View Full Version : John Sickels on Sox pitching

04-05-2002, 12:42 PM
ESPN.com's John Sickels, who has in the past, I believe, talked up the Sox young pitching, now sees a less rosy outlook for some of the young guns:


04-05-2002, 01:12 PM
"John S. writes: I've been hearing for a couple years about how "stacked" the White Sox are in young pitching. Yet outside of Mark Buerhle, who was really a surprise out of nowhere. I have yet to see anybody materialize along the lines of Wade Miller, Roy Oswalt, Juan Cruz, Josh Beckett, Bud Smith, Barry Zito etc., or even show the promise of the aforementioned at the major-league level."

Juan Cruz? I'd venture to say that John S. is a Cubbie fan.

I'm not saying that Cruz sucks or that he won't pan out. But what exactly has Cruz done? He won three games last year and only one of the wins was vs a good team. In fact in those three wins his team supported him with 26 runs, IIRC.

I have no problem giving the Cubs credit but regarding Cruz, let's wait and see what he does over the course of a full season.

Neither the questioner or Sickels mentioned that quite a few Sox system products have done fine, albeit often with other teams. Two Sox system guys are starters with Pittsburgh - Wells and Fogg. Wells is going to be a fine pitcher in the long run. Wells is only what 25 yrs old?

I tend to agree though that the Sox seem to bring guys up too early and give up on them too soon.

Don't forget too that the Cubs touted pitchers - Wood & Prior - the Cubbies got them because they had such high picks. It's not like the Sox passed over either of these two.

The Sox rotation of Buehrle-Ritchie-Wright-Garland-Rauch. 4 of the 5 came up thru the Sox system. So we'll get to see how these Sox guys do this season.


04-05-2002, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by DrCrawdad
Juan Cruz? I'd venture to say that John S. is a Cubbie fan.

I think that might be a good venture since I believe he picked them to go to the World Series. He was the only staff member of ESPN in fact to have them in the playoffs none the less.