Are People Worried About Too Many Triples At Citi Field?

Just curious: but since people are worried about so many homeruns at the New Yankee Stadium, are they also worried about the amount of triples at Citi/Taxpayer Field? From Buster Olney:

 

• From the Elias Sports Bureau: Because of its spacious dimensions and high outfield walls, the Mets' new home, Citi Field, is quickly gaining a reputation as one of the best triples parks in the majors. There have been 12 three-base hits in the last seven games at Citi Field, with at least one in each game, including three in the Mets' loss to the Marlins on Wednesday. In the 45 seasons that the Mets called Shea Stadium home (1964-2008) there were only two stretches in which triples were hit in each of seven-or-more consecutive games there: an eight-game streak in August 1965 and a seven-game streak in September 1976.

 

It seems as if, after the season is over, the Yankees will move the fences back and the Mets will move them in. You wonder why they never figured out to do this while they were spending billions of dollars building these places in the first place. But then again, that whole "planning" thing was never New York's strong suit (see: the whole Second Avenue Subway saga).

But I wonder if there will be as much WFAN caller outrage over all those triples as there has been over the homeruns at "Coors Field East" (so is Citi Field now "Comerica Park East"?). But as we know from Coors Field (humidor) and Comerica Park (moved fences in), teams will do anything in their power to be as neutral as possible towards pitchers/hitters. I just need to figure out which one the New Yankee Stadium is because, according to ESPN's Park Factors, one Yankee Stadium (in the Bronx) is a hitter's park, but the other Yankee Stadium (in New York, NY) is a pitcher's park. Odd indeed