The wind must have blown in every day that year

I am referring to Wrigley Field 1941 where strat has transformed Wrigley Field into a small ball park.They have also
changed it into a variety of other home run havens in left hand hitters, right hand hitters, both, not to mention fiddling
with the ball park singles.Now , the dimensions of the playing field have not changed since 1938.There have been
some minor changes, the baskets which alter the trajectory of some home runs, changing the distance to the backstop by 2 feet and changing it back.But nothing that would seem to account for the dramatic variety of ball park homeruns
ratings.So what is the basis for the change in ratings?Wrigley is afflicted with a great variety of winds. Is that the basis
for these differences? Did they study the historical data. Or did they just wing it? And the curious matter of ball park
single ratings. I have no idea how these are determined but it would seem that Wrigley's should be uniformally high
as the park has the smallest amount of foul territory in the majors. limiting the number of defensive catches.
Does anybody know how they determine this stuff? I have been going to Wrigley for 65 years starting with the 1947
All Star Game and it always looks the same to me.But apparently it changes every few years and I don't notice it.
More fool me.

Gotta remember they are setting up Wrigley to perform like it did with the players who actually played there in the year in question. It has A LOT to do with the numbers actually accrued there by the actual hitters of that year.
Wrigley59 is a righty-homer haven? Ernie Banks hit quite a few
On of the Wrigley 60s is a lefty-leaning park? I would guess Billy Williams
Wrigley41? the team batted .253 with 99 homers

Wrigley did not perform, the players did. In essence what that means is because Banks hit homeruns in Wrigley
virtually every right handed batter will find it easier to hit homeruns there. And this is supposed to be a simulation?
There has got to be a better way.

The data supports Wrigley as a strong pitchers park in 1941. According to baseball-reference.com, that year, the Cubs' hitters hit 37 homers at home, and 62 on the road. Their pitchers had a similar split, giving up 20 homers at home, but 40 on the road.

While Wrigley may not have changed much over time, the composition of other parks in the NL did, so by comparison, it's now much more of a hitters park than it used to be. The Polo Grounds had the shortest foul lines in baseball. Ebbets was under 300 feet in right field, and Sportsman's Park wasn't much more than that. As those parks fell by the wayside, and instead, Candlestick, Dodger Stadium, and Busch Stadium came into use, Wrigley began to play more like a hitters' park.

This has been a problem I have had with Strat for some time. Ballpark numbers should not be shaped by who played for a team.

If the changes in Wrigley irk you, I recommend looking at Fenway through the years.

i think that fenway has had many more changes made to it over the years (adding the monster, "williamsburg", etc..) than wrigley (baskets, ???). however, a stadiums "rating" should have nothing to do with the make up of the home teams that played in them based off of the power or lack there of of it's left/righthanded hitters. hopefully, it is based off of league averages for those years.

-steven