Quote:
Originally Posted by Argonaut
There's that piece too, though on the aggregate hitters will pull to the opposite field moreso than otherwise.
I'm interested in the nuts-and-bolts behind park factors and batted balls. Like, the OOTP engine sees 1.10 LHB AVG and 0.90 RHB AVG and does a good job of reflecting this skew in long-term statistics and results. But say in one case you had a 60 rated LF and a 60 rated RF, and in the other case you had a 50 rated LF and a 70 rated RF.
Would the latter setup be better for this park? Would the engine "understand" that a better right-fielder helps to mitigate the 1.10 LHB AVG park? What do these factors even "mean" in terms of park dimensions, especially if you also have 1.10 LHB HR.. a wide right field area and a tiny fence?
My gut feeling is that the OOTP engine will get this right.. especially because it seems to reflect the advantages of bunting against the infield shift. But I don't know the nuts-and-bolts of how it gets it right.
|
My (simplistic) understanding of it is that a multiplier is applied to all hitters of the same side regardless of where they hit the ball. After that, having a better defensive right/left side of the field depends entirely on the type of batters you face, so if you've facing my 9 RHB spray hitters it wouldn't make a difference and RF would still be slightly more important than LF.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that if I use a specific park factor (ex.: 1.1 RHB with 0.9 LHB) I'll also use RHP to maximise the number of LHB in the opposing team lineup, which reduces the potential added impact of the RF in that specific case