Citi Field

[KoosFan]

Am I the only one who thinks moving LF in 13' is going overboard? Citi Field will now be only marginally larger than Citizens Bank Park, almost universally derided as a bandbox. Yet this makes people happy.

I don't mean this to sound as flippant as I know it will appear at first glance but why not a bandbox?
Now, I disagree that the new measurements make CF as bad as Citizens Bank or even New Yankee Stadium for that matter,
but we were terrible in OCF and although I know a lot of that is the roster,
I say enough with the theories and predictions of doom and gloom, let's give it a shot and see what happens.

If the Mets lose twice as many games, they'll change the fences again, bet on that.
And only because it's cheaper to move the fences in and out than it is to make whole changes to a team when you're broke.

Besides, it's not like they're screwing up the team's chances of winning one for the thumb.

[RayNY]

If that pic is recent then they seem to be moving at a lethargic pace.

Btw R.I.P. Gary Carter

[Blue387]

If that pic is recent then they seem to be moving at a lethargic pace.

Not shown: Jeff Wilpon building the fence by hand. That explains the slowness.

[grimthorpe]

If the Mets lose twice as many games, they'll change the fences again, bet on that.
And only because it's cheaper to move the fences in and out than it is to make whole changes to a team when you're broke.

When's the last time a team actually moved the fences back? I guess the Phillies after the first year at CBP when it was an absolute joke. And it still pretty much is.

People only clamor to move the fences in, not out. They just want to see their home runs. Period. There'd be enormous pressure against moving the fences back.

And I really do think the changes in LF are too much. Moving the fences in 13' AND lowering the wall by half really is a dramatic change. I wouldn't call it neutral. At least make it 375' to LC.

If they just originally made it a nice 382' or so to LC with an 8 or 9' wall none of this would have happened. They overdid it.

I really have no problem with what they did in RF and RC, though. I think those changes are fair.

[KoosFan]

If the Mets lose twice as many games, they'll change the fences again, bet on that.
And only because it's cheaper to move the fences in and out than it is to make whole changes to a team when you're broke.

When's the last time a team actually moved the fences back? I guess the Phillies after the first year at CBP when it was an absolute joke. And it still pretty much is.

People only clamor to move the fences in, not out. They just want to see their home runs. Period. There'd be enormous pressure against moving the fences back.

And I really do think the changes in LF are too much. Moving the fences in 13' AND lowering the wall by half really is a dramatic change. I wouldn't call it neutral. At least make it 375' to LC.

If they just originally made it a nice 382' or so to LC with an 8 or 9' wall none of this would have happened. They overdid it.

I really have no problem with what they did in RF and RC, though. I think those changes are fair.

My comment about moving the fences "in and out" was meant as tongue-in-cheek and not intended to be taken literally.
The inference being that there are bigger issues with this team than the placement of the fences —
although I will give you that ill-placed ones don't help the situation.

[majorleads]

From the Mets twitter...





Outside Citi Field...

[Paul W]

Not shown: Jeff Wilpon building the fence by hand. That explains the slowness.

doubt that jeff-ie would know how to handle a hammer or shovel...

[Matt The Hammer]

If that pic is recent then they seem to be moving at a lethargic pace.

Btw R.I.P. Gary Carter

The project manager said it. He's waiting for the fence panels to be fabricated. That's driving the schedule, so the framing we see can take it's time. Foundations are in, so weather sensitve work is completed. Panels will problably take a week to install when they arrive. Even quicker if they work around the clock - if they're late.

Looks like the complete deck was fabricated and on site.

RIP Gary indeed. Never thought (before he was diagnosed) that he'd be the first of that team to go.

[alpineinc]

Platform coming along.

















417258_10151333990200078_94421890077_23493978_1030349473_n.jpg

[RayNY]

It'll definitely look weird but whatever. I'm still more for it than against it. And it is what it is. Haha that should be the Mets new motto... "The New York Mets. It is what it is."

Btw once they wall up that new section it looks like the perfect shelter for stray cats, squirrels, raccoons, etc. to raise a family.

[RayNY]

Also I wonder why they used scaffolding to hold up the new section, rather than steel beams and a concrete wall. I wonder if it's because they're not sure if the new dimension will be permanent depending on how things play out in the future? But if it is going to stay like that, it will be held up by scaffolding for the rest of the stadium's life?

[DN4L]

Great shots, alpineinc...
I'm looking forward to seeing the finished product in April..

[jnakamura]

Also I wonder why they used scaffolding to hold up the new section, rather than steel beams and a concrete wall. I wonder if it's because they're not sure if the new dimension will be permanent depending on how things play out in the future? But if it is going to stay like that, it will be held up by scaffolding for the rest of the stadium's life?

That "scaffolding", if you want to call it that is just fine. It's thick, tubular galvanized steel bolted to a solid concrete foundation. It's a perfect choice: Strong enough to last 100+ years, yet relatively easy to unhook and move or remove if need be.

[RayNY]

That "scaffolding", if you want to call it that is just fine...

What else would you call it? It looks like scaffolding to me. Just sayin'.

[jnakamura]

What else would you call it? It looks like scaffolding to me. Just sayin'.

1. Scaffold tubing is only 48mm in diameter.
2. Scaffolding is a temporary structure.
3. Scaffolding is used to support people and materials in the construction or repair of buildings.

Neither of these 3 apply to what is being constructed. Those steel supports are 3 times thicker in diameter than scaffold tubing.

Suppose the steel supports were square, instead of round, and painted black....what difference would it make? It's all going to be covered up anyway.

[Coach Bombay]

What else would you call it? It looks like scaffolding to me. Just sayin'.

Ever see scaffolding cemented into the ground?

[RayNY]

1. Scaffold tubing is only 48mm in diameter.
2. Scaffolding is a temporary structure.
3. Scaffolding is used to support people and materials in the construction or repair of buildings.

Neither of these 3 apply to what is being constructed. Those steel supports are 3 times thicker in diameter than scaffold tubing.

Suppose the steel supports were square, instead of round, and painted black....what difference would it make? It's all going to be covered up anyway.

I'm not trying to incite some argument here, but are you seriously getting your panties twisted because I said it was scaffolding? Such a small and frivolous thing to get so upset about. I was merely asking if they did it that way in case they needed to change it again in the future.

[RayNY]

Ever see scaffolding cemented into the ground?

Those tubes in the pics above are not cemented INTO the ground either. There are separate cement blocks that are in the ground and then they attached the tubes onto them.

But anyway it's not important I was merely asking a question but apparently the "scaffolding police" have been dearly upsetted by my calling it scaffolding. Sheesh.

[jnakamura]

I'm not trying to incite some argument here, but are you seriously getting your panties twisted because I said it was scaffolding? Such a small and frivolous thing to get so upset about. I was merely asking if they did it that way in case they needed to change it again in the future.

You're working under the false assumption that your post upset me--it didn't in the slightest--it was a good question. I was just answering your query, "It looks like scaffolding to me....What else would you call it?"

Scaffolding is a specific thing and you seemed confused. I like helping people understand. No need to thank me.

[Gary Dunaier]

To these layman's eyes, if those are the supports for the new left field area, it doesn't look that secure to me. But I suppose looks can be deceiving - the bleachers at Shea Stadium were similarly constructed...


(Photo taken September 24, 2007. © Gary Dunaier. Link to upload on Flickr.com: here.)


(Photo taken August 8, 2008. © Gary Dunaier. Link to upload on Flickr.com: here.)

[jnakamura]

To these layman's eyes, if those are the supports for the new left field area, it doesn't look that secure to me.

Those new tubular steel supports are probably rated to hold more than 50,000 lbs....apiece. That new structure will be able to hold thousands of times the amount of weight it will be asked to. If anything, the Mets are over-engineering that new structure. A vertical hollow tube can hold an ungodly amount of weight.

In layman's terms....it's really really really sturdy.

Looks can be deceiving. After all, does an egg "look" like it can withstand being squeezed hard in your hand without breaking?

[CHiller]

I don't give a fig about how it's constructed. What I'd like to see is some enterprising Mets fan bring a sign to the park that keeps count of all the Mets home runs that land in those seats this year.

[metfan61]

Just sayin...

bandaid.jpg

[KoosFan]

I don't give a fig about how it's constructed. What I'd like to see is some enterprising Mets fan bring a sign to the park that keeps count of all the Mets home runs that land in those seats this year.

In honor of the greatest sign man ever, Karl Ehrhardt:

MO' ZONE.jpg

[Strawman]

Not only is it scaffolding, it's rickety scaffolding besides. What an embarrassment. What a joke. All for a handful of new "homeruns." Blech.