GotowarMissAgnes wrote:My problem is that you put words in my mouth that were completely the opposite of what I wrote. Sorry, but I have a major problem with people who misrepresent another person's argument either through a failure to read carefully or through a deliberate attempt to twist another person's words.
I don't understand what you mean by "I don't buy into the park effect theory." That's sort of like saying, "I don't believe in that round earth theory" You really don't believe that teams score more in Coors field than in Petco or Dodger stadium? I suppose if you really want you can not believe credible facts, but don't expect anyone to respect you for that opinion.
And yes, if Beltran was in Coors field, he would have hit much better. All of his stats would have been raised by about 10%. Now most park factors are not nearly this big, but there's enough of a difference that you must make adjustments. A player's stats are significantly impacted by the parks he plays in and you have to adjust a player or team performance to be able to make comparisons.
It's not a theory. It's a fact.
Pot meet the kettle. first of all, I never put words in your mouth so you might want to rethink that. It was you who misread my argument.
Second, you just put words in my mouth that were never said. I was talking about BELTRE, never said Beltran, so you might want to look at yourself in the mirror. If you can't stand people who put words in your mouth, you might want to do the same.
I don't buy into park effect theory. I know people hit better in certain stadiums, I don't discredit that, but I don't think you should judge every single person on an equal park effect curve. For example, you can't take a guy like Beltre who hit 48 HR (not exactly sure off the top of my head) and say he would have hit so many more or less at this particular stadium. Say you go to a place like Wrigley, the wind has more to do with HRs there than anything else, which is a totally random occurance.