Revised Citi Field dimensions unveiled

Sandy Alderson is making his mark as the new general manager of the Mets, and it starts with changes to the dimensions at Citi Field. Sure, beleaguered owner Fred Wilpon probably made up his mind long ago, but Alderson must’ve had some say over the details. The new dimensions are much more neutral than the expansive, pitcher-friendly measurements of old, as you can see from the comparison below.

The corners remain unchanged and didn’t need to be changed. Gone is much of the Modell’s notch in right field, to be replaced by a picnic area and a chain link fence. Where the original juts out in the power alley, the dimension and wall remains. Another short fence brings in the notorious triples alley in deep right-center under 400 feet (hint-hint, Giants). In left field, most of the 16-foot high wall will have an 8-foot fence placed in front of it, which should make David Wright’s life a lot easier. Wright tallied 14 HR at Citi Field during the 2011 season, it should be interesting to see how much he and Jason Bay benefit. Bay in particular has not been able to make the adjustment with only 18 HR in 900 PA over the last two years. In addition, it’s just as important for the Mets that Citi Field shake its reputation so that it can attract free agent sluggers in the future.

Despite the planning goof that Citi Field was at the outset, it generally follows the important rule that it’s always easier to bring fences in than to move them out. Around here we’re worried enough about Cisco Field that we’ve turned to making suggestions about making the dimensions more neutral. Unlike Citi Field, which was built on a large expanse of land, Cisco Field’s dimensions are limited by a major street to the east. There’s no moving that, or a gigantic wall/building in right.

17 thoughts on “Revised Citi Field dimensions unveiled

  1. chw and det brought in outfield walls in the past decade when their park was too big although not as huge of change as what citifield will see. comerica filled in the pen that used to beyond rightfield with “bleachers” and moved them in front of the original left field wall where the wall went from 395 to 370 making it so much easier for homeruns to be hit to lf. det article about the alternations

    http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20050114&content_id=931277&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=null

    us cell for the chw just moved in their left/right field corners in 10-15 ft. think bal has moved in and out their outfield walls over the decades.

    i used to believe that building a big park should be the way to go considering like mentioned it’s easier to pull in the wall and add additional seating as det did with their righ tfield area than it is to push your wall back where at worst it maybe not enough and worst case maybe have to move some seats although doubt any team would go that far. but least for cisco field in the sj renderings that right area could be tricky due to the street behind it. i did like the suggestion made in the link posted last mid nov where you could orientate the park a little and get a more fair distance from home plate to the right field wall and also the down the left field line too although in the new rendering you’d get rid of a few sections of seats in rf in front of the “brick wall”.

    i do think a new park in sj would be a lot more offensive friendly due to the not marine layer with the cold weather and heavy air at night knocking balls down as we see at the stick/at&t/coliseum over the decades. we all see when it gets warm here in the bay area during baseball season, the ball tends to travel better at both baseball venues so you’d expect the same to happen in a new park in sj where the temp is generally higher than it is here in the sf/oak region. course could say the same should apply to raley field in sac where the temp is even higher of that of sj yet that park is considered a pitcher friendly venue.

    but as i’ve said before if you have good to great pitching, you can still not only win but pitch well consistently in a bandbox as teams like the nyy/phi have shown over the past half decade.

  2. The Giants should be paying attention 🙂

  3. OT: RM, I believe there’s also a MLB owners meeting in mid-December (Winter Meetings?). Perhaps you could add that meeting to your calendar as well.

  4. Got it RM. I thought the Winter Meetings Dec 5-8 in Dallas included owners as well. My bad.

  5. I am a proponent of spacious outfields for several reasons. First, I think it encourages an exciting brand of baseball. One of my favorite non-A’s teams of all time is 1987 Cardinals. It was a team built for the cavernous old Busch Stadium – good pitching, good defense and, with the exception of Jack Clark, everybody could run like the wind. That team could manufacture runs, and helped me as a kid appreciate how exciting team speed can be. Still, the most exciting play in baseball for my money is an inside the park homerun. The next most exciting plays are any play at the plate, a triple, and a double steal. Maybe it’s the steroid era, but your typical 385 foot homerun is a yawner now.

    Speaking of the end of the steroid era, if teams can no longer stand around waiting for the three run homer, the clubs that are quickest to embrace team speed will have a decided advantage. In the same way that big fat sluggers didn’t want to play at Citi Field, you won’t be able to attract speedsters to a bandbox. Just like in football, the future is speed.

    Finally, when you look at teams that have had success throughout baseball history, it tends to be those who play in big ballparks. The Yankees, Cards and A’s have the most rings – is it coincidence that they played in big park? Meanwhile, the Cubs and Red Sox have a long history of futility and both play in small parks. Size does matter. Theories abound on this – some think that home field dimensions impact the psyche of pitchers so much that they take their nervousness on the road. Others think, more simply, that it’s just harder to attract free agent pitching talent to play in a band box.

    If I owned the team, I’d build the grand canyon and watch my team run the bases like a pinwheel. Seeing as how I don’t own the team, I’m just going to encourage dimensions that are –at least – on the big side of average.

  6. @MoPete – i’m with you… in 1985, Tommy Herr of the Cardinals had 8 homers 110 rbi’s and 31 stolen bases!

  7. @MoPete–i’m with you too. Homeruns are okay, but speed, triples, great D,double steals, manufacturing runs are way cool. Cisco looks like it will be a bandbox, but i guess thats what the fans want are the balls flying out and 9-7 games.

  8. Dodgers sale was approved provisionally tonight. Looks like the A’s may be moving up the line of issues to be dealt with.

  9. “Team speed? For Christ sake. You get fucking dammed little fleas on the fucking bases, getting picked off trying to steal, getting thrown out, taking runs away from you. You get them big cock suckers that can hit the fucking ball out of the ball park, and you can’t make any god damned mistakes.”

    – Earl Weaver

  10. Hecanfoos, but when is the best time to put in a tomato plant?

  11. Desperately hoping the A’s are willing to listen to reason and make the Cisco Field park dimensions reasonable. And while you’re at it increase the capacity to 36K so we’re not confused with a minor league park.

  12. Brian, you oughta be worried about where the fuck your next lay is coming from, rather than where your next god damned tomato plant is coming from.

  13. Oh…in case anyone is wondering what just happened…

  14. Thank you, hecanfoos. You made my day.

  15. @hcf – EPIC. Also – I’ll only allow such frequent profanity when it comes from the mouth of a HoF manager.

  16. Managers Corner. SO damn funny! If you want to get my (now high school aged) kids to laugh, mention “team speed”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s