Minute Maid Park

[WinOrDieTrying12]

Whats with the huge hill in center field?
Cant they get rid of it?

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by WinOrDieTrying12

Whats with the huge hill in center field?
Cant they get rid of it?

No they can't. They tried last season to get rid of it again but Tal's Hill put up such a fight that they just gave up and let it be. The families of the three workers killed in the attempted hill removal have filed a class action lawsuit against the demolotion company they worked for, claiming that they should have been provided fire-resistant suits, having prior knowledge that the hill was known to spew fire and brimstone at any attempt to remove it from the stadium.

The Astros claim that they have no knowledge of how the hill gained entry into the ballpark in the first place, but have not ruled out another brave attempt at removing the mysterious and deadly hill at a later date.

[calhalo]

Originally Posted by Elvis9045

the hill was known to spew fire and brimstone at any attempt to remove it from the stadium.

The Babe, Huggins, and Gehrig dont like being moved from yet another in-play flagpole burial place*. That they are non-sensically buried in an Astros ballpark is one of the many secrets of legendary Minute Maid Park.




*...hey, the monuments looked like friggin tombstones.

[tmorss9]

Win, I hope you don't mind the hazing going on here... Its a tribute to Duffy's Cliff in Boston, as well as CF in Crosley field. No, they will not consider getting rid of it.

[Astros4Life]

that hill (even though i hate it) is a unique feature of the juice box just like the astros HR gas pump and the old train on the wall...so they will most likely keep it

[lefty27]

Why dont they just put the wall in front of the hill? It would still be a good poke to get it out there. The bigger problem is the short porch in left field. No wonder Morgan Ensberg has 26 bombs.

PS-Is a mini-train hauling over-sized fake oranges back and forth really that spectacular?

[Astros4Life]

Originally Posted by lefty27

Why dont they just put the wall in front of the hill? It would still be a good poke to get it out there. The bigger problem is the short porch in left field. No wonder Morgan Ensberg has 26 bombs.

PS-Is a mini-train hauling over-sized fake oranges back and forth really that spectacular?

at the baseball thing at the houston art museum they have amodel of the juice box and the train was originally going to be on texas ave according to the model...so we would have had a fake train hauling over sized fake oranges outside the stadium...why didnt they do that

[burger eater]

The hill was actually improvised during the last minutes of construction so Craig Biggio would have something to trip on while helplessly chasing flyballs to deep center-field.

[sfgiants29]

Couldn't they just move in the fence? 436 is too long for baseball nowadays. If you move in the fence in right front of the hill it would probably be around a 405 foot CF wall.

[Seattle1]

Ehhhh, they should just get rid of the hill. And the flag pole. Get rid of the hill & put the wall just in front of the flag pole, that's my suggestion. (And get rid of the train too.)

[JordanDL3891]

whats wrong with it? dont you like differences?

The guy that desgined the park wanted differences and he wanted a hill in CF.

[Williamsburg2599]

Originally Posted by sfgiants29

Couldn't they just move in the fence? 436 is too long for baseball nowadays. If you move in the fence in right front of the hill it would probably be around a 405 foot CF wall.

For Nowadays? If anything the fences should me moved back for nowadays Having a deep center makes up for the very short left field wall.

[Elvis]

It's interesting to me how many people dislike the quirks that make different ballparks unique. I guess some people would just as soon have a mandate that all ballparks should have the same generic 330-375-400 dimensions.

Couldn't they just move in the fence? 436 is too long for baseball nowadays.

I disagree 100% with this as well. 436 should be the league minimum. There are too many bandbox parks nowadays. What is the league average ERA now, like 5? We need more pitchers parks. Pitchers parks mean more triples and inside-the-park-homeruns and I LOVE triples and inside-the-park-homers!

[Seattle1]

Originally Posted by Elvis

It's interesting to me how many people dislike the quirks that make different ballparks unique. I guess some people would just as soon have a mandate that all ballparks should have the same generic 330-375-400 dimensions.

Personally I don't dislike quirks per se, it's just that some of the quirks in Minute Maid Park seem a bit heavy-handed. I think they overdid it by having wacky quirks for the sake of having wacky quirks. (Sorry Astros fans, no offense.)

Symetrical parks like Dodger Stadium and New Comiskey are fine, but so are parks with irregular dimensions like PNC and Safeco, imho. Then there's the grand daddy of all irregular dimension parks, Fenway! But I doubt they built the Green Monster for the sake of having a quirky stadium.

[redlegsfan21]

I like the hill. That of course coming from a Reds fan who likes Crosley Field and sees his team play there 8 times.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Seattle1

Personally I don't dislike quirks per se, it's just that some of the quirks in Minute Maid Park seem a bit heavy-handed. I think they overdid it by having wacky quirks for the sake of having wacky quirks. (Sorry Astros fans, no offense.)

Symetrical parks like Dodger Stadium and New Comiskey are fine, but so are parks with irregular dimensions like PNC and Safeco, imho. Then there's the grand daddy of all irregular dimension parks, Fenway! But I doubt they built the Green Monster for the sake of having a quirky stadium.

The problem is that the parks of the past that had quirks/asymmetry had them out of necessity of due to limited space/money. Modern parks are not hindered with most of these constraints. So you're faced with two choices: Build every park symetrical - copying a standard dimension "mold" or, invent quirks for the sake of having quirks. I tend to think of designing ballparks as combinations of function, form, and creativity. Without the creativity you wind up with "clone" parks which are best exemplified by the cookie-cutters of the 60s and 70s, AND the "retro brick" parks of recent times.

So really ALL new ballparks have "forced" quirks. But that's just the creativity part of it. Sure, MM Park could eliminate Tal's hill and be just like every other stadium, but maybe they don't WANT to be like every other stadium. And I admire that.

[sfgiants29]

Well, it's not just about the demensions, someone can get hurt running unexpectedly on hills. I've seen many sprains and a few torn up knees by people who have ran onto bullpen mounds in foul territory chasing fly balls. That should be an issue that should be discussed more.

[Williamsburg2599]

Originally Posted by sfgiants29

Well, it's not just about the demensions, someone can get hurt running unexpectedly on hills. I've seen many sprains and a few torn up knees by people who have ran onto bullpen mounds in foul territory chasing fly balls. That should be an issue that should be discussed more.

You can get out of bed and sprain your ankle. Show me a park that doesn't have some dangerous hazard to fielders.

Originally Posted by Seattle1

But I doubt they built the Green Monster for the sake of having a quirky stadium.

They didn't. It was originally built to keep balls in the park(there used to be a stands infront of the wall) and not hitting the street or buildings behind Fenway.

[Seattle1]

Originally Posted by sfgiants29

Well, it's not just about the demensions, someone can get hurt running unexpectedly on hills. I've seen many sprains and a few torn up knees by people who have ran onto bullpen mounds in foul territory chasing fly balls. That should be an issue that should be discussed more.

I think that really is a good point. Sure, all stadiums have hazards that players can get hurt on, like rolled up tarps or T.V. camera wells. However, why deliberately build a potential hazard (hill, flag pole) in the middle of center field? It won't seem so quaint the minute a multi-million-dollar center fielder blows his knee out tripping out there and/or running into the flag pole.

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by Seattle1

I think that really is a good point. Sure, all stadiums have hazards that players can get hurt on, like rolled up tarps or T.V. camera wells. However, why deliberately build a potential hazard (hill, flag pole) in the middle of center field? It won't seem so quaint the minute a multi-million-dollar center fielder blows his knee out tripping out there and/or running into the flag pole.

Bear with me...

Why deliberately store tarps on the field? Why deliberately have bullpens on the field? Why deliberately have low fences that players can fall over? Why have players bat without facemasks? Why have players and pitchers play in the field without helmets where they can get hit with batted balls? Why deliberately expose fans to flying bats and balls that could cause serious injury? Why deliberately build outfield walls that aren't injury-proof when you could use softer, thicker padding? Why arent all players required to wear protective arm and leg armor when batting?

The odds of someone getting hurt on that hill or flagpole is around a million to one, as opposed to the much higher risks of the things I just mentioned. It seems you're worrying about the wrong risks.

[Yankeebiscuitfan]

Here some additional information about Tal's Hill

http://www.digitalballparks.com/National/Astros10.html

[Seattle1]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Bear with me...

Why deliberately store tarps on the field? Why deliberately have bullpens on the field? Why deliberately have low fences that players can fall over? Why have players bat without facemasks? Why have players and pitchers play in the field without helmets where they can get hit with batted balls? Why deliberately expose fans to flying bats and balls that could cause serious injury? Why deliberately build outfield walls that aren't injury-proof when you could use softer, thicker padding? Why arent all players required to wear protective arm and leg armor when batting?

The odds of someone getting hurt on that hill or flagpole is around a million to one, as opposed to the much higher risks of the things I just mentioned. It seems you're worrying about the wrong risks.

I doubt it because players and fans are already used to all of the potential hazards you mention, it's all part of baseball that people are accustomed to. The hill/flagpole are unusual hazards that players aren't used to encountering their whole career going back to little league. Why build a pointless obstacle course in the middle of the outfield? I bet someone gets hurt out there one day, probably a player on a visiting team who hasn't played much at MMP.

[redlegsfan21]

Next to my house and my tiny ballfield where I throw a ball up in the air and catch it, there is a upward hill. I remember that I tried to catch a ball going up that hill and I did catch it and I fell flat on my face. Of course I thought of it as Crosley but the amount of times I've gone up that hill to catch a ball, I have never hurt anything except my face. I must say that the incline is close to that of MMP.

[redbuck]

The hill is interesting, but is another completely unoriginal idea in a modern park. There is nothing new or really interesting about it. It affects play almost never and it is certainly not an original idea. Perhaps it would make sense in Cincinnati or Boston but not in Houston.

Here is what Eric Pastore, webmaster of digitalballparks.com, told me in an interview last summer and I have to agree with him:

"It's funny, when you look at new places like Erie Pennsylvania's Jerry
Uht Park and Bellsouth Park in Chattanooga. These are ballparks that had to
be retrofit in small confined areas. These ballparks are fantastic because
of it.

Why? Because the architect was forced to give up his typical blueprints
and use some type of imagination to figure out how to make these
ballparks fit.

Imagination is exactly what's missing from these new ballparks. It was
that same imagination that created Fenway Park. Having to be fit into a
small square area, huge fences (the green monster) had to be erected to
keep cheap homeruns in the park.

That's what all of these ballpark architects are missing... imagination.

Do something different.
Be daring
take a leap...
make me excited!
It won't happen though because, HOK and HNTB now just seem to keep
sticking with what they know.


Houston tried... it's not a bad park. It's still that contrived look that doesn't seem to offer a real ballpark feel, but at least it doesn't look
like everything else. It's a step in the right direction. It's still
better than these apathetically sterile facilites that we see today."

[Elvis]

Originally Posted by redbuck

That's what all of these ballpark architects are missing... imagination.

Do something different.
Be daring
take a leap...
make me excited!
It won't happen though because, HOK and HNTB now just seem to keep
sticking with what they know.


Houston tried... it's not a bad park. It's still that contrived look that doesn't seem to offer a real ballpark feel, but at least it doesn't look
like everything else. It's a step in the right direction. It's still
better than these apathetically sterile facilites that we see today."[/i]

I could not agree more.