Scoring the Scoreboards

[batmagadanleadoff]

A random sampling of (all but one) modern MLB scoreboards. Which are your faves? Your least faves? Why?

Astros


Cards


Giants




(cont. in next post)

[batmagadanleadoff]

Mets


Nats



Orioles

[batmagadanleadoff]

Padres


Phillies


Pirates

[batmagadanleadoff]

Reds




Rockies


Dodgers




Braves

[batmagadanleadoff]

Twins


D-Backs

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

No Comerica, with it's giant Tigers with light-up eyes?

[Willets Point]

Are they trying to get the Phillies phans to boo Jayson Werth?

[Gwreck]

What makes for a good scoreboard:

1. Large, clear video replay board;
2. Full-time out-of-town scoreboard. Cannot switch to advertising or "let's go team" messages during the game;
3. Lineups of each team displayed at all times;
4. Misc. key information easy to find (ie. pitch count/speed; OBP of batter, etc.)

Based on those criteria, a few of my favorites are:

1. Washington. I liked the layout of the board (image in this thread is a good representation), it's big and clear and you can find anything at a glance.
2. House of Evil. Credit where credit is due; the thing is HUGE and can be seen clearly everywhere, especially the affordable seats in the stratosphere.
3. Arizona. Recently upgraded the main video board. Extra credit for having the lineups and out-of-town scores posted, full-time, separate from the main board to the info is always there, even when the "Go D-Backs!!!!!" message needs to appear.
4. Kansas City. Recently upgraded, and also a giant board that can be seen from everywhere. I found the layout a little busy which was the only real drawback.
5. Target Field had a very nice video board but the out-of-town scoreboards were difficult to find and weren't "full-time."

Also nice: Cincinnati, which has been upgraded since the picture in this thread was taken. St. Louis was also pretty good and gets a nod for having a board above the bullpen specifically to indicate who is warming up.

Ballparks that need upgrades: Detroit, Philadelphia, Dodger Stadium. Oakland too, but I know why they haven't.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Props to those who care about constant accounting of out-of-town games, even when most of them are being played at a different time:

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Scoreboards in general look better at night.

What's really distressing is how little any of them differ from one another in terms of design: Exposed ironwork, arched sponsor name, clock, etc.

I think the Mets' arrangement is way too busy with ads, and the main scoreboard and right field video board don't look like they really belong together. I don't usually have trouble with the board telling me the story of the game at Citi, although Shea's original scoreboard was very straightforward, telling me what I needed to know (the K-tracker and other stuff like that were just ugly tack-ons). And if you needed to know who was warming up, you brought binoculars.

Stuff that's nice about Citifield: The sign is blue and orange. the video is crisp, and though some people got on them forthis, I preferred the understated [crossout]and badly punctuated[/crossout] LETS GO METS of the rookie season to the LET'S GO Mets? that's there now.

The Cardinals and Pirates get props for attractive citiscapes in the backgrounds.

(reviewing photos, looks like they got the punctuation right? Why do I remember otherwise...)

[bmfc1]

Good thread.

I like when you can see everything at one place. At CF, you have to go to multiple boards to gather all of the pertinent information. For that reason, I like the set up at Nationals Park.

Also at CF, I hate the signage to the left and right (e.g. Goya, Arpielle). It's looks tacky and minor league.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I appreciate the ads being placed on a calm stretched fabric rather than another LED screen. It gives my eye a rest and allows it to fall on what it needs to fall on when it's seeking to fall.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Tigers




Indians




Blue Jays

[batmagadanleadoff]

Rangers


Yankees

[MFS62]

If I'm sitting un the upper deck behind home plate and look at the scoreboard, I don't have tunnell vision. I also can see what is behind or around the scoreboard.
For that reason, I like Baltimore (that classic looking warehouse) and Atlanta (a beautiful view of the downtown lit up at night).
But there is nothing better than the Fenway Park scoreboard - missing score numbers (for the local games an out of town ones) and all. Name another scoreboard that is surrounded by a wall that has its own nickname. To me , that scoreboard is as much a part of baseball as the team that plays in that ballpark.

Later

[batmagadanleadoff]

The Great American Ballpark scoreboard -- 8/29/10

[batmagadanleadoff]

Royals

[Lefty Specialist]

I always liked this shot of Turner Field's scoreboard. Crystal clear. The 11-1 lead made it more fun to watch.

[ashie62]

All nice but the Shea scoreboard beats them all.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Ashie62 wrote: All nice but the Shea scoreboard beats them all.

You may have a point. Two of my favorite scoreboards no longer exist, but were unveiled within one season of each other: Shea Stadium's scoreboard (through the '70's) and the Astrodome scoreboard.

The modern scoreboards are technologically superior. But they're all so redundant looking. Seen one, seen 'em all, for the most part. One of these decades, some baseball owner is going to build a retro cookie cutter doughnut stadium, just to be different.

One of my modern favorites is the scoreboard at The Rogers Centre, which is essentially nothing more than a gigantic screen. But it's sleek and uncluttered. I like the Royals scoreboard, too. (I know, not modern) And I like the way that the Yankees distanced their scoreboard advertising from the scoreboard itself.

I started this thread with the preconceived idea that the Mets' main scoreboard was the ugliest of the moderns. Collecting these images confirms my POV. I get the impression that the Wilpons gave us a scoreboard grudgingly, the same way that they gave us a Mets HOF a year later. The Mets' scoreboard portion of the scoreboard looks like an afterthought -- an excuse to sell more ad space. I wonder if the Wilpons lose any sleep at night over the fact that there's a portion of their scoreboard that isn't generating ad revenue?

[HahnSolo]

Lefty Specialist wrote: I always liked this shot of Turner Field's scoreboard. Crystal clear. The 11-1 lead made it more fun to watch.

Of course if I'm reading that "result" column correctly, LoDuca, in the middle of a 6-run inning, when the team was already up 5-1, was sacrificing. C'mon, Willie.

[bmfc1]

April 6, 2007

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL200704060.shtml

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Fenway and Wrigley, of course.

Among the cookie-cutter modern boards, I like the Nats' scoreboard (for its clean graphic presentation/area "breaks" and well-executed lettering), the Camden Yards one (for the backdrop) and the AT&T Park one (ditto).

But the Royals might be my surprising favorite among all the newfangleds; nice board, presentation as clean/uncluttered as the Nats board, but with the logo incorporated. Kitschy-pretty.

[HahnSolo]

bmfc1 wrote: April 6, 2007 http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/ATL/ATL200704060.shtml

I stand corrected. Willie still sucked though.

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

Confession: I like SkyDome.

The Astros also have a hand-operated scoreboard of the out-of-town scores. I was able to play with the numbers on a tour of the park last year.

Marlins have two screens at either end of the field, then the teal monster, which doesn't quite work.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I was not impressed with Skydome for a lot of reasons but one of them was that I was forced to turn my head every time I wanted to know what the count was, and I was in pretty good seats along the 3rd base line.

Also, the fake grass is ugly and lends itself to a boring style of play and the wonderful shade of blue seats are are too much when half-filled

[batmagadanleadoff]

Re: Skydome/Rogers -- Are you guys riffing on the stadium, or the scoreboard?

[Gwreck]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: I started this thread with the preconceived idea that the Mets' main scoreboard was the ugliest of the moderns. Collecting these images confirms my POV. I get the impression that the Wilpons gave us a scoreboard grudgingly, the same way that they gave us a Mets HOF a year later. The Mets' scoreboard portion of the scoreboard looks like an afterthought -- an excuse to sell more ad space. I wonder if the Wilpons lose any sleep at night over the fact that there's a portion of their scoreboard that isn't generating ad revenue?

Seriously? I'm not high on the Wilpons either but they didn't "grudgingly" include the scoreboard. A more accurate description is that they managed to make it look terrible by putting advertisements around it in a stupid manner without any regard to design or aesthetics.

Generally speaking, the Citi Field boards themselves are middle-of-the-pack. Not fantastic, but not awful. The out-of-town scoreboard would be among the best in the league if it could be seen properly at night.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Re: Skydome/Rogers -- Are you guys riffing on the stadium, or the scoreboard?

Well, both. But what I recall about the place was that the count wasn't anywhere I could find it.

[Guest metsguyinmichigan]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Re: Skydome/Rogers -- Are you guys riffing on the stadium, or the scoreboard? Well, both. But what I recall about the place was that the count wasn't anywhere I could find it.

Well, they use the metric system in Canada, any way, so even if you could see the count it would be confusing. I think you need 5.3 balls to get a walk or something.

I did like the stadium, and that board was MASSIVE when it debuted. I think everyone else just caught up.

I haven't been to the new Yankee hell-hole but that board looks ridiculously huge.