Cubs Notes and Preview: Cubs value to double?

The big news surrounding the Cubs is of course the Wrigley renovation deal that apparently will be announced on Opening Day Monday.

The Sun Times broke the story and Dave Kaplan of Comcast cites a source that speculates the value of the Cubs could double in result.

Multiple experts told me Friday morning that by 2017, the revenues will increase so dramatically that the franchise will probably double in value since the Ricketts family paid $845 million in October of 2009 for 95 percent of the team, Wrigley Field and a stake in Comcast Sports Net Chicago.

The deal reportedly will allow an increase in the number of night games from 30 to 40, or potentially, close to 50. The Cubs will finally get their jumbotron as well as increased signage in the stadium.

This deal seems to be getting settled without the approval of the rooftop owners, however.  They were a focal point in the negotiations and we haven't heard the last from them. It makes me wonder how much Alderman Tom Tunney promised them in this deal.

Statement from Beth Murphy, owner of Murphy's Bleachers and spokesperson for the Wrigleyville Rooftops Association:

"We reserve judgment until said proposals are publicized, however we are deeply troubled that 16 small businesses were not party to talks where their contractual rights were at stake. Rooftop owners reserve the right to use any and all means necessary to enforce the remaining 11 years of our 20-year contract. We support a renovated Wrigley Field, but the neighborhood and its businesses should be partners in the debate as we have over the last 30 years."

Now that the off the field issues are almost settled lets look at tonight’s preview.

Cubs at Braves 6 p.m. on Comcast SportsNet Plus

Today’s line up vs. Mike Minor:

1. Dave Sappelt CF
2. Starlin Castro SS
3. Anthony Rizzo 1B
4. Alfonso Soriano LF
5. Scott Hairston RF
6. Welington Castillo C
7. Brent Lillibridge 3B
8. Alberto Gonzalez 2B
9. Scott Feldman P

What to watch for:

  • John: My guy to watch today is Scott Feldman. If he can survive the Upton brothers and the rest of that Brave line up, it may go a long way in his bid to stay in the rotation with a Matt Garza return looming.
  • Tom: I’m hoping Alfonso Soriano can get himself started. He has had some monster games in the ATL and his bat is sorely needed. Have to say I will have one eye on a closing situation to see how it plays out.
  • Felzz: Scott Hariston, I'm going to kid myself into thinking that the Hariston/Schierholtz platoon is a competitive one and that playing time might be weighted based on performance. If this is the case, and it most likely isn't, then Hariston should be motivated by Schierholtz's heroics to step his game and match Nate the great hit for hit.

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    It just tans my hide that these rooftop owners have any say in what the Cubs do. When I saw a few sun bathers on television on the roof top back in the day, I just thought it was a novelty. These owners have no product!!! They just leech off the Cubs kinda like how Napster gave us "free" music!

  • In reply to bocabobby:

    "Leech" is appropriate word

  • In reply to bocabobby:

    I agree. But the only reason they do is because the Cubs agreed to it.

  • I hope Feldman proves he more than Volstad 2.0. Both had good X FIPs. Let's see if Feldman can pitch better with men on base.

    I am a little more hopeful that he can pitch better than Volstad, he's moving from the AL and a tough park.

  • fb_avatar

    I usually don't delve into the politics side of the Cubs since I went away to college so correct me if im wrong but what right do these rooftop owners have to influence decisions the Cubs want to make? All I've seen them do is make money off the team while contributing nothing or doing anything.

    If I were Rickets id say screw them....but I guess that's why im not the billionaire.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Hi Marcel, not that I care about the RTOs at all but they do have an agreement in place with the Cubs that they pay the Cubs 17% of their profits annually for an "uninterrupted sweep" view of the ballpark.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    what boogens said. The rooftop ownwers have no right at all, except for the fact that they have a 20-year contract with the cubs. TribCorp could have taken the long view, realized that the stadium will need renovtions and new revenue streams, and gone the route that Rickets is trying to go now. But they didn't, they took the short term fix (shocker, I know) and made a deal with the rooftop owners. Deal includes unobstructed views. This deal with the city doesn't finalize things in any way - so far the rooftop owners have taken the political road to get what they want, and they seem to have lost - but they still have a legal road they can take, ie enforcing the contract. Don't count on those Jumbotron replays just yet, it might take another 11 years to get it.

  • I agree that the rooftop owners haver no standing whatever. I have always liked the idea of having them out there, but just as another oddity of the franchise. If they lose revenue, hard cheese!

  • In reply to BLOOMIE1937:

    Do you not understand how contracts work?

  • Feldman will hopefully do fine and he should have plenty of opportunities since I do not believe Garza will be back until late May or early June. I just don't see the Cubs rushing him back anytime soon.
    Cubs have looked pretty well so far, however Atlanta will be their first real challenge of the season. Looking for Soriano to put one over the fence tonite!

    Go Cubbies!!

  • fb_avatar

    I would pack up and leave. Or here's a dumb thought. Let the Cubs put their JumboTron up and take some of your "gift" profits and elevate your seating area, and then milk the Cubs for eleven more years in blatant copyright infringement, a loophole that by the way should allow the Cubs to break that contract. I fail to even see the alleged romanticist side that thinks the ambiance created by the rooftops is a good thing. What's next? Helicopters hovering over Wrigley with premium drink packages for fans willing to shell out the dough for a true, on top view of the game?

  • Yeah the rooftop thing just got out of hand like everything else in that neighborhood since 98. Here is to Feldman continuing our good starts.

  • It seems pretty clear that Rahm told Tunney to back away from the rooftop owners, shut up, and get the deal done.

    Tunney reversed course with his quotes yesterday, saying that the Cubs agreement with the rooftops was a private matter, and the city wouldn't be involved. That's distancing himself quite a bit from a group he was beholden to just a few weeks ago.

  • In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    Yep sounds like he buckled.

  • Javier Baez with a hr in the first.

  • In reply to Caps:

    Trade him now. ;-)

  • I bet any money that a bunch of sleazy bag lawyers who represent those roof top owners will file lawsuits next week against the city and the Cubs.

  • Marcel, you are absolutely correct. The RTO's have no right to influence the Cubs in their decisions. And this is why: The Cubs are limited as to what they can do because of City ordinances and Landmark status, etc. Hence why they are "negotiating" with the City. The separate contract the Cubs have with the RTO's is just that, a SEPARATE contract. The RTO's can lobby the City to try and use its muscle to their benefit, but the Cubs can do whatever they want pending agreement from the City. If that happens to violate their contract with the RTO's then the RTO's can sue them. Unless of course that contract isn't quite exactly as the RTO's have been portraying. That contract hasn't been released publicly, so none of us really know what's in it. But their use of their Alderman and the media is very telling for me. The companies who supply the food and beer etc, also have a contract with the Cubs, why can't they have a say in the renovation issue? Lol.

  • From the Braves broadcast, "It's always nice to get the lead on the Cubs so you don't have to listen to their fans."
    Chip Caray: "Heh heh heh. It is an acquired taste isn't it?"

    Really? Way to stay classy Braves broadcasters and disparage a whole fan base in one fell swoop.

  • In reply to Pura Vida:

    I take that as a badge of honor. Cubs fans are everywhere. We travel well and represent loud and proud. Heck, when the Cubs travel to San Diego, the Padres fans hate us because there are more of us than them.

    The only mistake the color man made was thinking that just because the Cubs weren't in the lead, there fans would be any less vocal.

  • I'm going to guess that Ricketts is going to buy out the contract from the RTOs once there is an agreement in place with the city. He was willing to lose money on various players like Zambrano and this contract is probably small potatoes compared to all of that as well as the new revenue streams coming in. Make them a deal they can't refuse.

  • For those of you keeping track, the Cubs' team batting average now at .115.

  • fb_avatar

    Ugh Scott Feldman! Gonna be a long year again..... Had my fingers crossed he could get out of that bases loaded jam.......

  • Finally got back. Long day but totally worth it. Looks like I haven't missed much with the Cubs.

  • fb_avatar

    Feldman wasn't as bad as it seems, wasn't getting hit hard at all, just had some problems with his command(4 walks). First 2 runs scored without a hit. Im not too worried about him, not gonna judge him on one start.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    I agree that Feldman's line is slightly misleading. He really battled all night long, but have to quibble about a couple things. First, his command was far worse than just "some problems." He walked 4 but hit a batter and also uncorked two wild pitches. Still, your point is taken. He wasn't hit too hard at all.
    2nd quibble is that the Braves scored their 1st run when Justin Upton launched one off Feldman.
    Still waiting for the bats to show some sign of life. And I'm already tired of Lillibridge.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Pura Vida:

    Thanks for tightening that up. Had heard the first 2 were scored without a hit. Agree though that you have to give the Braves some credit. Against a more aggressive, free-swinging team Feldman might have had a better night. Atlanta didn't do him any favors.

  • One more point: you really have to hand it to the Braves hitters for stringing out their ABs and making Feldman earn his outs. They noticed he was having trouble and let him dig his own holes. Braves hitters saw 149 pitches in the game, lead by Freddie Freeman who saw 24 in 4 ABs. Cubs hitters, in contrast, saw only 97 pitches. Obviously, this is partly due to the fact that Minor was throwing strikes and Feldman wasn't, but I think it also shows, in part, that the Braves had a better and more patient approach at the plate overall.

  • The Cubs' aggregate on-base percentage is below .200. That is incomprehensibly terrible. Far worse than even the club's biggest pre-season detractors could have imagined. SSS and all, but holy balls does this team suck on offense.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    Luckily it won't be like that all year...

  • fb_avatar

    Logan Watkins wants to pipp Barney

  • cubs could use ian stewarts bat in the lineup.

  • In reply to eddie35:


Leave a comment