Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mark Blount's Port Cellar: Celtics Forum' started by Devizier, Sep 7, 2018.
Has anyone seen this study yet?
I haven't dug into the details but the chart is striking.
Broncos and Colorado Rockies are highest in their particular sports. Seems like a higher altitude is helpful.
And being in a western conference, especially in NBA/NFL and maybe NHL. Long travel taking it's toll, though maybe less of an issue in MLB since they stay there for a few days.
Baseball (where one man the pitcher can control a game) and hockey (where one man the goalie can do likewise) have the lowest home advantage. That makes sense.
3 of top 7 hardest places to visit in MLB are in the AL East.
There's also an ongoing debate about if the Rockies have a road disadvantage. Pitches move less in Colorado (due to the thin air), and thus move more in other parks, relatively speaking. It's not definitive, but Rockies hitters appear to take time to adjust to being on the road.
Edit: The methods used in the article and for most HFA calculations would not know the difference between a home advantage and a road disadvantage.
The Jazz are #2 on the list, and while not as high as Denver, Salt Lake City’s elevation is still an impressive 4,226 feet.
Calgary is 3400 feet and the highest NHL team.
Edmonton is 2100 feet and middle of the pack.
Seems to me that if you built a team to take advantage of the unique aspects of your home field/court/rink, you would be unusually advantaged at home and disadvantaged on the road. Not surprising that teams that play at altitude, as well as baseball teams that play in unusual parks (such as the Red Sox), would therefore show up as having relatively large HFAs.
True, but there's a difference between building a team to take advantage of a park (Adrian Gonzalez? David Ortiz?) and the effects that the environment have on everyone who plays there. The theory goes that Rockies hitters spend a week in Colorado watching curveballs that don't curve and then can't hit curveballs that do curve when on the road. That's not really an aspect of teambuilding if it affects everyone (which we don't have enough evidence to speak to).
Pats and Red Sox doing something right
Sorry, confusing nomenclature. I didn't mean highest elevation for Calgary, I meant highest home field advantage.
There has been discussion how the home team advantage in the NBA has been dimished somewhat by phone apps, which means that opposing teams can have, err, "companions" waiting for them at their hotel instead of having to stay out at bars all night looking for company.
Has there been any research on this? I'm guessing this study did not take this into account.
As someone who's watched the Rockies since day 1 (I was at Mile High Stadium on April 9, 1993; EY Homerun!), there's no doubt this is the case. This has been discussed on previous SOSH threads, and there was a study done on this, but I can't find it now. Basically, hitting at Coors probably adds about .100 to a player's home OPS (a good hitter, that is), and subtracts .050 from a player's road OPS. The fact that 3 of the 4 other teams in the NL West play at or below sea level makes this more extreme.
The Nuggets homecourt advantage makes sense in that basketball requires more conditioning that the NFL or MLB, so playing an up tempo style at altitidue, which the Nuggets have long done since the Doug Moe days (and really, even Larry Brown in the ABA before) creates a significant advantage.
Hmm, looks like the only HFA in all of sports that rivals the thin air of Denver and Salt Lake City is Warrior fans.
Life is all about change, but I'll be pretty sad to see the team leave Oakland next season.
There's an even bigger study suggesting home court advantage is diminishing because players are drinking less on the road.
edit: Of course sex and drinking are heavily linked too. If you don't have to go to a bar to get laid..
Let's not forget examples of players performing better on the road because their newborn is keeping them awake at home.
Browns ahead of the Packers, Steelers (I have to change my bet this week), and a few other marquee teams.
To be fair, the metric is based on odds of beating a team of comparable caliber, so for the Browns it’s probably a small enough sample size that we can write-off any results as mostly noise.
Did anyone check Tatum's splits for signs of this problem?
The LA and Miami flu isn't as strong as it used to be. However, The Warriors are only 6-4 on the road against bad Lakers teams 2013-14. Their 2 wins last year were in overtime.