Ticket prices, Spring Training, skating & more

[Mikey]

from Cubs.com on facebook
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->12/4 Ticket prices, Spring Training, skating & more
Share
Fri at 4:31pm

The Cubs recognize these are tough economic times, so ticket prices for 2010 home games will essentially be flat for 50 percent of the seats. The "bronze" and "silver" level ticket prices will basically stay the same, while the "gold" tickets on average will increase about $2 and the "platinum" level will increase on average about $5.

"This isn't the year to go crazy on ticket price increases," Cubs president Crane Kenney said Friday. "The Ricketts [family] made it clear in their opening press conference that all of the profits in the business stay in the business."

Kenney addressed some other Cubs topics at Wrigley Field:

* SEASON TICKETS: Attention anyone on the waiting list: There's hope. Right now, there are about 120,000 people on the waiting list. The Cubs will have 700 new tickets available for 2010. Kenney said existing season ticket holders will be allowed to relocate to the now available locations if they chose. Stay tuned for more information on that.

* SPRING TRAINING: The Cubs should have an announcement in January about whether they will keep their Spring Training headquarters in Arizona or move to Florida for the 2012 season. The team has narrowed its list to two sites in Collier County near Naples, Fla., and two sites in Maricopa County, Ariz., including one linked to the Gila River Indian Reservation.

"The way we're sizing this up is we've had a great 50 years in Arizona and they've been great partners," Kenney said. "What [Cubs chairman] Tom [Ricketts] and the family is looking at is where should we spend the next 50 years."

Naples has become a very viable option, and the Cubs do recognize that travel will be an issue in Florida. The closest teams are in Fort Myers, where the Red Sox and Twins both train. Kenney said he is considering all factors, including the demographics of the two states, to determine the best place to make a sizable investment.

"From the attractiveness of the business offers, it's certainly even," Kenney said.

The Cubs aren't looking to build a smaller Wrigley Field, but replicate the Wrigley experience, he said. They want fans to be able to walk to the ballpark from their hotel and have restaurants, retail and golf nearby. Mesa Mayor Scott Smith has said he hopes the Cubs' long tradition in the city will count, and Kenney said it does mean something to the Ricketts family.

"The deciding factor will be training for the players," Kenney said. "Tom [Ricketts] has said at the end of the day, if it's a push on all other fronts, where we can train the players to perform the best is where we'll go."

* WRIGLEY FIELD: The Ricketts family took a tour of the ballpark from top to bottom, examining everything from the washrooms to the players' lounge to the scoreboard. There is currently some work being done to upgrade. Kenney said the family told him to "think long-term" in terms of improvements. Fans should notice better washroom facilities and concessions. Part of the process has been Kenney taste-testing hot dogs to find the best one.

The players should have a better weight room when they report in 2010. The umpires' dressing room is being relocated. The back of the scoreboard is being repaired and updated. There are no plans for a video scoreboard, but the team is looking into having replays and stats available for fans at the ballpark to use on their iPhones and other hand-held devices.

The team is negotiating with businesses to find a sponsor for the billboards projected for left field. Kenney said the goal is to preserve the culture of Wrigley Field but also bring in revenue.

The team hopes to create a club on the mezzanine level where Suites 1-6 are currently located. About 80 tickets will be available for that location, and fans will have access to their own concessions and a bar. The tickets will be sold as season tickets. Expect an announcement sometime after Christmas.

* TRIANGLE BUILDING: The Cubs are interviewing architects and engineers to get the project going. The building, which will be located on Clark Street, west of Wrigley Field, could house offices, a restaurant and retail options.

* ICE RINK: The Cubs are building an ice rink in the parking lot west of Wrigley Field which will be open this winter. More details to come. It's being done in conjunction with the Chicago Park District, and because of the interest created by the NHL Winter Classic played at Wrigley on Jan. 1.

-- Carrie Muskat<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Mikey]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->12/4 Looking ahead to Indy
Share
Fri at 6:47pm

It appears as many as three teams are interested in Milton Bradley, and GM Jim Hendry will spend next week at the Winter Meetings in Indianapolis trying to find the right match.

The Cubs may be able to take care of some of the items on Hendry's wish list with the right trade. The tweaks are minor for 2010, and include finding a center fielder, a veteran right-handed reliever, and a right-handed bench player who could play the outfield.

Bradley would seem to be difficult to move, partly because he is owed $21 million over the next two years and because of his lack of production on the field. But other teams have players and contracts that, for whatever reason, they want to move as well. The Cubs also could take on a player in exchange for Bradley, and then deal that player to another club.

As for center field, it would seem that Reed Johnson would be a perfect fit for the Cubs. The Cubs did not want to offer him arbitration because of budget limitations. But that doesn't mean Johnson can't come back. If he can't find a better deal as a free agent, expect the two sides to resume talks.

The Cubs have had conversations with Detroit about Curtis Granderson, but it's difficult to believe the Tigers will trade the popular center fielder.

As much as some fans would like to have Mark DeRosa back, he also is out of the team's price range.

* Cubs athletic trainer Mark O'Neal reports Alfonso Soriano, Aramis Ramirez and Geovany Soto are sticking to their rehab routines and are making progress. Ted Lilly, who had arthroscopic surgery on his left shoulder, will be re-examined after Jan. 1, and then could begin a throwing program.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Brock]

Not that I want DeRosa or Johnson back, but reading about how they are out of the Cubs price range after we threw $7.5 million at Grabow really kind of pisses me off.

[The Dude]

Reading how Saito got a one year, $3.2M deal pisses me off.

[Andy]

<!--quoteo(post=70872:date=Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM:name=Brock)-->QUOTE (Brock @ Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Not that I want DeRosa or Johnson back, but reading about how they are out of the Cubs price range after we threw $7.5 million at Grabow really kind of pisses me off.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

DeRosa wants 3/27. That's why he's out of the Cubs price range.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=70883:date=Dec 7 2009, 09:54 AM:name=The Dude)-->QUOTE (The Dude @ Dec 7 2009, 09:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Reading how Saito got a one year, $3.2M deal pisses me off.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Saito is 40 years old and was not allowed to pitch on back to back days last year.

[Brock]

<!--quoteo(post=70885:date=Dec 7 2009, 10:11 AM:name=Andy)-->QUOTE (Andy @ Dec 7 2009, 10:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=70872:date=Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Not that I want DeRosa or Johnson back, but reading about how they are out of the Cubs price range after we threw $7.5 million at Grabow really kind of pisses me off.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

DeRosa wants 3/27. That's why he's out of the Cubs price range.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Well for me, whenever it is said that someone is out of the Cubs price range it just goes to show how poorly Hendry has managed his resources. A team with a $135 million payroll shouldn't have to say that they can't afford someone that fills a need.

Again... it's not about DeRosa specifically.. but just anticipating the next names that come up that the same thing will be said about.

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=70894:date=Dec 7 2009, 11:56 AM:name=Brock)-->QUOTE (Brock @ Dec 7 2009, 11:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=70885:date=Dec 7 2009, 10:11 AM:name=Andy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andy @ Dec 7 2009, 10:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=70872:date=Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM:name=Brock)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brock @ Dec 6 2009, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Not that I want DeRosa or Johnson back, but reading about how they are out of the Cubs price range after we threw $7.5 million at Grabow really kind of pisses me off.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

DeRosa wants 3/27. That's why he's out of the Cubs price range.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Well for me, whenever it is said that someone is out of the Cubs price range it just goes to show how poorly Hendry has managed his resources. A team with a $135 million payroll shouldn't have to say that they can't afford someone that fills a need.

<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Ding, and the sad thing is we are talking about not being able to afford middle of the road talent. The Grabow signing makes me madder every time I think about it because there is a glut of RPs on the market, we have quality internal candidates, and he's mediocre at best.

[BT]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->A team with a $135 million payroll shouldn't have to say that they can't afford someone that fills a need.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why is that, exactly? Why should the level of the payroll have anything to do with whether or not the payroll is flexible?

I'm hearing reports that the Yankees are cutting costs. And their payroll is over 200 million.

Putting aside whether or not Hendry has spent 135 million wisely (I'd agree he hasn't), it doesn't change the fact that the Trib could easily have jacked the payroll up over a sustainable amount in order to make the team more attractive to buyers (by winning). So if, for whatever reason, the new owners say that 135 is too high, and the payroll is going to either stay the same or come down, by definition Hendry can't afford to ADD to the payroll. And it doesn't matter what the current payroll is.

[Coldneck]

<!--quoteo(post=70905:date=Dec 7 2009, 01:14 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 7 2009, 01:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->A team with a $135 million payroll shouldn't have to say that they can't afford someone that fills a need.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why is that, exactly? Why should the level of the payroll have anything to do with whether or not the payroll is flexible?

I'm hearing reports that the Yankees are cutting costs. And their payroll is over 200 million.

Putting aside whether or not Hendry has spent 135 million wisely (I'd agree he hasn't), it doesn't change the fact that the Trib could easily have jacked the payroll up over a sustainable amount in order to make the team more attractive to buyers (by winning). So if, for whatever reason, the new owners say that 135 is too high, and the payroll is going to either stay the same or come down, by definition Hendry can't afford to ADD to the payroll. And it doesn't matter what the current payroll is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's all well and good, and I agree with you. But then Hendry uses his limited resources on a guy like Grabow when the Dodgers are shopping Sherrill and there are an adundant of middling relievers looking for jobs. That's the rub. He's done this same thing over and over again to the point that we have no flexibility to go out and get guys we actually need.

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=70918:date=Dec 7 2009, 01:03 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 7 2009, 01:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=70905:date=Dec 7 2009, 01:14 PM:name=BT)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BT @ Dec 7 2009, 01:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <!--quotec-->A team with a $135 million payroll shouldn't have to say that they can't afford someone that fills a need.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Why is that, exactly? Why should the level of the payroll have anything to do with whether or not the payroll is flexible?

I'm hearing reports that the Yankees are cutting costs. And their payroll is over 200 million.

Putting aside whether or not Hendry has spent 135 million wisely (I'd agree he hasn't), it doesn't change the fact that the Trib could easily have jacked the payroll up over a sustainable amount in order to make the team more attractive to buyers (by winning). So if, for whatever reason, the new owners say that 135 is too high, and the payroll is going to either stay the same or come down, by definition Hendry can't afford to ADD to the payroll. And it doesn't matter what the current payroll is.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

That's all well and good, and I agree with you. But then Hendry uses his limited resources on a guy like Grabow when the Dodgers are shopping Sherrill and there are an adundant of middling relievers looking for jobs. That's the rub. He's done this same thing over and over again to the point that we have no flexibility to go out and get guys we actually need.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->


That's both true and untrue. Hendry HAS overpaid for guys like Grabow and Miles. But the cumulative 2-3 million overspent on those guys have very little impact on the overall budget. Many on the board keep acting like there are 12 guys on the team like that, and there isn't. There were 2. And one of them is gone.

[Coldneck]

BT, next time you and Jim are sharing a hot dog can you please mention that I'd like to be signed as bullpen catcher. I was a catcher in little league and am a very positive influence. I'd even take a 2 year deal. 2 years / $200K is all I need. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/grin.gif[/img]

[BT]

<!--quoteo(post=70931:date=Dec 7 2009, 02:04 PM:name=Coldneck)-->QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 7 2009, 02:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->BT, next time you and Jim are sharing a hot dog can you please mention that I'd like to be signed as bullpen catcher. I was a catcher in little league and am a very positive influence. I'd even take a 2 year deal. 2 years / $200K is all I need. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/grin.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I'll tell him, but your 100k contract might end up blocking our trade for Halladay, so I doubt it.

[Scarey]

<!--quoteo(post=70934:date=Dec 7 2009, 04:28 PM:name=BT)-->QUOTE (BT @ Dec 7 2009, 04:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec--><!--quoteo(post=70931:date=Dec 7 2009, 02:04 PM:name=Coldneck)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Coldneck @ Dec 7 2009, 02:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->BT, next time you and Jim are sharing a hot dog can you please mention that I'd like to be signed as bullpen catcher. I was a catcher in little league and am a very positive influence. I'd even take a 2 year deal. 2 years / $200K is all I need. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/grin.gif[/img]<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->


I'll tell him, but your 100k contract might end up blocking our trade for Halladay, so I doubt it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/funny.gif[/img]

I don't think there was a more perfect response.

[The Dude]

http://www.desipio.com/?p=2580