MLB 2014: Can't You Hear the Thunder?

[Lightning Lord]

Naz, or whoever, am I correct in assuming that Camden Yard (or whatever it is called...Baltimore's place of play) is better than Washington National's place of play?

[naz]

I haven't been* to Nationals Park, so I can't truthfully say. But, since most people put Camden Yards at or near the top of their lists, I'm gonna say... yeah, probably.

* I'm going to go out on a limb and say that, to accurately judge and rank a stadium's quality as a baseball venue, you really should watch a game there in person. Judging a stadium from what it looks like on TV isn't fair, IMO.

[Inigima]

I'm biased as a Baltimore native, but Camden Yards is both a superb park and the blueprint for all stadiums since.

[naz]

I lived in Baltimore when it first opened and it was simply a stunning achievement at the time. There was no other stadium that matched its balance of historicism and modern amenities. That said, other newer stadiums have refined the Camden Yards model over the years and improved it in some ways, but there are some things about the place that still make it an awesome place to attend a game. The architectural experience of the alley and warehouse, for one, are uniquely Camden Yards and no copycat stadium can match that. And to think they were originally planning to tear the warehouse down.

That said, I honestly think (from an architectural perspective) that the faux-historic ballpark thing has played itself out. I really liked Target Field in Minneapolis simply because it didn't attempt to follow that blueprint, but instead tried to create a truly modern ballpark that was still a nice place to watch a game.

[MercenaryChef]

Naz, or whoever, am I correct in assuming that Camden Yard (or whatever it is called...Baltimore's place of play) is better than Washington National's place of play?

Been to both multiple times. Camden rules over nats park

[Fez]

Naz, or whoever, am I correct in assuming that Camden Yard (or whatever it is called...Baltimore's place of play) is better than Washington National's place of play?

Camden is great, but it would only need be pretty good to beat Nationals Park. Its not a bad stadium per se, just bland. I've only been to five stadiums, one of which no longer exists, so I'm not the best judge. But I'd probably put Nats Park around 15-20 in the rankings. Better than the legitimately bad stadiums, but that's as far as it goes.

[Lightning Lord]

Thanks for the input everyone. I had heard similar things. Naz, glad you enjoyed Target Field :) Did you have a downtown view?

[Myshkin]

I suppose it all depends on whether you like modern or classic stadiums. There really is something to be said for each. You're gonna be more comfortable in a sleek modern stadium, you're gonna have more amenities and usually some pretty neat things to look at, but for me none of that equals that feeling of... baseball you get from a classic stadium. All this to say that Dodger Stadium is easily better than AT&T,

[Ghjhero]

Oh cool.. are we doing a stadium ranking thing? Is this limited to only those we've visited in person? Because I could make a list of my own. But I don't want to spam the thread if someone thinks that it should be another thread altogether.

(For the record, I've attended games at 15 stadiums in 13 cities, and haven't had a chance to rate them yet.)

eta: Oh, and are we going to simply rank their quality on a gut-feeling level, or should we have actually assessment criteria and rubrics?

Yeah sure ill rank the stadiums and post what I think. The rest of you should do it too! And while I havnt been to all 30 stadiums, I'll rank them as fairly as possible.

Papi being Papi again today!

[Kat]

I suppose it all depends on whether you like modern or classic stadiums. There really is something to be said for each. You're gonna be more comfortable in a sleek modern stadium, you're gonna have more amenities and usually some pretty neat things to look at, but for me none of that equals that feeling of... baseball you get from a classic stadium. All this to say that Dodger Stadium is easily better than AT&T,

I know it's a year for nostalgia, but the feeling I get from AT&T is that one side of my face is not frozen from wind chill like it was at Candlestick. It magnifies the niceness of the park knowing that the old one was cold and crappy and cold and windy and cold.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

All this to say that Dodger Stadium is easily better than AT&T,

What are you smoking, Dodger Dogs?

[GrimTuesday]

The Mariners are looking good so far, and that without their number 2 (Iwakuma) and one of the top pitching prospects in baseball (Walker). Obviously it's too early to start declaring them AL West Champs, but something feels different when I watch them play, they are giving their fans a lot to optimistic about. Then again, most of the games they have played have been against the Angels.

[JBB5093]

Ervin Santana with a nice Braves debut, 8 innings of shut out baseball. I wish Fredi would have let him go out there and pitch the 9th though. The bats looked somewhat better tonight. I wonder if that has something to do with BJ Upton sitting out.

[MercenaryChef]

The best part of going to at the time pacbell Park was watching the dodgers win!

[Mr. X]

Oh cool.. are we doing a stadium ranking thing? Is this limited to only those we've visited in person? Because I could make a list of my own. But I don't want to spam the thread if someone thinks that it should be another thread altogether.

Please make this list. I want to read it. Seriously -- how many people in this thread can bring the multiple perspectives of being baseball fans and architects? (And I totally welcome the lists of anyone else who fits both of those criteria.)

* I'm going to go out on a limb and say that, to accurately judge and rank a stadium's quality as a baseball venue, you really should watch a game there in person. Judging a stadium from what it looks like on TV isn't fair, IMO.

I agree with all of this.

[Frances Bean Corbray]

Dodger Stadium seems perfectly fine on TV, I've always heard the drawback to it is how hard it is to actually get to in terms of transit and traffic (stadium traffic being so bad as to keep fans from arriving on time/requiring them to leave early to beat said traffic, hence the jokes about Dodger fans coming late and leaving early).

Veteran attendees of Dodger Stadium can perhaps illuminate me on this aspect?

Been to Oakland though it was long ago.

The Coliseum actually was pretty once. The Raiders returning ruined it.

And it gets worse every year since the current A's owners logically don't want to invest money in improving the facility when they straight up want a new stadium and thus money sunk into things like a new scoreboard would never be recouped if/when they moved a couple years later.

Location/being easily accessible by public transit is definitely it's strongest suit (The Raiders still like the location, in fact, they just want to bulldoze and rebuild a new stadium.)

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

The Coliseum actually was pretty once. The Raiders returning ruined it.

And it gets worse every year since the current A's owners logically don't want to invest money in improving the facility when they straight up want a new stadium and thus money sunk into things like a new scoreboard would never be recouped if/when they moved a couple years later.

Location/being easily accessible by public transit is definitely it's strongest suit (The Raiders still like the location, in fact, they just want to bulldoze and rebuild a new stadium.)

Tne BART access is really nice, but that's really all it has going for it at this point.

A packed game is absolutely brutal. Last season we hit a regular season Giants game over there and it took us more than an hour to get from the entrance of the stadium to our seats. One the 1st base side. It was painful. You hit these massive choke points at every section entrance. It's like trying to fight your way to the stage at a sold out general admission concert or something.

[naz]

re: Ballpark rankings

How about this... let's do this in a democratic, baseball way. Don't rush it. Use statistics. Get aggregate opinions.

Let's put each ballpark up for discussion (say one park a week) and those of us who have been there (i.e. watched a game there) can give their qualitative opinion on various assessment categories (see below). Then we provide a quantitative score for each category. I'll keep track of the scores on a spreadsheet and, for ballparks with scores from multiple people, we can compute an aggregate score for each.

Possible assessment categories:

- General amenities (concessions, seating options, clubs, restaurants, bathrooms, shops, tv screens, entertainment)

- Architectural aesthetics (spatial quality, historicism, modernity, quality of construction, street presence, tackiness)

- Architectural functionality (ease of getting around, finding your way, circulation space, seating comfort, variety of seating/viewing options)

- Urban setting (location, downtown vs. outskirts, accessibility, parking, public transport, nearby bars/restaurants)

- Views of the game (obstructions, angles, scoreboards, intimacy, nosebleeds, bullpen location)

- Views of the city (skyline, backdrop)

- Food and beverage (variety, quality, availability, waiting time, vendors, options for those with dietary restrictions)

- Fan experience (camaraderie, rowdiness, friendliness, baseball knowledge, kid-friendliness)

- Cost (concession pricing, ticket pricing, value options, parking cost)

- Distinctive character (things that make this stadium unique, e.g. warehouse at Camden Yards, Green Monster, McCovey Cove, outfield ivy)

Ground rules:

- You must have watched a game there. No stadium tours or drive-bys.

- You should have been there for at least 5 innings (if it works for baseball, it should work for us)

- Older, no-longer-existing ballparks can be included

- Each of the above 10 categories could be scored from 0 to 10, giving a total score of 100.

- Aggregate, average scores will be computed from multiple people

- Avoid homerism. Avoid nostalgia (e.g., giving a high score because your dad took you there as a kid). Try to be as objective as possible while still providing qualitative data.

A mod should chime in and let us know whether we should do this is in a separate thread. I think it should be its own thread because this thread will move too fast and get closed and it would nice to have one thread in which to compile all the opinions. On the other hand, if it's in this general MLB thread, more people will probably participate.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

re: Ballpark rankings

How about this... let's do this in a democratic, baseball way. Don't rush it. Use statistics. Get aggregate opinions.

Let's put each ballpark up for discussion (say one park a week) and those of us who have been there (i.e. watched a game there) can give their qualitative opinion on various assessment categories (see below). Then we provide a quantitative score for each category. I'll keep track of the scores on a spreadsheet and, for ballparks with scores from multiple people, we can compute an aggregate score for each.

Possible assessment categories:

- General amenities (concessions, seating options, clubs, restaurants, bathrooms, shops, tv screens, entertainment)

- Architectural aesthetics (spatial quality, historicism, modernity, quality of construction, street presence, tackiness)

- Architectural functionality (ease of getting around, finding your way, circulation space, seating comfort, variety of seating/viewing options)

- Urban setting (location, downtown vs. outskirts, accessibility, parking, public transport, nearby bars/restaurants)

- Views of the game (obstructions, angles, scoreboards, intimacy, nosebleeds, bullpen location)

- Views of the city (skyline, backdrop)

- Food and beverage (variety, quality, availability, waiting time, vendors, options for those with dietary restrictions)

- Fan experience (camaraderie, rowdiness, friendliness, baseball knowledge, kid-friendliness)

- Cost (concession pricing, ticket pricing, value options, parking cost)

- Distinctive character (things that make this stadium unique, e.g. warehouse at Camden Yards, Green Monster, McCovey Cove, outfield ivy)

Ground rules:

- You must have watched a game there. No stadium tours or drive-bys.

- You should have been there for at least 5 innings (if it works for baseball, it should work for us)

- Older, no-longer-existing ballparks can be included

- Each of the above 10 categories could be scored from 0 to 10, giving a total score of 100.

- Aggregate, average scores will be computed from multiple people

- Avoid homerism. Avoid nostalgia (e.g., giving a high score because your dad took you there as a kid). Try to be as objective as possible while still providing qualitative data.

A mod should chime in and let us know whether we should do this is in a separate thread. I think it should be its own thread because this thread will move too fast and get closed and it would nice to have one thread in which to compile all the opinions. On the other hand, if it's in this general MLB thread, more people will probably participate.

It should definitely be its own thread.

[Kat]

Go ahead and do it in its own thread and keep this to the sport discussion.