Now that the presumptive numbers are up on the scoreboard, it looks as if the PawSox ballpark discussion is settling down for an earnest debate at City, State and Baseball-Fan levels.
On the 15th, Paul Grimaldi offered analysis in the Journal headed, "Proposed PawSox stadium's value can be difficult to measure." Read the piece here.
Friday's Projo has further articles and analysis. Donita Naylor went to Pawtucket to check the blood pressure of fans at the home opener. Anecdotal research, perhaps, but vivid reactions here.
Beth Comery writes in a somewhat negative vein in her article titled "Stadium Proposal A Lose/Lose" here on Providence Daily Dose.
And our previous post "Stadium Proponents Hold Press Conference" provided links to the PawSox owners' complete economic analysis, architects' concepts for the stadium and more.
On RIPR's On Politics Blog offers Ian Donnis's look at the proposal, "PawSox Providence Ballpark would Cost State About $2M Per Year." You can read it or hear it here.
His colleague, Scott MacKay rolled up his sleeves and dissected the pros and the cons of the subject in "The PawSox Baseball Move to Providence: Good or Bad?" Decide for yourself by listening to Scott or reading him here.
Finally, for the moment anyway...
Comments from the Cranston Style blog by Josh Wood, under the headline: "The Providence Ballpark Proposal and The Fuzzy Math of Stadium Economics." You can read this one here.
Stay tuned, sports fans and lovers of the walkable city. it's getting interesting.