Ballpark strategy

Is these thinking wrong?
When spending much less on pitching versus hitting, I pick a pitcher's park (harder to get hits and homers) because I know my pitching staff will likely struggle.

I don't think there's one simple answer. Your logic makes perfect sense, but I do just the opposite.
If I'm using cheap pitchers, then I'm obviously spending the extra cash on hitters... so I want to maximize that element of my team. I pick an extreme power park, stack the lineup with homerun hitters, and (hopefully) overwhelm my opponents with offense. And yeah, my pitching staff struggles... that's an understatement! But I like doing it that way, and sometimes it even works lol.

I rarely go for a big hitting team, but if I did I would like mjsm01's strategy of taking a hitters' park. Why? I think runs scored increases faster than a team's hitting ability. Example, let's use an arbitrary power rating for how well a team hits:

100 power rating might net only 1 run a game
200 power rating might net 2.1 runs a game
300 power rating might net 3.3 runs a game
400 power rating might net 4.8 runs a game
500 power rating might net 6.8 runs a game

and so on. Having a hitters' park increases your power rating. Of course a hitter's part increases your opponent's power rating as well. However, you're hoping you end up higher on the power curve.

This is simplified and might even be wrong, but that's how I look at it.

Coyote is correct. Adding offense isn't strictly linear because of the multiplier effects of how batters interact with each other within a lineup. If you insert a great hitter into an already great lineup, it actually creates more value than inserting the same hitter into an average lineup, because that hitter will have more run-creating opportunities in the stacked lineup. So you can see how using a hitters park would accelerate that process by boosting offense. It's just one factor to consider though, and the overall effect probably isn't very large. If you're punting on your starting pitchers completely then I'd say yeah go whole hog with a hitters park. But if you're punting your bullpen and hoping your SPs can still scratch out complete games, then maybe go with a pitchers park to help your SPs to avoid that bullpen.

I've found that using high-end *SP, 9M+, and a strong pitchers park to be a successful strategy. But by doing that you have to be careful with the hitters because you still have to generate runs. I currently have two teams using the same rosters, but you'll also find that doesn't necessarily mean the same performance. One is 14 games over .500 the other, basically the same. is only 7 games over. The strategy also results in a lot of complete games, since the BP is basically LH, RH specialist, and HAL manages the rest. I'm a pitcher guy so I enjoy this strategy a lot.

speaking of ballparks...

Toronto made some changes

Rogers Centre is going to be even more hitter-friendly moving forward.
Per sources, here are the expected new dimensions.
RCF alley moving in from 375 to 357(!) feet.
LCF 375 to 366.
CF from 400 to 397.
Lines expected to stay same at 328.
#BlueJays

Wow, bombs away in Toronto. Can't recall a park that wasn't a pitchers park making changes that drastic before.

Seattle brought the LF fence in a decade ago which seemed like a good idea at the time. LF was absolutely massive, that and the marine layer almost tanked Adrian Beltre's offense when he played here, and Seattle was the most extreme pitchers park in the league. It worked okay for a few years but now, after the flyball revolution and all the changes to the ball, Seattle is back to being the most extreme pitchers park, despite being mostly neutral for homers. Why? Because the outfield is so damn small now that it's the most difficult park to get a base hit in! Basically if you hit it in the air it better be over the fence, or it's probably in someone's glove. (Strat gets it: 2022 Seattle is 1-9-1-9.) Which of course just exacerbates the all-or-nothing approach of many modern hitters. Anyway, I'd expect similar results in Toronto. Even fewer reasons now for hitters to focus on anything other than launch angle.

I ditto MaxPower's view that you pick a pitchers park if you are putting money into SP's (skrimping on RP $$). So from that starting logic, it makes sense for you to choose a hitters park if you are not putting $ into starting pitchers.

My friend (long time strato player) loves power teams and he will always choose a home run ball park and put 70%+ of his money into hitters. Then he makes any necessary SP/ RP changes to match the ballparks and teams that are in a particular league (before the player drop $ penalties get too high).

Having said all that, I just finished a league where a finalist used Tropicana ballpark and put only $25m in pitching.... so he chose a pitchers park but put most of his money in hitting. Lot's of ways to win.