Best park in baseball is on the Bay

Dennis Punzel  —  8/21/2008 10:19 pm

So, what's your favorite ballpark?

It's a question I get frequently from people who have noticed that our family vacations often seem to include side trips to various major league ballparks. And there have been a few father-son trips to ballpark destinations.

It's a fun topic for baseball fans, one that is sure to trigger disagreements, but also one for which there are no right or wrong answers. Unless you said the Metrodome in Minneapolis.

The TwinkieDome has long set the standard for the least appealing major league ballpark, with its giant plastic baggie in right field and its general absence of character or atmosphere. But I digress. We'll get back to the worst parks later.

The subject of favorite parks comes to mind because of a recent trip to the Bay Area for a family wedding, as well as a visit to my new favorite ballpark -- San Francisco's AT&T Park. Opened in 2000, the ballpark with the ever-changing name (Pac Bell to SBC to AT&T) has drawn rave reviews as it revitalized the formerly downtrodden China Basin area and almost made Giants fans forget the decades they spent going to the horrendous, windswept Candlestick Park.

In short, my wife and I enjoyed a spectacular day watching a game between the two worst teams in the majors -- the Giants and the Washington Nationals. It started with a pleasant ride on Caltrain with thousands of fans apparently untroubled by the sorry state of their team. Like most San Francisco destinations, any transportation other than car is preferable. The train brings you within a couple blocks of the stadium, a short walk lined by newly built restaurants and bars.

The stadium itself is similar to most parks built since Baltimore's Camden Yards introduced the throwback ballpark concept in 1992. In fact, it was designed by the same architectural firm (HOK) that designed Camden Yards, as well as new parks in Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, San Diego, St. Louis and Washington.

None of those parks, however, can match the view from the upper deck at AT&T, with San Francisco Bay extending out from right field and the Bay Bridge hovering in the background behind left field. The park just feels like San Francisco.

Which is enough to make it my favorite among the 19 current major league parks I've attended, to go along with 10 defunct parks. My list includes the current parks in Milwaukee, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, Denver, Boston, Baltimore, Minnesota, Cleveland, Detroit, Kansas City, Anaheim, Oakland, two in Chicago and two in New York.

Almost all the parks inspire positive memories. That's why we go to ballparks, because we enjoy the experience in the same way that art aficionados go to art museums or golfers travel the world to play different courses.

But the less enjoyable venues stand out the most. My bottom five ballparks are easier to determine than the top five. Those would be: 1. Metrodome; 2. Oakland's McAfee Coliseum; 3. U.S. Cellular Field in Chicago (White Sox); 4. Shea Stadium in New York (Mets); and 5. Detroit's Comerica Park.

Favorites? I could make a case for almost any of the other parks to be in my top five. Wrigley, Fenway and Yankee Stadium are like shrines, but they lack the comforts of most of the newer parks. Fun to go to once or twice, but I don't think I'd want any to be my home park.

Visiting the new parks is at times kind of like going through the Parade of Homes -- each is impressive and nice in its own right, but after a while they kind of blend together.

My personal criteria might be different from some. I give bonus points to stadiums that allow fans to bring in their own small coolers (Miller Park, Cincinnati, Atlanta, San Francisco, among others). Affordable, decent tickets are nice (good for Pittsburgh and Cincinnati, but even plenty of cheap seats can't save Oakland). Prominence of luxury boxes is a big negative (Cleveland is the worst offender).

All things considered, my top five: 1. San Francisco; 2. PNC Park in Pittsburgh (great skyline, best food selection and the friendliest ushers anywhere); 3. Great American Ball Park in Cincinnati (love the misting stations for cooling off); 4. Citizens Bank Field in Philadelphia (can't beat the cheese steaks); 5. Miller Park (I don't often participate, but the daily sea of tailgaters creates a really festive atmosphere).

Notably, both Yankee Stadium and Shea Stadium will be replaced in 2009. The following year, the Metrodome will give way to a new open-air stadium in Minneapolis.

More new worlds for the ballpark fan to explore.

And if you go to San Francisco, just remember: take the train and sit in the upper deck.

Next Week: A review of Miller Park.

---

BALLPARK AFICIONADO CRITICAL OF MILLER PARK

Compiling my list of favorite Major League Baseball parks for Spectator was a task complicated by the fact there are some notable holes in my list of stadiums visited.

I've yet to get to Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles, San Diego's new Petco Park, Seattle's Safeco Field, the new Busch Stadium in St. Louis or either of the new parks in Texas (the Rangers' AmeriQuest Field and Houston's Minute Maid Park) -- all of which have the look of top five contenders.

So for a more comprehensive evaluation I turned to my resident ballpark expert, Bill Kessler of Madison, who recently completed the 30-ballpark circuit by going to Tropicana Field in St. Petersburg, Fla., home of the Tampa Bay Rays, and Miami's Dolphins Stadium, home of the Florida Marlins. (He also has been to 14 retired parks).

Kessler breaks down the ballparks into five categories.

The Classics: Yankee Stadium, Wrigley Field and Fenway Park.

The Middle-aged: Kauffman Stadium in Kansas City, Shea Stadium, Angels Stadium and Dodgers Stadium.

The New: Nineteen parks built since the White Sox's U.S. Cellular Park, which opened in 1991.

The Bubbles: Metrodome and Tropicana.

The multipurpose: McAfee Coliseum in Oakland and Dolphins Stadium.

How does one evaluate a stadium?

"Baseball parks are works of art, or not," Kessler said, "and therefore cannot necessarily fit into compartmentalized categories like a tax return. It's all about having a pleasurable experience notwithstanding the quality of the game or who you are rooting for -- the ambiance."

His criteria include:

Condition of field: "Only Tropicana failed. A stained, soiled, discolored carpet."

Sight lines, aisles and comfort: "The modern parks all angle their seats toward second base and are a few inches wider. They also tend to have shorter rows for easier access and good sight lines for all parts of the playing field and information visuals. A notable exception to all three is Miller Park."

Getting around inside the park: "If you can't walk in (a) 360-degree circle and on various levels freely, that is a major problem because it is so much fun to stroll."

Scoreboard, visual information: "Almost all are adequate except the classics. The exceptions are Miller and Nationals Park."

Themes: "Several are built in old rail yards so there is a train theme in Seattle, Houston, Colorado and Phoenix. Several are built in the warehouse district so old buildings are included in the structure (Baltimore, San Diego). Detroit and D.C. seem to want to emulate Disney World."

Symmetry/asymmetry: "I prefer asymmetry, different left and right fields. A bowl is boring. Fenway and Texas are the big winners here, followed by the more clever of the new stadiums like Pittsburgh, Washington and Philadelphia."

Beauty of the stadium: "Highly subjective, of course. I favor open vistas rather than boxed in. So, of course, the domes are horrible. Pittsburgh is by far the best. It has the traditional roof structure of the pre-World War I stadiums combined with a center field that opens up to the city and the lighted bridge. It is magical. Phoenix and Milwaukee are twin monsters."

Settings: "With a few notable exceptions, most settings were selected to enhance the experience or assist the municipality in turning blight into beauty. Some have spectacular settings. Others, not so much."

Cost: "Washington is outrageous."

Food: "Pittsburgh, hands down."

Taking all those factors into consideration, he puts together his lists of favorites and not-so-favorites.

Best overall ballparks: 1, PNC Park, Pittsburgh; 2, Wrigley Field, Chicago; 3, Petco Park, San Diego; 4, Citizens Bank Park, Philadelphia; 5, Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles.

Best new parks: 1, PNC Park; 2, Petco Park; 3, Citizens Bank Park; 4, Safeco Field, Seattle; 5, Minute Maid Park, Houston.

Most underrated: 1, Minute Maid Park; 2, Dodgers Stadium ("understated beauty, it feels the most like a ballpark); 3, PNC Park; 4, U.S. Cellular Field, Chicago; 5, Dolphins Stadium, Miami.

Worst overall: 1, Tropicana Field, Tampa Bay ("Cheap construction, useless location, distant parking, bad seats, cannot walk around, bad food and beer, narrow seats, terrible sight lines"); 2, Metrodome, Minnesota ("Dirty, old, claustrophobic"); 3, McAfee Coliseum, Oakland; 4, Dolphins Stadium; 5, Shea Stadium, New York.

Worst new parks: 1, Nationals Stadium, Washington; 2, Comerica Park, Detroit; 3, Miller Park, Milwaukee; 4, Chase Field, Arizona; 5, Coors Field, Colorado.

Most over-hyped: 1, Fenway Park, Boston ("Small, uncomfortable; Green Monster is stupid and ugly"); 2, AT&T Park, San Francisco ("Cannot see the Bay, save from the upper deck; hard to get to"); 3, Progressive Field, Cleveland ("Was great when built, now surpassed by many"); 4, Camden Yards, Baltimore ("See Cleveland"); 5, Yankee Stadium, New York ("Legends aside, needs to go").

Dennis Punzel  —  8/21/2008 10:19 pm