New Stadium Dimensions Compared to Other Ballparks - Miami Marlins Forum

Party · 08-14-2009, 01:27 AM

New Stadium Dimensions

Dolphin Stadium

(The Triangle at LSS is really 410ish, not 434)

Some of the bigger parks in the league...

Some of the smaller stadiums...

Some of the older parks in the league...

Not 100% but it's a good comparison.

Stadium is going to play like the Grand Canyon when the roof is closed.

Fans are going to be on top of the action down the lines. Almost no foul territory.

Omar · 08-14-2009, 10:51 AM

Good to see, though I still wish we would have a Teal Tower-like structure in LF to save us as much as the current one has in 17 years.

Sashimi · 08-14-2009, 11:40 AM

I'm really glad that they kept it a pitcher-friendly park. I'm not a fan of some of the band boxes that have been built recently in a shameless effort to generate more HRs.

And how cool were the Polo Grounds!

Ralph · 08-14-2009, 12:53 PM

Still think it's too pitcher friendly.

Fritz · 08-14-2009, 01:05 PM

I wish we could just have a neutral park. Unless you rope it down the lines, it's gonna be hard to hit a dinger.

FishFF · 08-14-2009, 01:13 PM

Yeah, we gon be Padres-lite

jonathan2323 · 08-14-2009, 02:00 PM

the Stadium dimesions are ridiculous. i like pitcher friendly parks but 420,416 and 396 thats going to be a hard area to hit HRs.

Omar · 08-14-2009, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sashimi

I'm really glad that they kept it a pitcher-friendly park. I'm not a fan of some of the band boxes that have been built recently in a shameless effort to generate more HRs.

And how cool were the Polo Grounds!

The best. I'd take those dimensions in a heartbeat (with some added distance down the lines, of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FishFF

Yeah, we gon be Padres-lite

We'll be worse, since the humidity weighs the ball down.

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 03:38 PM

Whatever. It's neither a positive or a negative. Both teams have to play under the same conditions, it doesn't give anyone an advantage, so I don't really get into that discussion. I'd prefer a nuetral park, but I don't care either way

MiamiHomer · 08-14-2009, 03:40 PM

Mike Stanton's power knows no bounds.

Omar · 08-14-2009, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobbob1313

Whatever. It's neither a positive or a negative. Both teams have to play under the same conditions, it doesn't give anyone an advantage, so I don't really get into that discussion. I'd prefer a nuetral park, but I don't care either way

Um, what

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 03:52 PM

Both teams have to play in the park, so it doesn't inherently give one team an advantage. Oh, you can build your team to suit the park, but as the past few years have shown, the team you have is more important than what type of park you play in.

I would personally prefer a neutral park, but i don't really care one way or the other. I'm not going to jump for joy or curse because we are going to play in an absurdly over the top pitchers park.

Omar · 08-14-2009, 04:21 PM

The team you have and the park you play in aren't mutually exclusive, though, at all. Especially when you have 100 games (minimum) booked for pitcher's parks in the division per season.

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 04:43 PM

Haven't we booked 100 games (minimum) the past few years in pitchers parks and haven't we still hit home runs and stuff?

The team you have is far more important than where you play. It's not like this park is only going to help our pitchers.
--------------------
Haven't we booked 100 games (minimum) the past few years in pitchers parks and haven't we still hit home runs and stuff?

The team you have is far more important than where you play. It's not like this park is only going to help our pitchers.

Omar · 08-14-2009, 05:13 PM

Hasn't Beinfest also said that the mold of this particular team (one sample out of 30) is supposed to be pitching and defense? Our power hitters are either gone (Jacobs), on their way out (Uggla), or the man himself (Hanley time).

Namaste · 08-14-2009, 05:44 PM

My .02

I'd rather our new ballpark be a pitchers park than Citizens type (which is a joke).

I totally understand how some will be disappointed. I like when HR's are events and not just "ho-hum" there goes another one. Plus, we'll have some really cool triples and some inside the parkers.

Party · 08-14-2009, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sub Zero

The best. I'd take those dimensions in a heartbeat (with some added distance down the lines, of course.

We'll be worse, since the humidity weighs the ball down.

Eh, we'll have the roof closed on really humid days. Also SD can get really wet on some nights with the fog. I think it'll be similar to San Diego.

Roof closed, the Astro Dome is a good comp considering the dimensions are nearly the same.

MiamiHomer · 08-14-2009, 09:32 PM

I could have done without the weird triangle in center field but whatever.

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 10:00 PM

Why is a park that increases home runs considered a joke, but not one that supresses them at a similar rate?

Namaste · 08-14-2009, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobbob1313

Why is a park that increases home runs considered a joke, but not one that supresses them at a similar rate?

Because HR's should be hit far and not be routine fly outs?

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 10:15 PM

And what about balls that are hit far and turned into routine outs?

Party · 08-14-2009, 10:17 PM

Because for the better part of 60 years, stadiums were similar to their modern day home run suppressing counterparts.

There are very few ballpark between '50 and '89 that were constructed for ML teams that had band box distances.

Namaste · 08-14-2009, 10:18 PM

bob2

I guess we can go round and round with this but I'm just giving my personal preference.

Everytime a ball clears the fence in (plug in any small ballpark) that was obviously not well hit, I cringe. Call me a traditionalist.

Party · 08-14-2009, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobbob1313

And what about balls that are hit far and turned into routine outs?

That has been considered a norm.

A 315 foot shot in a new ballpark did not make a reappearance in baseball until the 1990s.

Bobbob1313 · 08-14-2009, 10:20 PM

Aren't most of those the 'cookie cutters' we always criticize?

I'm just saying, I'd rather have a neutral than extreme either way, and I don't think there is a natural advantage to one over the other.

08-14-2009, 01:27 AM	#1
Party Faithful Party Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Miami-Dade Posts: 12,489 Reputation: 1944002 My Teams:	New Stadium Dimensions Compared to Other Ballparks New Stadium Dimensions Dolphin Stadium (The Triangle at LSS is really 410ish, not 434) Some of the bigger parks in the league... Some of the smaller stadiums... Some of the older parks in the league... Not 100% but it's a good comparison. Stadium is going to play like the Grand Canyon when the roof is closed. Fans are going to be on top of the action down the lines. Almost no foul territory. Last edited by Party; 08-14-2009 at 01:57 AM.

08-14-2009, 04:43 PM	#14
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	Haven't we booked 100 games (minimum) the past few years in pitchers parks and haven't we still hit home runs and stuff? The team you have is far more important than where you play. It's not like this park is only going to help our pitchers. -------------------- Haven't we booked 100 games (minimum) the past few years in pitchers parks and haven't we still hit home runs and stuff? The team you have is far more important than where you play. It's not like this park is only going to help our pitchers. Last edited by Bobbob1313; 08-14-2009 at 04:44 PM. Reason: Doublepost Merged

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Running a message board is expensive. To eliminate these ads become a member--it's free!

08-14-2009, 10:51 AM	#2
Omar needs more teal Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,729 Reputation: 606251	Good to see, though I still wish we would have a Teal Tower-like structure in LF to save us as much as the current one has in 17 years.

08-14-2009, 11:40 AM	#3
Sashimi Marlin Chic Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 410 Reputation: 2477 My Teams:	I'm really glad that they kept it a pitcher-friendly park. I'm not a fan of some of the band boxes that have been built recently in a shameless effort to generate more HRs. And how cool were the Polo Grounds!

08-14-2009, 12:53 PM	#4
Ralph Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 1,868 Reputation: 144806 My Teams:	Still think it's too pitcher friendly.

08-14-2009, 01:05 PM	#5
Fritz Haters gonna hate. Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Land of the free and the home of the Whopper Posts: 9,164 Reputation: 2267342 My Teams:	I wish we could just have a neutral park. Unless you rope it down the lines, it's gonna be hard to hit a dinger.

08-14-2009, 01:13 PM	#6
FishFF Scary Good! Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,218 Reputation: 132898	Yeah, we gon be Padres-lite

08-14-2009, 02:00 PM	#7
jonathan2323 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 194 Reputation: 1 My Teams:	the Stadium dimesions are ridiculous. i like pitcher friendly parks but 420,416 and 396 thats going to be a hard area to hit HRs.

08-14-2009, 03:38 PM	#9
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	Whatever. It's neither a positive or a negative. Both teams have to play under the same conditions, it doesn't give anyone an advantage, so I don't really get into that discussion. I'd prefer a nuetral park, but I don't care either way

08-14-2009, 03:40 PM	#10
MiamiHomer Super Moderator Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Miami Posts: 23,740 Reputation: 4269842 My Teams:	Mike Stanton's power knows no bounds.

08-14-2009, 03:52 PM	#12
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	Both teams have to play in the park, so it doesn't inherently give one team an advantage. Oh, you can build your team to suit the park, but as the past few years have shown, the team you have is more important than what type of park you play in. I would personally prefer a neutral park, but i don't really care one way or the other. I'm not going to jump for joy or curse because we are going to play in an absurdly over the top pitchers park.

08-14-2009, 04:21 PM	#13
Omar needs more teal Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,729 Reputation: 606251	The team you have and the park you play in aren't mutually exclusive, though, at all. Especially when you have 100 games (minimum) booked for pitcher's parks in the division per season.

08-14-2009, 05:13 PM	#15
Omar needs more teal Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,729 Reputation: 606251	Hasn't Beinfest also said that the mold of this particular team (one sample out of 30) is supposed to be pitching and defense? Our power hitters are either gone (Jacobs), on their way out (Uggla), or the man himself (Hanley time).

08-14-2009, 05:44 PM	#16
Namaste Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 11,314 Reputation: 3658295	My .02 I'd rather our new ballpark be a pitchers park than Citizens type (which is a joke). I totally understand how some will be disappointed. I like when HR's are events and not just "ho-hum" there goes another one. Plus, we'll have some really cool triples and some inside the parkers.

08-14-2009, 09:32 PM	#18
MiamiHomer Super Moderator Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Miami Posts: 23,740 Reputation: 4269842 My Teams:	I could have done without the weird triangle in center field but whatever.

08-14-2009, 10:00 PM	#19
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	Why is a park that increases home runs considered a joke, but not one that supresses them at a similar rate?

08-14-2009, 10:15 PM	#21
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	And what about balls that are hit far and turned into routine outs?

08-14-2009, 10:17 PM	#22
Party Faithful Party Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Miami-Dade Posts: 12,489 Reputation: 1944002 My Teams:	Because for the better part of 60 years, stadiums were similar to their modern day home run suppressing counterparts. There are very few ballpark between '50 and '89 that were constructed for ML teams that had band box distances.

08-14-2009, 10:18 PM	#23
Namaste Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 11,314 Reputation: 3658295	bob2 I guess we can go round and round with this but I'm just giving my personal preference. Everytime a ball clears the fence in (plug in any small ballpark) that was obviously not well hit, I cringe. Call me a traditionalist.

08-14-2009, 10:20 PM	#25
Bobbob1313 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 19,107 Reputation: 2765967	Aren't most of those the 'cookie cutters' we always criticize? I'm just saying, I'd rather have a neutral than extreme either way, and I don't think there is a natural advantage to one over the other.