The Rockies are Historically Road-Averse

On Monday night, the Rockies lost to the woeful Cubs, 6–4. It brought their road record to 14–46, good for a .233 winning percentage. That’s the worst mark in baseball, but the Rockies aren’t the worst team in baseball — merely the worst road team. At Coors Field, they’ve gone a spectacular 43–22, the third-best home record in the game.

It’s hard to imagine that this huge discrepancy comes down to a roll of the dice. Are the Rockies this bad on the road? Probably not. Are they this good at home? Also probably not. But this gap calls out for an investigation, so I set out to answer: what in the heck is up with their home field advantage — if that’s even what’s going on here?

Obviously, I’m not the first person to try to answer this; earlier this year, Neil Paine tackled the subject when Colorado was a woeful 6–32 on the road. The Coors hangover effect is real, and it gives us a good reason to think that the source of the Rockies’ problems might be the road side of things rather than the home side of things. I won’t try to solve the issue of what ails the Rockies today, but still, we can gawk at their incompetence and speculate about what it means for their true talent, which sounds fun enough to me.

The Rockies’ road woes are nothing new. Since the franchise’s first season in 1993, they’ve run up a .396 winning percentage on the road and a .545 mark at home. That 150-point gap is the biggest in the majors, and it’s not particularly close. Here are all the teams taken together:

Home/Road Splits, 1993-2021
Team Home Away Differential
Rockies .545 .395 .150
Pirates .501 .400 .101
Rangers .550 .450 .100
Marlins .506 .417 .089
Rays .524 .438 .086
Athletics .560 .475 .085
Nationals .533 .448 .085
Cardinals .582 .499 .083
Yankees .627 .544 .083
Astros .556 .474 .082
Padres .513 .434 .079
Tigers .498 .419 .079
Blue Jays .534 .456 .078
Giants .560 .483 .078
White Sox .540 .465 .075
Phillies .533 .462 .071
Dodgers .582 .512 .070
Diamondbacks .523 .453 .069
Cleveland .565 .497 .068
Mariners .530 .464 .066
Cubs .527 .461 .066
Angels .547 .482 .065
Brewers .514 .449 .065
Twins .516 .453 .063
Orioles .494 .433 .061
Reds .513 .457 .057
Mets .523 .467 .056
Red Sox .574 .519 .055
Braves .585 .531 .055
Royals .472 .423 .049

The Pirates aren’t that close to the Rockies, and they’re the closest. In fact, Colorado has only had a differential less than league average in seven of its 29 seasons.

That brings us to an obvious question: is it home strength or road futility? There’s plenty of research suggesting some effect, but finding the exact magnitude has always proved problematic. In fact, some studies don’t find a hangover effect at all. If you ask me, it’s almost certainly a road disadvantage. The Rockies have the worst road record in baseball since their inception. Could it be that they’re actually that bad? I guess so, but it seems far more likely that Colorado is a middling team (as their home record would indicate) with a huge penalty when it descends from altitude.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

In any case, that’s not the question I’ll try to answer today. After a few hours of shuffling numbers around, I ran into the same problem that all these studies run into: it’s difficult to separate an advantage at home from a disadvantage on the road. Instead, we’ll just take the split as a given and focus on this year in particular.

Are the Rockies actually a .661 team at home? That’s not a good or accurate read of their splits. But let’s say you’re curious, and perhaps credulous. If their true home/road split is 150 points of winning percentage, what are the odds that they’d put up this season’s 428-point gap?

Rather than attempt to use mathematical identities to solve that, I took the easy way out by running a Monte Carlo simulation of Colorado’s season. I took the Rockies’ overall winning percentage (.456), then applied the life-to-date home/road splits to it. From there, I simulated the season, a lot — 100,000 times, to be precise. Then I asked my simulation how many times they finished with a home/road split at least this extreme.

Friends: it never happened. Never ever ever, more or less. In 100,000 simulations, it happened 65 times. So I ran it a million times — and it happened 690 times. I ran it a million more times — 706 seasons at least this extreme. The re-running was mostly for dramatic effect; something weird is going on in Colorado.

Something weird was going on in Colorado last year, too. The Rockies were meaningfully better on the road in 2020; they were a .400 team at home and .467 away from it. It was a shorter season, but even so, when I ran that a million times, it only happened about 3.4% of the time.

Clearly, that form didn’t do much to predict this year’s form. That brings up an old nemesis of mine: the Bonferroni correction. Basically, there are a lot of chances for teams to have weird seasons. Saying that the Rockies were extremely unlikely to have such a crazy home/road is true, but incomplete. Every team was unlikely to have such a crazy home/road split, and most teams didn’t! So rather than speculate about the likelihood of this happening — it happened already, the ex-post likelihood is 100% — I thought I’d ask a different question. Teams have had remarkable home/road splits before; how many of those have persisted to the next year?

If you were hoping that a huge home/road split in one year was predictive of a similar one in the future, you’re in for a disappointment. I went back to 1993 (I had the Rockies data handy, after all) and looked at every team’s home/road splits for each consecutive pair of years. In other words, I looked at how each team performed in 1993 and compared those to ’94, then at how each team performed in ’94 and compared it to ’95, on and on up through 2019.

The 60 teams with the best home win percentage differential were 218 points of winning percentage better at home. The next year, they were 89 points better at home. The next 60 teams were 160 points better at home than on the road. The next year, they were 83 points better at home. After taking into account that the overall mean level is 80 points, the regression to the mean was near-absolute.

How about on the downside? The 60 worst teams were 72 points of winning percentage worse at home than on the road. The next year, they were 74 points better at home. The next slice up? They were 20 points worse at home in year one, 64 points better in year two. On average, your best bet for predicting a team’s next-year home/road record was to use 8% this year’s record and 92% league average.

What does that mean for this year’s Rockies? We know that their long-term average home/road split is roughly 150 points of winning percentage. Let’s take that as a naive “fair value” for a Coors team’s home/road numbers. Using 92% of that and 8% of their record this year (we’re approximating here, so these are loose numbers that you should absolutely not take as perfect), we’d expect them to post a 172-point home/road split next year.

That’s a boring conclusion, I know. The Rockies of next year will likely just be another Colorado team: bad on the road and decent at home. I truly wish I had something better for you. Honestly, this effect might be overselling it. Those numbers I quoted included the Rockies, and we know that they have a persistently high home/road split. The actual mean reversion number might be even higher.

There’s still one interesting outstanding question. Well, there are actually a ton of outstanding questions, but there’s a particular one I have in mind. When we model our playoff odds, we treat homefield advantage as a static 4% edge; if two evenly matched teams play, the home team will win 54% of the time. That’s not the case with the Rockies, though. We know that they exhibit larger splits. It doesn’t matter for their playoff odds; those are at 0% either way. But for other teams in the race, where they play the Rockies absolutely matters.

Who are the biggest beneficiaries? The Dodgers, indirectly. They have six games left with the Rockies, with three at each site. That has essentially no net effect. The Giants, on the other hand, have six games in Denver remaining. We have the Rockies as a .471 team at home. In practice, though, they’re likely something closer to a .506 team at home. That’s a sizable gap; over six games, that works out to an extra Rockies win something like 20% of the time. In a race we project to be incredibly close, that’s a big difference.

On the other coast, the Phillies get a similar boost. They have three games remaining with the Rockies, all in Philadelphia, which is worth a small boost. The Braves, who lead the NL East, still have a series in Denver and a series in Atlanta, for little net effect. We don’t think that race will be as tight as the NL West, but if a game matters, the Rockies’ two-faced nature might help swing the race.

In conclusion, I’m sorry. I really hoped to find some reason why the Rockies were truly and sustainably a disaster on the road. I wanted to find something convincing, or at least something plausible. I didn’t find anything like that. I hope you’ll settle for a meandering look at how bad Colorado has been on the road over the years, with a sprinkling of the Dodgers somehow catching a break mixed in for spice.





Ben is a writer at FanGraphs. He can be found on Bluesky @benclemens.

41 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
kidzeroMember since 2019
5 years ago

Ben, You’re overthinking this and looking too much into the details. Bottom line is that Rockies management (Tricky Dickie Monfort) are just terrible…years and years of incompetence and not giving a s**t about the loyal Rockies fans…only money.

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  kidzero

What the hell would bad management have to do with home/road splits, which is the topic of this article?

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

Well if there are real and measurable reasons for it (and the more often it occurs, the more likely that is to be true) then the longer the front office goes without figuring out what they are and how to solve the problem…the worse one can say the management is.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

I’ll bet the Rockies management is well aware of the problem. It’s just not an easy fix.

BipMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

I think your point is true, AND I also think the Rockies have given use a lot of reason to think they are not really up to solving this problem, given they haven’t ever seemed to be able to correctly assess the relative strength of their own team.

Dick Monfort
5 years ago

Great stuff Ben, thanks!

Based on these numbers, I’m directing Bud that from now on, we only play the guys who played in our home games.

Ruben Amaro Jr.
5 years ago
Reply to  Dick Monfort

Dumbass.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Aside from the hangover effect, there is almost certainly a real effect of the team’s historical attempt to find guys who can take advantage of the weird run environment of Coors. Fast left-handed hitters who put the ball in right field should get more triples. Low-spin fastballs play more similarly at Coors vs elsewhere than high-spin fastballs. The team (hopefully) knows it has to put fast players at every spot in the outfield because it is so dang big.

These are the sorts of things that should give the team a major advantage at home. And I think they’re probably right to do it this way, but it would help if the guys they got were also good on the road.

There are two other possibilities. One is that switching between the extreme environment at Coors and other stadiums is hard. For the Rockies, they have that problem on the road. For visiting teams, they have that problem at Coors.

The final issue–which does not explain most of this, but almost certainly explains some–is that someone pointed out the other day that home teams have done far better this year than in years past. I have no idea why this is happening. Someone posited that the number of extra innings games combined with the ghost runner rule have led the home team to post a better winning percentage this year compared with previous ones.

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Good thoughts. If you look at the Rox record (particularly their run scoring record, as their problem has for years now, contrary to lazy conventional wisdom, been on the hitting side) on road days immediately following a home stand, it’s amazingly awful. They have something like 12-15 certain losses each year in those first games of road trips. The Rox are for all practical purposes playing in an entirely different context than the 29 other teams, with a rather large anvil around their neck, and the problem is getting worse as analytically driven teams figure out ways to maximize that advantage (i.e throw nothing but breaking balls on those first few days after a Rox home stand).

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

Maybe the players could watch some realistic virtual breaking balls as part of their daily routine on home game days. Get a virtual reality machine that is as large as a batting cage and the players take batting practice with it to see extremely good breaks on breaking pitches.

John Elway
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Opponents have a hard time adjusting to being a mile high versus sea level.

Just neighing.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  John Elway

Yep. I think this goes both ways. The Rockies have a lot of work to do but I think the home/road split has a lot to do with visiting teams struggling at Coors, too.

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Visiting pitchers, sure, but there’s no reason why hitters would struggle at all (the ball doesn’t move as much and there’s acres of grass for batted balls to fall in). But in addition to historical splits for Rockies hitters, their pitchers are far better at home too this year. That has never happened to anywhere near this degree, and rarely at all.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Run scoring raises for both the Rockies and there opponents in Denver, so I am not sure what you mean.

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  John Elway

bad sleep is a part of this.

PandaKOST
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’d like to see an analysis of teams’ road record vs road record @ Coors. Or perhaps some analysis looking at the first game of a road stand @ Coors. If Rockies have to adjust to sea level pitching, surely road hitters must also adjust to mile high pitching, too, right?

Seamaholic
5 years ago

Glad someone finally did this piece, but it’s missing the biggest mystery of this incredibly strange — historically strange — Rockies season: Their starting pitchers, last I checked, had almost 1.5 runs better ERA (straight, not park adjusted) AT HOME at Coors Field than on the road. And keep in mind their road games are tilted toward very pitcher friendly stadiums in the NL West. That’s just impossible.

eph1970Member since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

Is it about the Rockies or the other teams? If you pitch two games a year at Coors, do your pitches work?

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  eph1970

Not as well for sure. But last I checked, Denver’s altitude hasn’t changed since 1993 and we’ve never seen anything like that before. Really nothing even in the ballpark.

RoyalsFan#14321Member since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

Not even in the ballpark. GET IT.

carterMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

On a side to that, while some of the ballparks are playing more neutral, I do think that going to those run suppressing ballparks might make it slightly worse on their hitters as well than if they were in another division.

AnonMember since 2020
5 years ago

I saw it suggested years ago and not since then but I wonder if the Rockies need to consider home/road platoons rather then L/R platoons. Obviously you couldn’t have true platoons since you can’t sit a guy for a whole 10 game home stand or road trip but if you have 2 guys at one position then one guy plays 80+% of the games at home and the other guy 80+% of the road games. You’d have to get creative to do it with pitchers where you push starts and go with bullpen games or skip over guys with off days to squeeze someone in, but it could be done. Obviously it wouldn’t apply to the better players ( I was going to say stars but I’m not sure they have any stars left next year) but you could do it at 3 to 5 positions on a regular basis.

rosen380
5 years ago

“The Pirates aren’t that close to the Rockies, and they’re the closest”

When the gap between #1 and #2 is the same as #3 and last, I think that points pretty hard at “something weird is going on here”

Pwn Shop
5 years ago

Can we take a step back from looking at the (crude) actual win-loss records this year and look up their pythagorean win-loss for home and away this year? Or BaseRuns? I’m not computer-y enough to know how to do it myself or I would.

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  Pwn Shop

I suspect it would be even more extreme. Their hitting on the road is just putrid, and their pitching is bad too. They not only lose but lose badly when they’re on the road.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago

Its been clear to me over the years that the Rockies struggle more on the road than other teams struggle at Coors. So, I have always thought the Rockies should platoon some positions as road or home rather than lefty or righty.

PandaKOST
5 years ago

Coors has got to be the trickiest park/team to GM. I’d love to see a top notch and creative GM have a go at it. Some suggestions: platoon home/road, low spin rate pitchers, no breaking ball pitchers, ditch starting pitchers (high altitude fatigue), bail on power and go all speed. I’m open to more ideas. I don’t know the solution.

mariodegenzgz
5 years ago
Reply to  PandaKOST

Ditching starting pitchers would be a horrendous idea. Rockies bullpens already suffer massively when the summer months roll around and they have to pitch half the innings of every game because half of those games end 10-8. Plus, there’s the added difficulty that the Rockies right now are good at developing starters, but really terrible at developing relievers (because they make them pitch like starters). The Rockies are probably the only team in baseball that can say that their five best pitchers are their starters.

Also, think the Rockies are already doing some of these things. Low-spin four seamers are everywhere in their rotation, for example. Putting a big emphasis on defense is something they already do, although that’s something that’s translated more to infield than outfield so far.

PandaKOST
5 years ago
Reply to  PandaKOST

Have the Rockies considered installing a pressurized batting cage? Rockies hitters’ home/road splits increase as the season wears on, probably in large part due to hitters getting more reps at altitude than sea level (ie their eyes get used to pitches with less break).

screehanMember since 2016
5 years ago

Has anyone looked at the record of all other teams in the first game and/or series they play AFTER playing in Coors? That might help determine to what extent this is an away-from-Coors problem.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  screehan

I seem to recall someone here did that study a few years back. But perhaps I’m remembering wrongly.

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago

don’t use the bonferroni corrections, it’s going to be particularly overconservative in this case. use Romano and Wolff (2005) in this precise case. Someone else chime in if they think they have something better.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
5 years ago

I wonder if the league knew how much of a challenge it would be in 1993 just to play baseball in Colorado (and subsequently right after playing in Colorado), if they still would have gone through with it or not.

GoatHerderMember since 2016
5 years ago

Money is being made so yes, it would have still happened. I haven’t heard Colorado on the list of teams to get relocated because of it. Franchise placements are driven by economics not what is happening on the field.

Seamaholic
5 years ago
Reply to  GoatHerder

Rockies will never relocate. They’re always among the top five or six in MLB in attendance.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  Seamaholic

The ironic thing is that it took until 1993 for them to get a team due to Denver having a relatively small metro area, yet in actuality they get great attendance due to being able to draw from the entire Rocky Mountain region, despite many of their fans only being able to make it to Denver for 1 or 2 games a year.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  GoatHerder

Whatever. A whole league of teams with the run environment of Colorado would be a nightmare but one stadium where everything is upside-down adds some much needed flavor. One of the neat things about baseball is that because of different outfield shapes (and to a lesser extent, altitude and climate) you get these weird quirks. That is a good thing.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Coors Field is always my argument against standardizing outfield sizes. The stadium needs such a large outfield just so that the number of home runs don’t become absolutely ridiculous even with the humidor.

AF
5 years ago

Fascinating to think about why this might be. Even if we can’t figure it out, I love watching baseball in Colorado and the fact that Coors exists. I don’t know if I’d go so far as to call it an exotic place for baseball, but it prompts so much curiosity, creativity, frustration, opportunity, etc., and I think baseball is better for it.

First professional game I ever went to was a week after 9/11 in Denver on my ninth birthday. Dbacks/Rockies. Dbacks jump out to a 6-0 lead in the first inning, and Schilling’s on the mound. Rockies get to Schilling and eventually hit back to back HRs off B-Y-Kim in the bottom of the 9th to win 9-8. Fell in love with the place. Dbacks go on to win WS behind dominant Schilling/Johnson performances in the postseason. Have probably been to 10-ish games in Coors since. It’s magical. Things happen there that don’t happen anywhere else, even when the Rockies have atrocious teams.

J. T.
5 years ago

In other news, the Rockies might just be the worst franchise in the league. Also, water is wet, and the sky is airy. Back to you, Fangraphs!

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  J. T.

To be fair, it’s pretty airy down here on the ground too…