June 6, 2004

 

 

Quickly now, how many more regular-season games have the Cubs won than the White Sox in the last two seasons?

 

The answer, entering the weekend, was zero.

 

Chicago's major-league teams had compiled identical 115-98 records, yet you would have a hard time proving it by the recognition they have received. The Cubs are celebrated with rare innocence; the White Sox are under constant scrutiny, never seeming to deliver enough.

 

It's the one time of year when the White Sox are reminded about their consistent competitiveness, like it or not.

 

Monday's major-league draft will be the 14th in a row in which the Sox do not pick in the top 10. That's because they haven't finished among the five worst teams in their league since 1989.

 

No other team in the majors has gone so long without an awful season—not the Yankees, not the Braves. The Cubs have had seven top-10 draft picks since the White Sox last qualified for one (Alex Fernandez, fourth pick, 1990).

 

Given their middle-of-the-road resources, it is a tribute to the scouting staff and the skills of their general managers (Ron Schueler and Ken Williams) that the Sox have finished at .500 or better in 10 of the last 14 seasons, never losing more than 86 games. But that ability to be decent, at worst, may have contributed to their inability to win big.

 

Although the influx of Latin-American free agents makes baseball different from sports such as professional football and basketball, the top of the draft is still the best place to find stars. It will be much more difficult for the White Sox to land an impact player at the 18th spot, where they select, than it would be if they had one of the first 10 picks.

 

Consider the Oakland Athletics. There's no way they would be winning 100 games a year if they didn't have Mark Mulder, Barry Zito and Eric Chavez. They wouldn't have landed them if they weren't picking 10th in 1996 (Chavez), second in '98 (Mulder) and ninth in '99 (Zito).

 

Where would the Yankees have been in the last decade if they didn't have Derek Jeter? They got him with the sixth pick in 1992. And how average of a team would the Cubs be without Kerry Wood (fourth pick, '95) and Mark Prior (second pick, 2001)?

 

High draft picks don't ensure success, of course. Kansas City has had 10 of them in the last 14 years, yet hasn't produced a better player from that group than Michael Tucker. Minnesota has had eight. Todd Walker was the best player from that group before 2001 pick Joe Mauer came along.

 

Detroit (eight), Pittsburgh (seven) and San Diego (seven) also have gone through a flurry of recent top-10 picks without landing a single star. Florida missed on its share but landed Josh Beckett (and a future World Series championship) with the second pick in 1999.

 

Neither Chicago team figures to land any of the bigger name players in Monday's draft—those being Long Beach State right-hander Jered Weaver, Florida State shortstop Stephen Drew and Rice pitchers Jeff Niemann, Phil Humber and Wade Townsend.

 

The Cubs' first pick is No. 66 because they lost their first-rounder for signing free agent LaTroy Hawkins. The Sox, at least, can try to build strength through numbers. They have six of the first 69 picks, getting both supplemental picks and extra second-round picks for the loss of free agents Bartolo Colon and Tom Gordon.

 

The challenge with that many picks is to pay them all.

The challenge with that many picks is to pay them all.

I hope we do but not with a ludacris offer.

I hope we do but not with a ludacris offer.

That's why we'll go with a lot of college pitchin early, so we can sign as many players as possible.

That's why I think the MLB should allow pick trading. The Sox have a ton of picks, but no one really high one. That would be awesome, the Sox offering their sandwich pick and their first rounder and get a top 10 pick, and take one of the boys from Rice.

 

Ah, dreaming...