Recently, word came down the pipe that Nat Bailey Stadium, the historic home to Vancouver baseball, would be saved from the wrecker’s ball and kept as is for the forseeable future. This is a good thing, in my opinion, but it’s also a mixed blessing.

I did my bit to save the Nat, by allowing an excerpt from a book I’ve been writing on the Vancouver Canadians to be used on the Friends of Nat Bailey website.

I certainly didn’t want to just sit back and watch a glorious piece of Vancouver’s history bite the dust, so I did what I could to help, and the efforts of myself and many others combined to save the stadium, but the fact of the matter is, Nat Bailey is a-hurtin’.

A large part of the right field side of the stadium was demolished a while back because it was rotting away, and before that, the bleachers down the right and left field lines were demolished due to wood rot. Those stadium changes make the visitors dressing room far smaller than the home dressing room, and players last season had no problem complaining that the facilities were of high school standard.

To quote Nick Blasi, last year’s Vancouver right fielder, "Whenever anyone flushes the toilet, everyone in the shower gets scalded." Said Danny Putnam, "My college facilities were better than this. My high school facilities were better than this. I’ve seen little league parks better than this."

Of course, the lads always said these words through a smile, and none were demanding major changes. The lack of polish on Nat Bailey has always been part of its appeal - the old scoreboard is terrible, an absolute deathtrap, but it also happens to be the original scoreboard from Sicks Stadium, home to the former major league team, the Seattle Pilots. The press box is a sweatbox, and whenever the mini-donut stand cookers blows a fuse, the press box computers die along with them. The corporate barbeque area is a great spot, but when you’re down there, you can’t see the game unless you stand at the fence.

So why do I say the saving of Nat Bailey is a good thing? Because history MUST be treasured, and to knock down the Nat would be like knocking down the Vancouver Art Gallery. You might not go often, but be damned if you want someone to take it away from you.

Nat Bailey must be saved from the wrecking ball, but it also needs to saved from itself. It needs new electrics, a new press box, a raised barbeque area, expanded bleacher seating, a lower wall (hey, people wanna see home runs now and then, and a 400 ft long, 20-foot high center wall ain’t allowing much of that), and work done on the scoreboard so that it doesn’t kill someone.

Other things that would be nice include a speed gun so fans can watch how fast the pitcher is throwing, a refitted concourse that doesn’t feel like a farmer’s market, and lights that actually light up the field when it’s a cloudy afternoon.

All in all, Nat needs a big refit, and it won’t come cheap.

But think about it… baseball towns across America have spent tens of millions refitting their ballparks so that they look historic, but work with the efficiency of a modern stadium, drawing in tens of thousands of visitors in the process. A few tonnes of landfill on the BBQ area, a lower outfield wall (or a closer wall, whatever works), a new roof on the stadium with a shiny new press box… these things are not multi-million dollar propositions, and they will pay themselves off by enticing more people to come to the ballpark.

To not make the changes means consigning The Nat to a temporary reprieve, because sooner or later, someone is going to condemn the joint if something isn’t done to bring it up to standard. And then where will we be?

The Tyee, a most excellent online BC newspaper, said this of the Nat while the fight to save the stadium was still in full swing:

Beating the drum loudly[…] is NPA Park Board Commissioner Suzanne Anton, elected to the Vancouver Park Board two and a half years ago. Anton’s preliminary investigations [for a new Vancouver sports stadium] included looking at the edges of the Downtown East Side, most specifically on land located on the fringes of Chinatown, adjacent to the old CN Train Station. The area is ripe for development and would fit into the city’s long-term master plan to revitalize the downtown core. Building a new stadium there, however, appears far down the list of civic priorities. A factor is that Anton lacks political juice in her new role on the Park Board, which prefers to focus on developing green spaces and community-based facilities.

What about Nat Bailey?

One big facility commanding the Park Board attention is the curling venue for the 2010 Games. It’s slated to be located at Vancouver’s Riley and Hillcrest Parks, next to Nat Bailey Stadium, home of the Northwest League Vancouver Canadians. As part of the legacy program associated with Vancouver 2010, the Park Board will inherit the new $28 million curling facility along with a new community centre, library, swimming pool and skating rink, plus assorted other local area park improvements and amenities.

Will any of that glitter rub off on old Nat? Not much, it seems. The Park Board is landlord to the old ball park, built in the early 50’s within the boundaries of Queen Elizabeth Park. Today, the team that plays there, the single-A level Vancouver Canadians, occupies a low rung in minor league baseball. Vancouver used to have a triple-A team, but they outgrew Nat Bailey and departed for Sacramento in 1999.

The current thinking by the Park Board centers on keeping the baseball facility as is and upgrading the infrastructure of the 55 year old stadium as funds and time allow. That’s fine with owners of the Canadians. As the territorial rights holder to minor league baseball, and assuming the C’s are content to remain a part of the single-A short season Northwest League, Nat Bailey is more than adequate.

Let me assure the reader, the C’s are more than content to stay a part of the short season Northwest League, now and for a long time to come.

Team owner, Fred Hermann, told me last year, "the simple fact of it is, in the months around Summer, it just isn’t condusive to baseball up here. It gets wet most days, you call off games, you can’t practice… Really, short season ball is perfect for Vancouver because it allows us to play every day, while full season ball would stretch into months where there’s still the risk of snow on the mountains."

In addition, even if the C’s wanted to leave the Northwest League, where would they go? The high-A league around these parts is the Midwestern League, of which Vancouver could never be a part by virtue of geography. Ditto the Advanced-A California League, and the AA Texas League. So really, the only options are either Triple-A (which we’ve already lost once) and exactly where we are - short season single-A.

The Canadians are going to be a short season ball team until someone either in the halls of power, or in the vaults of the financial world, decide to invest enough to bring the team up to Triple-A standard. Part of that investment would, I’m sorry to say, mean taking the team away from The Nat and sending it to a new stadium, likely in the part of town mentioned in the Tyee - near the railway station on Main Street.

Which leaves us with the quandry… do we take the new stadium and grow with the world, or do we stick with the Nat and make do?

Sadly, it seems the latter option is the only real option. As much as I’d love to see the C’s play a few games on the new FieldTurf in BC Place Stadium (come on, guys, thinkof the promotional possibilities in having baseball downtown, even on a one-off basis!), there just isn’t anyone in town prepared to give baseball the chance it deserves.

That said, if the best we can hope for is another ten years at The Nat, well that’s a pretty decent fallback option. It’s not shiny, it doesn’t work well, it’s a pain in the ass for players and fans… But it’s still The Nat.

People still drive from across North America to touch the infield grass here. And really, if that’s the worst we can hope for, I’m cool with that.