Svrluga "they’re trying to sell some beers and send people home"

[JCA-CrystalCity]

Nats Park is a replacement level ballpark for me. Not gonna write home about how awesome it is, but it's never gonna be on a list of worst MLB parks. I agree that Miller Park is extremely underrated, and Safeco Field seems generally well-regarded. The acoustics have also always seemed a bit off to me. The way a place like Nats Park becomes a memorable locale is by being home to a memorable team or, at least, to memorable concessions.

I agree that Nats Park is being increasingly boxed in by blah-looking office and condo buildings. It's good for the city and for the neighborhood but it's not the best for the view from behind the plate. I happen to think that the new building that went up on Half Street (where the bullpen used to be) is particularly ugly.

I would say average, not replacement level. give it 2 WAR.

[hotshot]

I remain surprised that a family as wealthy as the Lerner's would've been satisfied with such an average looking edifice. I mean, parks aren't replaced every 5 or10 years. You'd have thought they would've wanted to make more of a statement while they had the chance.

[HalfSmokes]

I remain surprised that a family as wealthy as the Lerner's would've been satisfied with such an average looking edifice. I mean, parks aren't replaced every 5 or10 years. You'd have thought they would've wanted to make more of a statement while they had the chance.

Average and heavily subsidized is probably preferential to stunning and coming out of their own pockets

[Elvir Ovcina]

I remain surprised that a family as wealthy as the Lerner's would've been satisfied with such an average looking edifice. I mean, parks aren't replaced every 5 or10 years. You'd have thought they would've wanted to make more of a statement while they had the chance.

A lot of the other crap they own makes Nats Park look like a Frank Lloyd Wright house by comparison.

[Five Banners]

I remain surprised that a family as wealthy as the Lerner's would've been satisfied with such an average looking edifice. I mean, parks aren't replaced every 5 or10 years. You'd have thought they would've wanted to make more of a statement while they had the chance.

That process is worth a thread of its own

[PowerBoater69]

How much money do they actually make selling beer, considering there are labor costs to keeping the stadium open?

I'm sure they have some sort of minimum number of hours once employees show up. Sell ten $15 beers in an hour and that will cover minimum wage.

[nats2playoffs]

Nats Park is a replacement level ballpark for me. Not gonna write home about how awesome it is, but it's never gonna be on a list of worst MLB parks. I agree that Miller Park is extremely underrated, and Safeco Field seems generally well-regarded. The acoustics have also always seemed a bit off to me. The way a place like Nats Park becomes a memorable locale is by being home to a memorable team or, at least, to memorable concessions.

I agree that Nats Park is being increasingly boxed in by blah-looking office and condo buildings. It's good for the city and for the neighborhood but it's not the best for the view from behind the plate. I happen to think that the new building that went up on Half Street (where the bullpen used to be) is particularly ugly.

[Baseball is Life]

As it is, Nats Park is not memorable architecture nor does it have any particularly great "look." Neutral parties visiting me in Annapolis prefer OPACY. Can't recall one visitor out of around 20 who preferred Nats Park. I don't think a retractable roof would harm the "look"; who knows, might even improve it.

Just my opinion but people who prefer OPACY over Nats Park are probably people who don't go to a lot of games. Yeah, sure, the aesthetics of OPACY are better but it's one uncomfortable park. I have not been there for a long time but all I remember are closed concourses, small seats, no cup holders, and seats pointed the wrong way because that was more "authentic" to old parks.

Nats Park may not have the aesthetic appeal but it's very functional, i.e., comfortable to people who go to a lot of games. People can complain all they want about bad views at Nats Park (shocking because you know it's in the middle of burgeoning city neighborhood) but who cares about views outside the park. For me the really valid complaints about Nats Park are some of the service issues from the vendors.

[hotshot]

They had the chance to make Nats Park something special -- to use your word, "aesthetically." They failed. It's an updated DC/RFK Stadium.

I was always fine with with the park out East Capitol street so, as a fan, OK with me. If, however, I owned the team, I'd be disappointed that in a majestic city like Washington, this is the best park that could be built.

[nationals28]

I remain surprised that a family as wealthy as the Lerner's would've been satisfied with such an average looking edifice. I mean, parks aren't replaced every 5 or10 years. You'd have thought they would've wanted to make more of a statement while they had the chance.

Voted #14
https://www.capitalfrontiers.com/single-post/2020/04/16/The-Top-Major-League-Baseball-Stadiums-Ranked-by-the-Fans

I agree it's completely average and unremarkable in a city that had so much to work with. It's a shame.

[Baseball is Life]

They had the chance to make Nats Park something special -- to use your word, "aesthetically." They failed. It's an updated DC/RFK Stadium.

I was always fine with with the park out East Capitol street so, as a fan, OK with me.

If you're trying to somehow compare Nats Park with RFK Stadium for baseball, you kind of lose me there.

It would have been odd if they built another brick neo-retro cliche in DC. It just doesn't fit the architecture of the city.

I'm no architect but the form over function approach at Nats Park works for me. I really don't care about views and such. I like wide concourses, good sight lines, big bathrooms, lots of food choices, easy access, etc.,

[Mathguy]

So is this the reason for the Grateful Dead Night on 8/13 ?

https://twitter.com/barrysvrluga/status/1141149072235143168

[Baseball is Life]

Voted #14
https://www.capitalfrontiers.com/single-post/2020/04/16/The-Top-Major-League-Baseball-Stadiums-Ranked-by-the-Fans

I agree it's completely average and unremarkable in a city that had so much to work with. It's a shame.

Again, my theory is casual fans tend to favor visually appealing parks. I remember the first time I went to Wrigley and I started to gush about the park to some Cubs fans near me. They said something along the lines of "wait until you have to stand in line for those tiny bathrooms" and another die hard Cubs fan to my horror said they should tear it down.

After going there about four times over the last seven years I now understand what they meant. Before any of you fly off the handle, I'm not suggesting they tear Wrigley down. I'm just suggesting that people who go to a lot of games might value different things than people who go once every few years.

[tenken627]

As I get older, the more I can see the enjoyment that can be had yelling at clouds. Better to tell at clouds than eat tide pods.

[rileyn]

I like Nats Park.  It works for me. 

[Ali the Baseball Cat]

Beat me to it.  White Flint was the architectural equivalent of explosive diarrhea

A lot of the other crap they own makes Nats Park look like a Frank Lloyd Wright house by comparison.