The Diamondbacks can now officially seek a new home for another new ballpark, as Rebekah Sanders of the Arizona Republic reports. A previously reported agreement is now formally in effect, leaving the D-Backs responsible for maintaining Chase Field (rather than Maricopa County) while allowing the team to jet for another facility — so long as it is in the county — as soon as the 2022 season. Generally, this set of moves promises to boost the team’s long-term financial outlook, though it remains somewhat hard to fathom that Chase Field is truly in need of replacement after opening in 1998.
Here are a few more notes from Arizona:
- As they continue to lead the pack in the NL West, the Diamondbacks are surely beginning to look forward to what could be a complicated trade deadline. As GM Mike Hazen tells Nick Piecoro of the Arizona Republic, the club will continue to balance competing needs. On the one hand, says Hazen, the current roster “deserves our focus and attention”; on the other, he adds, “we don’t want to do anything that’s going to severely harm the long-term” interest. It’s an interesting article that looks back on some recent Arizona swaps while pondering what situation the team may face this summer.
- The monster start to the season from Patrick Corbin opened quite a few eyes. MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes took note, listing him sixth on the first power ranking of 2018-19 free agents based upon the combination of his first few outings with his youth and prior track record. The results have continued, as Corbin now carries a 2.12 ERA through 51 innings. But as Zach Buchanan of The Athletic examines (subscription link), Corbin’s most recent outings have given some cause for concern. The 28-year-old southpaw has shown a decrease in fastball velocity and reduced ability to command his slider of late, writes Buchanan. Of course, it’s a long season, and some blips are to be expected. Corbin says he still feels in good physical form, but his performance will be scrutinized closely all season long as organizations weigh him as an offseason target.
Wow. A new stadium after 24 years? I had heard Chase Field was actually really nice from people I know who have been there. I suppose the new stadium will be paid for by taxpayers as well, to the benefit of a private corporation. Yay baseball!
I’ve seen a handful of games at Chase Field and I’ve enjoyed it every time. I have a friend who moved to Arizona this year and went to the games vs. Houston. He said the stadium was great also
Too large to create any kind of demand for tickets. The trend is 35,000-38,000 capacity.
Literally who cares
I went to a game there a couple years ago and I have to say it was just way too big. It didn’t give off that friendly confines feel. Now, not saying a whole new stadium is needed at all. Can’t you pump some money into en existing structures and make do? I think that’s called rehab/remodeling and people do it all time….
Yeah, the County and Tax Payers make NO money off the DBacks. What a mean thing to do the Tax Payers. It saddles them with an endeavor that drives in tourists and money into their neighborhoods. Why don’t they just move the team to another state? This clearly is a drag on the local economy
So, what do you do with a “pre-owned” stadium? Amazing how the taxpayer’s pocket is always open.
GA State Univ – states 2nd largest public university – purchased Turner Field and turned it into their first football stadium and baseball field with on-site housing in an area that needed developing after the city that benefited from the game day parking too much to allow the Braves to develop that could have kept the team there into a new lease. The city talked about making the entire site into s public park, which in that area of town, wouldn’t have been the best of ideas. This allowed the field to live on, after they gave it a facelift and fully utilizing the grounds while giving them their own place.
What exactly are pros of having stadiums funded by public? I mean why should public money go to stadiums. What are they getting back except a team to root for which they have to pay to see? and most times, it is not cheap to see the said team.
Development of restaurants, hotels, all matter of apartments/condos around the new stadium. These developments create construction jobs, service industry jobs, bars and restaurants create a social atmosphere where people will go before and after a game or event.
Excellent! Thanks for your reply.
Lol that garbage has been throughly debunked. City gets a tiny fraction back of what is paid.
There’s a great book about this, that the promised benefits never actually materialize to offset the massive amounts of tax money put into the stadium, in large part because a stadium – taxpayer funded and otherwise – sits vacant the vast majority of the year. These deals absolutely do not help local economies, only line owners’ pockets. The book is by Andrew Zimbalist. I’d link to it but not sure that’s allowed. Google it.
One person’s opinion. The new ballparks in Denver, Cleveland and Baltimore completely revitalized those areas and have been a catalyst for development in Detroit. Location is obviously important to the impact.
Very well said. The modernization of Wrigley and the surrounding area has pumped even more income into Wrigleyville, that can’t be done in most cities. Some new minor league stadiums and spring training complexes have provided similar results although at smaller measures of course.
I have not been to Denver, but I live in Baltimore and have visited Cleveland and Detroit. I absolutely loved all three stadiums and the surrounding areas. The whole area around the stadium is given a great vibe. There is still new developments in Detroit near the stadium, too, with the new Pistons/Red Wings arena being built across the interstate from Comerica Park. That will only add to new business opportunities for the city.
The “opinion” is backed up by literally years and years of research. The benefits tend to be for a very few, but all taxpayers end up paying for them. And I lived in Chicago; Wrigleyville is a completely different beast than the area around any other MLB stadium, and always has been. Wrigley is in the middle of a city.
“More income into Wrigleyville,” may be correct, but the benefits don’t extend much beyond that, right? I mean, we are talking about taking tax money and using it to enrich private businesses. The vast majority of Chicagoans aren’t ever going to go to a Cubs game, probably aren’t going to get hammered in one of the Wrigleyville bars, and certainly can’t afford to live anywhere near Wrigleyville.
Busch Stadium in St. Louis along with the Ballpark Village is revitalizing the whole area around the ballpark !
Nah. Cleveland was because of casino. Detroit is vacant except on game days. Denver area was already fairly built. Up and coming area.
Lol the new Wrigley is actually a lot of local bars. People are flocking to cubs owned joints. Try again.
Yep and it’s hurting some of the local places too. Fans are going to Cubs owned places instead of local joints. So it is only helping Cubs.
Which is just an opportunity cost. All the revenue is just shifted from somwwhere else.
Why do they need a new ballpark after such a short time? Unless the location is problematic like in TB, it seems like something a renovation could fix. After all, the Red Sox and Cubs have been in the same ballparks for over 100 years and they’ve made it work.
Dodger’s—-1962
Angels——1966
Boy the Angels screwed up.
They went cheap and spent about half the cost of a new stadium at the time to renovate the Big A in the late 90s, despite a new stadium really being called for. Now they’ve spent the 2010s looking into building a new one somewhere. They waited too long (partially because of those renovations) and are stuck in their lease another 10 years, but I expect to see a new stadium enter development for them over the next 5 years or so – they need it
Also should be pointed out that, if not for Wrigley and Fenway (and even LA’s Chavez Ravine, to some extent) being landmarks and difficult to replace in their locations, neither stadium would exist today (Boston especially was almost gone in the late 60s and again in the late 90s)
You are correct-the Angels really screwed up. I’m here and the El Toro Marine Base was free reign for the county(Yup,the same county that LOST in its own courtroom to Arte over the name of the team). They could have built BOTH a football and baseball stadium-only to build a flight school THATS IN THE SAME PATTERN AS SNA AIRPORT! Angel Stadium is a dump.
Chase field is dark-green too dark,has zero desert feel to it. The food choices are horrific (Really,go to the park to eat TGIF?) and the seats are too far from the field. IF they build the new stadium,I would build it near the football & Gala River Arena.
I love these teams/clubs who hold cities & states hostage over tax free leases and such.
Know why the Hurricanes are still in Carolina? Best U.S. lease in the NHL.
I do want to add that if they renovate the stadium it would help immensely. Huge potential and it was a let down.
Yes. El Toro Airbase, Tustin Airbase and a couple spots off the 405 around Carson were all looked into – all of which would have probably worked very well for them.
Or around the time of the renovations, when attendance was so low and with the then new Pond down the way, they could have even built in the parking lot of Anaheim Stadium if they didn’t want to move anywhere. They decided to go cheap and renovate instead.
The stadium has the feeling of a long sunken WWII warship given a new paint-job and called into duty. It should have been gone long ago.
The park is actually very nice still. I don’t see what they would want from a renovation standpoint.
The problem is the park is in downtown Phoenix which is relatively underdeveloped compared to the suburbs.
I think the team ideally wants to move the team to Scottsdale along the 101 on the Indian reservation.
They want a smaller and more intimate setting for baseball…I personally love Chase Field, but it does not have that baseball stadium feel
I’m not a D-backs fan nor do I live near the ballpark, however I have been to a game there recently and don’t see what the need is for a new ballpark. I think it’s pretty nice actually. What are the concerns for needing a new one?
Getting a new stadium after 20 years is outlandish. Look at Fenway and Wrigley, serving as functionable stadiums for over a century. It is nuts that teams like the Braves and Rangers, and possibly Diamondbacks need new stadiums so quickly. They aren’t cheap things either.