Tomorrow night, the Season Three finale of ‘The Walking Dead’ airs opposite the Season Three premiere of ‘Game of Thrones.’ What is a nerd to do?! I guess I’ll opt for TWD, since it’s a finale, which would suffer more from incidental Twitter spoilers than a premiere. Which means I probably won’t get to GOT until the next day, which means I’ll have to be vigilant to avoid any mention …

  • The Cubs tied the Astros 6-6 last night in Houston, with Cubs regulars surprisingly going the whole way (and the Astros digging deeply into their bench much earlier – although, on the Houston roster, it can be hard to tell who’s a “starter” and who’s a “holy crap that guy is seriously on a big league roster?” bench guy. Not that I’m in a position to throw stones …). Edwin Jackson struck out nine in just four innings, which is incredible. He also gave up five earned runs in those four innings, which is incredible. Dioner Navarro homered for the fifth time this “Spring,” which I’m setting as the over/under for his homers all season. I’ll take the under.
  • The Red Sox are letting 28-year-old outfielder Ryan Sweeney go, and I wonder if he might be an interesting pick-up for the Cubs on a minor league deal, if that’s the best he can find. Right now, the Cubs’ AAA outfield depth consists of Brian Bogusevic (if he sticks with the Cubs), Darnell McDonald (if he sticks with the Cubs), Jae-Hoon Ha (a very young player who isn’t ready for the bigs), and, of course, Brett Jackson, whom the Cubs would prefer not to call up until he’s ready, rather than in a pinch. Seems like there’s a pretty wide opening and need for Sweeney as depth. He really struggled in Boston after being dealt by the A’s last year, but, hey, depth-ers can’t be choosers. He’s good defensively, can play all over the outfield, bats lefty, doesn’t strike out, sees a lot of pitches … I’d like him in the organization. Smart money says the Cubs are feeling him out.
  • An anonymous veteran scout offers his take on the Cubs, and it’s mostly what you would expect (if you can ignore that “Darwin Barney is clutch at the plate” thing – the scout is definitely dating himself). Many of the Cubs’ starters would be bench players on a good team.
  • Keith Law has the Cubs winning 77 games this year, which would be an impressive 16-game improvement from last year (how depressing is that?). Law wisely caveats his prediction on the Cubs not having a sell-off midseason, which, if they’re on a mid-70s win pace by midseason, they’re going to have a sell-off. That’s the primary reason I have a hard time predicting the Cubs to win more than 70 games this year.
  • (Apropos of little more than certain conversations that take place in the comments from time to time: Tyler Colvin did not make the Rockies, and has been sent to AAA.)
  • With all the JumboTron talk, I wanted to see just how large a 6,000 square foot video board – the minimum size the Cubs reportedly want – would look in left field at Wrigley, located in such a way as to not block any rooftop views. Here’s a rough mockup, to scale, of how big a 6,000 square foot board would look (and, yes, that is Mark DeRosa!):

  • It definitely looks very big, but I’m not sure it’s too big. I’ve been of the “bigger is better” mindset when it comes to the video board, but this might be just about as big as is reasonably possible. Any bigger, and it would really look out of place.
  • (Because one thing that Facebook actually does well is pictures, I shared that on Facebook as soon as I’d made it yesterday. In other words: you should “like” BN on Facebook so that you can catch things like this immediately. The Facebook version of the picture is also much larger, which would not fit here.)
  • cubfanincardinalland

    It’s a freaking baseball stadium, not the Sistine Chapel for crying out loud.

    • DarthHater

      With all the tourist traffic in the Sistine Chapel, the Church could generate some real revenue with a few ads on that ceiling… 😛

      • hansman1982

        The Word of God, presented by Ford.

  • cavemencubbie

    It is! Many ‘smart’ people lose sight of priorities. If I want to see art, I go to the Art Museum, neighborhoods, 35th and Shields. I can see grass grow in Lincoln Park and ivy at Northwestern or the University of Chicago. I visit Wrigley too see baseball, hopefully good winning baseball. If advertising makes for winning Cubs baseball; and in the process Wrigley loses it’s charm and the RTO crowd, it’s free views, so be it! There is no such thing as a free lunch! I want to see WINNING Cubs baseball.

    PS I grew up in Lake View, graduated from Lane, cut class to see my Cubs play, along with the other 3000 people in the stands on a Wednesday afternoon. Those other fans weren’t there to see beautiful Wrigley field, they were there to see baseball.

  • cubmig

    Re: the scoreboard. It’s a no brainer that I oppose a new scoreboard—–especially (and this is an unfair criticism of a photo-shopped presentation) as it might look in left field. The comment on how it might block the wind, is a point I’ve not read before and it’s a good one to contemplate. The wind is always talked about and “measured” watching the flags. It’s part of the nature of the Wrigley-game experience. I am opposed to it for other reasons as well.

    That said, ideas like a 21st century electronic JUMBO-TRON will persist as long as the “yenom” bug remains unsatisfied. (“Yenom” = Money). So…….if a monster is to claim a spot in Wrigley….then I say Pat’s idea of putting it in front of the old one sounds like the best compromise and least visual/legal intrusive of all I’ve seen or read—if it’s workable.

    I still hold hope that people realize that the a scoreboard should remain a scoreboard and not a commercial-laden cesspool and electronic cheerleader that adds nothing but distraction to the senses. The ballgame is on the field………..remember?

    • Tom A.

      It would look much better in center-field, not block views, not block wind !

      Move the old fashion scoreboard back to left-filed where it was in the first place !

  • cub nazi

    Wrigleyville… No renovation for you!

  • Nick

    Short and simple,

    We are at a baseball game! Not a Basketball game with cherrleaders and t shirts being tossed around after every TV timeout

  • Jono

    Without typical scoreboard information, it’s really just an electric advertising board. If it brings in $30+ million a year, im all for it

  • Jono

    Just that jumbotron alone could get you a verlander-caliber pitcher or a Hamilton-caliber position player. How can theu afford NOT to do this?

  • ajbulls23

    I can see the Cubs play winning or losing baseball anywhere. But there is only one Wrigley Field. That stadium is almost as big a draw as the team they put on the field. Leave the centerfield scoreboard alone. Keep using it as you always have. Put a smaller jumbotron in left for advertising. Work something out with the rooftops to share in some advertising there. But don’t change Wrigley. Wrigley the way it is, doesn’t cause the Cubs to lose games. Quit making excuses and build the team from the right way. With the right players in the right position. Lets have a true centerfielder for once.

  • Pingback: Chicago Cubs Sign Outfielder Ryan Sweeney to Minor League Deal | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

  • Thompsonville, Il_Cubs

    What is so special about Wrigley? What are we preserving? We have done nothing but lose its time for some change!

  • YourResidentJag

    I love how Brett posits that the Cubs will have a selloff if they’re in winning form by mid-season. A selloff of what? Other than Garza or maybe Fujikawa, who are the Cubs going to get of value? For DeJesus, Schierholtz or Navarro? And this is a selloff. I think people in Brett’s position worst fear is that the Cubs as Joe Sheehan has tabulated in his newsletter come out of this season with 80 wins. It makes less informed fans think that somehow now the Cubs have turned it around, except that a good majority of the players contributing to the wins won’t be around even next year. It also reduces the Cubs draft position which is awful if you’re in favor of the grand plan. Now, with big FAs signed, the argument has been that 80 wins is something this team would have achieved, so no spending should occur for multiple FAs for this reason. However, 80 wins with this roster as its constructed would be just as bad. And this team has that potential to be sufficiently mediocre because I don’t see a big sell off coming, unless I’m missing something.

  • Pingback: Obsessive Wrigley Renovation Watch: Deal Expected by Monday, Some Reported Details Trickle Out | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()