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.)
  • Mrcub1958

    Love it. If we stay this size is a must. Brett, sounds like desire for the 2014 season?

    • Brett

      That’s the buzz, yes. Definitely wouldn’t be this year.

  • justinjabs

    I think the Mariners’ huuuge video board is awesome, and I really like the location of it tucked away up there. Your mockup at Wrigley I am not sure of. It would take some getting used to. I just hope they do cool things with it … more advanced stats, replays, goosebump-giving highlight reels to start things out, closeups. But not too much cheesy in-between inning stuff, if any.

    • Brett

      I love the Mariners’ one, especially because it can be reconfigured on the fly to be a full-screen, or partial screen. But obviously an 11,000 square footer would be too big at Wrigley …

      • justinjabs

        Miller Park scoreboard is also 6,000 feet. So this one would be like that, but shorter and longer, right? And off to the side, obviously.

        What’s the chance you think that the Cubs would incorporate stuff like BABIP, wOBA, etc on the board if they had more space and perhaps put a page in the end of the scorecard explaining the “new” stats?

        • hansman1982

          Didn’t they do *some* of this last year with the RF video board?

    • Pat

      The cheesy stuff is what pays the bills.

    • Patrick W.

      The Mariners are doing something smart. They open on the road but are opening the ballpark and playing the game on the new Jumbotron for free. I will be there. Follow me on Twitter for pictures :) @BaseNarcissist

      • Brett

        That is awesome.

      • justinjabs

        That is pretty smart.

      • hansman1982

        Shameful Twitter Self-Promotion…

  • MichiganGoat

    So you put DeRosa up there to get all the ladies to swoon didn’t you? Next time I’d suggest Dick Tidrow he awesomeness would result in an immediate agreement.

    • Leggy Mountbatten

      Or the Reuschel Brothers,

  • J Wilson

    I think it looks ridiculous, sorry. It’s far too big, there is no neighborhood in left field now, from the fans’ perspective. If it was half that size, I could stomach it. Damn, people just can’t watch a game anymore, the actual game isn’t enough.

  • Okie Cub

    I’m for a jumbotron for all the revenue reasons, but man….that would take a LOT of getting used to.

    • Westbound Willie

      It looks ridiculous. That will never happen.

      • Dale’s Ear

        Is it weird that the more comments you post knocking the jumbotron the more I really like it? This is a rough sketch of what it “could” look like, so yeah the sketch is gonna look a little ridiculous. I’d also bet my entire piggy bank that this will happen in some form or another so nanahnanah boo boo!!

  • Clark Addison

    Looks like it would block the wind coming in from left field. Right handed hitters would love it.

  • MJ

    I have a feeling that they’re not talking about an actual 6,000 square foot video screen, but maybe a 6,000 square foot fixture that can house a sizable video board plus a few large permanent advertisements. A lot like what’s in Nationals Park or Target Field, if you look up pictures of those. That’s probably why they won’t budge with the city on it. That way, they can consolidate all their ads in one spot and get the rooftoppers off their case.

  • praying the cubs get ready to win

    Would the score board go in left or would they remove the taboo old score board and put a bigger jumbo torn in center and then maybe a smaller one in left like the one they put in right. just thinking of additional revenue. I still vote for a new ball park in the suburbs like Rosemont or Arlington Heights, because I think Tunney will lose his job and the roof top owners will all be so sorry they pushed the Cubs too far and properties worth very little, maybe 10-20% of their value. They should just accept they really have made millions stealing from the Cubs and enough is enough. They may lose their perfect view but people will still have parties with some or partial of the view, but if the Cubs move, they will have nothing. Teams have moved many times before.

    • Pat

      You wouldn’t have to remove the old scoreboard. You could put the new one right in front of it and avoid any of the landmark hassles.

  • walterj

    I love the idea . I hope it goes in .

  • Dustin S

    The great thing heading into the new baseball season is that you never know what will happen, but there will be surprises. There have been plenty of seasons where the Cards (and sometimes even the Cubs) were picked in pre-season to all but have the division wrapped up before it even started. But then injuries happen, star players disappoint, and a team no one expected steps up. The Cubs were 71-91 in 1983 and surprised everyone the next year.

    I don’t have any delusions of a World Series this year, but I’m just saying that it’s going to be fun to see how it all plays out. Will the Angels buy a championship this year or will they end up flopping like many Yankees seasons? Who will be this season’s Samardzija, Castro, or Rizzo, if there is one? Will the draft race be the highlight of 2013?

  • FFP

    Worse than “cheesy”– I was in Phoenix when the new stadium (then BOB–a Chicago based product) opened. One of the several things wrong with that park was what they used the big screen for. The (then smaller) screen often had a pair of cartoon clapping hands instructing fans when to applaud. “That was a double play! That is good for us! Everybody clap!” which everybody in their brand new Diamondbacks gear did on cue (always after a slight delay as folks checked with each other to be sure that all of Stepford was complying). Embarrassing.


  • When the Music’s Over

    That proposed scoreboard better be tough, as it would take a beating throughout the year.

    • Scott

      Unfortunately if the past is any indicator of the future, the beating would come mostly from the visiting team though.

  • Earl Cunningham

    Tough day for the Colvin fan club.

  • Kyle

    Somewhere between 75 and 78 seems about right, pre-firesale.

    Where’s Doc? I need the odds of a 77-win true talent team being at .500 or better in July?

    Gosh, this season just needs to start already. I want to see Samardzija rip up a weak Pittsburgh lineup and let things just roll from there.

    • Brett

      “Where’s Doc? I need the odds of a 77-win true talent team being at .500 or better in July?”

      Yup. I also would very much like to know that.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      *flash of light and smoke* I was summoned? Let’s see, usually teams have played about 90 games by mid-July. So, the probability of 45+ wins given a 0.475 “true” team *if* we assume that the opposition in those first 90 games is representative of the whole 162 game schedule is: *waves wand* BINOMIALUS PROBABILUS!

      0.36. That might sound awful, but wouldn’t a 0.36 OBP batter look good in the Cubs lineup?

      I know that the Cubs actually have a pretty rough schedule in the first 6 weeks, but that’s only through mid-May. I’m assuming that they will be making up for that by playing the 0.500 and sub 0.500 teams in the two months after that. By the All-Star break, it is not unreasonable to expect that their median opponent is a 0.500 team.

      • Kyle

        36% chance of .500 nearing the deadline? That doesn’t sound awful at all. Sounds better than I expected.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Well, a 77 win team is a 0.475 team. Basically, that means that you expect them to lose 1 game on 0.500 every 22 games: that is, it is most probable that they will be 10-12 after 22 games against a schedule of 0.500 teams. By 90 games, the most probable outcome would be a 43-47 team. (Obviously, I’m rounding up: you cannot win 42.75 games, so 43 is slightly more probable than 42.) So, playing 0.500+ ball at that point is just 2+ more “heads” than tails.

          (Again, if it turns out that the schedule is unusually rough or easy over those 90 games, then a key assumption is violated: but 90 games is a big chunk of the season.)

  • Jp3

    Corey Patterson also got released by the mets if we wanted to pick him up then ship him to Iowa. He’d make a great example to BJax as a cautionary tale to how long you play in the majors being an average power/speed guy striking out at a huge clip.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      But BJax takes walks, which Patterson did not. Their limitations actually are opposite ones: great batting eye, poor contact vs. bad batting eye, good contact.

      • Jp3

        My appologies fellas, I just generally meant being a CF as well as a bust and they BOTH K’d way too much. That part is indisputable.

      • davidalanu

        I’m not sure how you get good contact in regards to Patterson. Dude still struck out 20% of his PAs. The only two years where we was over 500 AB’s he K’d 142 and 168 times. Sure, he looks good in regards to contact when you compare him to Jackson, but overall, Patterson wasn’t a good contact guy.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Patterson K’d a lot because he swung at pitches a mile outside the strike zone. However, his ability to make contact with pitches well outside of the strike zone actually was pretty impressive: he was far, far more successful at it than most big league players would be. If the ability to get your bat on awful pitches twice as frequently as other players was a useful skill, then Patterson would have been an All-Star.

          (Alternatively, if you had people play tennis with baseball bats, then Corey would have been great.)

          Here’s the problem: that’s not a useful skill in baseball, and doing twice as well at hitting awful pitches than the average player does not yield as good of results as making average contact on only strikes. As pitchers are not complete idiots, they took advantage of this.

    • hansman1982

      He isn’t BJax though. Patterson has a career BB rate of below 5%. Jackson could very well have a BB rate above 10%.

      Patterson has a career AVG of .252 with a .290 OBP. If Jackson can make enough contact to get to a .250 AVG you will see an OBP of around .330-.340.

      I don’t think Jackson will have a hard time playing a long time in the big leagues (the speed, defense and OBP will make him (at worst) a 5th OF), it’s that the Cubs want him to have a handful of seasons as an average or better starter.

  • guy

    Wow, that is the worst possible look for Wrigley Field. It blocks the view of the neighborhood, it completely ruins the charm of the stadium, and it looks ridiculous. It clashes with the stadium in the same way Soldier Field now looks like an alien spaceship landed in the middle of an old-fashioned limestone arena. I could not be more opposed to this. Just terrible.

    In contrast, the new right field scoreboard basically fits in perfectly – it’s unobtrusive, it doesn’t diminish any of the inherent charm of the stadium, and it’s useful. Jumbotrons, on the other hand, will only be used to show 5 replays a game and spend the rest of the time blasting advertisements and probably a digital Vienna Sausage race and kiss cam or something. I couldn’t even begin to imagine a less appropriate addition to Wrigley than that.

    • Westbound Willie

      This looks like a guy that would wear a stripped suit with a plaid shirt. Anybody that thinks this looks even half way decent better put down the crack pipe and back away from the computer.

  • hansman1982

    “which means I’ll have to be vigilant to avoid any mention …”

    I’ll be sure to live-tweet the premier and put @BleacherNation in each and every one. Then email you all of them, UPS Overnight a printout and hack BN to post them there.


  • Kyle

    That looks awesome.

    Completely, utterly crazy thought: That sure would block some of the wind blowing in from left, and we’ve got a few high-profile RH power-hitting prospects we’re counting on.

  • hansman1982

    I also seem to remember a lot of hullabaloo about the Under Armour and Toyota sign ads. People got used to those items, people will get used to a jumbotron.

    • auggie1955

      The Toyota and Under Armor signs both look like crap and so does that jumbotron.

      • hansman1982

        So I take it you are anti-in-Wrigley advertising?

      • Westbound Willie

        Don’t forget about the Kraft noodle. That was another brilliant idea.

  • Cheryl

    It looks like it would fit perfectly – when the cubs move.

    • Westbound Willie

      Bingo. For the people that think this is a possibility I would guess that your houses are in complete disarray and architecturally a pure eyesore.

      For this I have to resort to a


  • Kevin

    If the Cubs made only $27M in 2012 (rough estimates per earlier post) with their payroll, there’s no way to compete unless they generate a hell of a lot more revenue. The 6,000 sq ft Jumbotron will go a long way to help revenue, but will it be enough? The BIG contracts signed yesterday may be the current market but it’s just getting out of hand. At what point does the bubble bust? How much would the average fan be willing to pay for the MLB package?

    • Kyle

      It was the second-highest revenue in the National League and 4th in MLB. If that wasn’t enough, nobody makes enough outside of the Yankees.

  • Kramden

    It’s a monstrosity and completely out of scale to anything at Wrigley. Takes away from the current scoreboard and makes that icon look like a bad pendant on the gold necklace which is represented by the arc sweep created by the left and right field bleachers.

    In all honesty it looks to me that a Jumbotron of that size and even bigger would be best placed traversing two or three of the rooftops across Waveland. I think that would be its ideal placement.

  • Westbound Willie

    It’s a hideous idea that someone scratched out with a couple crayons. It looks like the guys from South Park or the heckler did this. It’s all a big joke.

    Good one!


  • Rocket

    Does the size of the jumbotron have anything to do with revenue? Would the Cubs receive double the ad money from a 6000 sq ft screen than from a 3000 sq ft screen?

  • Spencer

    The Walking Dead always reairs after The Talking Dead, so you could watch GoT and then catch the reair of TWD if you could stay up a couple extra hours (take the early shift with the kiddo).

    Also, the size, position, and shape of that jumbotron look…not good at all. Rough sketch yada, yada, but I would be opposed to something like that. I think it would look better if it was more square shaped. And smaller. It looks disproportioned.

  • Edward

    Who wants a video board at Wrigley? Gross. No thanks. Why?

  • cavemencubbie

    Charm? Neighborhood view? Iconic scoreboard? I tell you what. I will let you visit and see Wrigley field for free, while I pay to see winning Cubs baseball in Rosemont or where ever. Rahm can mow the damn lawn in the outfield and replace the rusting structural steel in the stadium for all the artsy intellectuals who want to see charm and neighborhood views at Wrigley Field.

    • Edward

      You say artsy intellectuals like its a bad thing.

  • Die hard

    If they are serious about this might as well tear down Wrigley cause effect of transforming tradition will have been accomplished

    • DarthHater

      If, by “tradition,” you mean the tradition of having a broken-down stadium, outrageously crappy clubhouse facilities, and inability to take advantage of revenue streams from which all competitor teams benefit, then yes, you are correct.

      • Die hard

        Broken down stadium may not be structurally able to support that much weight… Another reason to move to Rosemont

  • Edward

    Anybody know how much revenue these Jumbotrons generate?

    • Die hard

      Good question but listening to game on radio beats watching on tv

  • DarthHater

    That jumbotron looks like it would partially block the view of LF for the CF rooftop and would block the view of a lot of CF and RF for the LF rooftop.