.
1) What percentage of the home/road skew in production (en masse) do you attribute to "real" park effects vs. "psyche damage"? Basically, how many points of OPS are lost due to park - and how many are lost due to Psyche?
In 2012, the slugging and ISO splits (hitters vs. pitchers) were:
Hitters: (home / road)
Slug: .331 / .403 --- (70 point plunge at home)
ISO : .111 / .156 --- (45 point plunge at home)
Pitchers: (home / road)
Slug: .338 / .449 -- (111 point edge at home)
ISO : 109 / .183 -- (74 point edge at home)
2) How do you explain the reality that Seattle PITCHERS had a 41 point LARGER skew in slugging, and a 29 point LARGER swing in ISO when compared to the hitters skews?
3) If, by direct observation, it "appears" that hitters are far more impacted by the park than pitchers, how would you know you were wrong?
4) Is it not possible, that hitters - who must wait up to 3 innings after getting robbed by the wind, actually manage to overcome the "in game" impact and shrug it off more easily? While, pitchers, when on the road - watch a ball sail over the LF fence must deal with the psychological consequences of the immediately - having seconds to try and ignore that "that would've been caught in Safeco" - might just be suffering a more drastic psychological impact - but it is most clearly manifested on the road, (when 'locals' are much less likely to be watching and able to pick up on it?)

Confused

Uh… you realize that several of the people responsible for that high road slugging % are not likely to pitch for the Ms in 2013, right? While almost all the hitters who suffered at home WILL be a part of the Mariners going forward?
Breakdown of Road numbers by pitcher
Guys who are dead like sushi:
Noesi: .276/.338/.516/.854 (11 games/192 ABs)
Beavan: .283/.325/.511/.835 (14 games/325 ABs)
Vargas: .266/.315/.495/.809 (19 games/459 ABs)
Guys who are likely rotation mates:
Felix: .249/.312/.374/.686 (15 games, 382 ABs)
Iwakuma: .276/.343/.474/.817 (13 games/192 ABs)
Erasmo: .256/.305/.462/.767 (9 games/117 ABs)
Now some of those guys don’t really have enough IP to make hay on… but 3 of the top 4 offenders are gone or have lost their spots. I can see being concerned a little about Iwakuma with that road OPS-against, but I don’t think it’s serious. He was pitching lights out once we got him in rhythm as a starter by the end of the season. His last 6 starts on the road (5 against contenders in the Rays, Yankees, Angels and Rangers) he was tremendous. It was his bullpen work that skewed his numbers (30 innings at .806 OPS-against as a reliever, .690 as a starter).
As for who might be joining them in the rotation – none of those minor leaguers got slugged on, anywhere.
SLG-against, 2012:
Hultzen: .269 (!)
Paxton: .323
Maurer: .346
Walker: .403
And as I mentioned elsewhere, none of the minor league options are the flyballers with gopheritis that Noesi, Beavan and Vargas could be. Beavan had .446 across 131 innings the last 2 years in AAA, btw and a .469 in MLB – in case you’re looking for some comparisons and potential translations, and he’s apt to get worse with a more normalized Safeco.
Luckily it seems the Mariners may have a plan to avoid having their horrible road pitching numbers coming back to haunt them in 2013. Imagine that.
~G

To put it a simpler way

Regardless of the psychological effect (of which there is one - ask Beltre, or Cammy, or any number of RH hitters who grew to despise the park in ways that bordered on pathological) the Mariners decided that they either couldn't or wouldn't change out enough position players to be able to defeat the park effects, so they changed the way the park will play and swapped out the starting pitchers instead.
80% of the 2012 April rotation is gone or confined to pen work. This is the plan: to "fix" the park to allow it to play more normally, and to remove the pitchers who were only in the rotation because they could pitch half their games in the Safe and thus save their ERAs for a while. The "hope the park will hold it" guys need not apply any longer, and luckily we have better options anyway.
BTW, we seem to be stocking the bullpen with an arsenal of young high-90s flamethrowers and nasty breaking types who a) don't get taken deep and b) pitch fine on the road - Wilhemsen barely has a split in his majors time, for instance, while League more sizeable splits in 2010 and huge splits in his 2011season, while sucking enough at home in 2012 to earn his walking papers. The pitching staff will be young and emotionally malleable. They won't KNOW that a certain ball "would not have gone out in Safeco before" because they didn't pitch enough in the park to be able to make that determination. The previous psychology of the park won't affect them.
It may not be a plan you believe will work, Sandy, but it is a plan and not just the hope that psychology will have deep-seated effects on only one side of the roster.
~G

so ... the psyche issue DID impact pitchers?

Understand ... I have not said there is NOT a psychological impact from Safeco.
I have been arguing that there is no evidence that the impact "has been larger for hitters than pitchers.
In truth when Doc first suggested that the hitters are going to benefit not only from the "real" impact, but also the "psyche" impact, I did not suggest that this view was flawed. I ONLY have been objecting to the contention that Seattle pitchers have been immune from this effect.
The contention is that hitters will gain from the real effect, plus the psyche effect. But, the pitchers will only be hurt by the "real" effect. The implication I was reading was that the psyche effect is actually a "substantial" (my word) portion of the total park effect for hitters, enough that the hitters will gain a lot, while the pitchers will lose little.
My position all along is there is no statistical basis to support the notion that the hitters have been hurt WORSE than the pitchers psychologically. When I went to examine the 2012 stats - one of the most extreme home / road seasons for the team, I was actually surprised to see the hitters with a much larger home/road skew. I was expecting the numbers to be much closer - which would have supported my contention that the pitchers get a similar psyche adjustement (in reverse) that hitters do. It was only AFTER looking at the numbers - and seeing that in 2012, the pitchers had a significantly wider home / road skew in terms of ISO and Slugging (and BABIP that was effectively even), that it occured to me that pitchers must deal with the psychological impacts of the park instantly while hitters have time between each event.
I can certainly buy into the concept that the pitching staff is going to be "re-tailored" to the park. But that seems to start by accepting the premise that the 2012 staff was, in fact, just as impacted by the psyche affects as the hitters - which was my primary point all along.
My problem, however, is that pitchers have indeed had a massive home advantage - even larger than the hitters in 2012. I read Doc's initial piece as suggesting that the pitchers will retain a significant portion of that home edge, while the hitters will lose a significant portion of the home detriment.
In the end, if the park plays more normal, than the psyche impacts vanish for both sides. However, large that may have been, they're gone. If that is the case - then, as I have been arguing, the pitchers home / road skew is going to shrink as much (or more - given a look at the actual numbers) than the hitters numbers will improve.
Yes, the club will be running a bunch of new guys out there in 2012. They will not be used to the comfort of the invisible monster in LF helping them out. As to whether this helps or heeds their development, only time will tell. But, for the pitching staff to improve, I'm thinking they have no choice but to remedy the .777 road OPS they allowed in 2012.
Ultimately, the 2012 hitters had an aggregate 81 point skew in OPS home (.622) - road (.703). Pitchers had a 149 point skew home (.626) and road (.777). In all honesty, the team is going to be MUCH better off if in fact the psychological impacts of Safeco were in fact drastically larger (but mainfested primarily on the road) for the pitchers. If the road pitching OPS drops more than the home pitching OPS rises, (which I think is the best recipe for pitching improvement), than yes, the Mariners could have a successful pitching staff in 2013. But it will be for exactly the opposite reason that Doc originally suggested.