I've addressed this already multiple times, as have other posters. I'm sorry if you've failed to understand the points, they weren't terribly hard to interpret.
Why are you presuming that the home run in Toronto has a higher percentage to be a flyout vs. a double in KC than the softly hit ball is a groundout vs. a single? If Toronto is better at longball, wouldn't it make more sense to try to find the gaps there vs playing a style they aren't suited to (never mind a style that didn't just lead them to an historic offense in a 162 game sample size) and then try to find the gaps there?
Or are you just trying to explain why the Jays are currently down 3 games to 2? If that's the case...well, based on what I've seen, your theory has more merit than the "small ball" vs. "long ball" debate I've seen. But this is baseball over a small sample size, it comes off as a bit unrealistic to look at such a small sample size and proclaim "THIS is why the Jays are failing!!".
And didn't the Jays lead the League in godp's? Wouldn't that not be the case if they were partial to making hard contact or no contact at all vs. weak contact?