John Manuel: Thanks for coming out everyone, we'll dive right into the AZL chat. Mitchell isn't as good as his numbers, or else I would have ranked him higher. Every manager or pitching coach I talked to said about the same thing about him: He commands the fastball and keeps it down. Those are two very good things. They all felt that was how he had so much success, and uniformly they all wondered about his ceiling, his secondary stuff, etc. Personally, I like pitchers who command average to plus fastballs; commanding the fastball is the fundamental building block to pitching. But the sentiment was pretty clear that there was some doubt about how high Mitchell's ceiling really is. Hence, he ranked where he ranked.

John Manuel: Navin, sorry, only one Cub. Carlos Perez definitely came close, in the 21-25 range, he made strides from extended through to the AZL of having a more consistent approach at the plate and not giving at-bats away. He was solid defensively as well, handled pitchers pretty well. The sense I got was his offensive upside is considered somewhat limited, and that he's more of a backup profile than a starter profile. But he was probably the No. 2 Cub who qualified. For what it's worth, I spoke with the Cubs pitching coach, who I believe I quoted in the story, and Martinez didn't come up. I think he's a bit shy of qualifying as well.

John Manuel: He literally was No. 21; if you listen to today's podcast you'll hear my buyer's remorse on Reckling. He's young, he's got a good curveball, an upper-80s fastball, some projection . . . I probably should have ranked him. At some point you just have to go ahead and pick 20, and when I did it, I left him out; it sounds like Wild has upside for his age and could move quickly. But on a true prospect-meter, I should have ranked Reckling ahead of him for being younger & lefthanded and possessing less stuff but more projection.

John Manuel: Lots of Cubs questions today, I'll try to get to them all without too many repeats. Jovan Rosa would rank third among Cubs prospects, he's not much of a runner but he has some gap power and good hands, both at the plate and defensively. He moved up to Boise at season's end and wasn't a disaster, a good sign, so he might be ready for low A next year. Redmond also attracted some attention, the ball comes out of his hand pretty well and he touched 92-93 mph at times, he likes to work up in the zone and then try to put hitters away with a curveball down in the zone, it sounds like he's interesting but didn't have enough all-around support for the 20.

John Manuel: Well, Mike, age isn't everything, though it's certainly pretty important, as the entire top 10 is teenagers, one reason Tobin and Anton aren't in the top 10. My reports on Mitchell's velo came straight from Mark Davis, his pitching coach; he was there and I wasn't, so I took his word for it. It will have to suffice. I wrote about Mitchell in our California draft coverage as well and his velocity was somewhat inconsistent in the spring; there are also concerns about his palmball changeup. Players with palmball changeups who have not lived up to expectations in the past include Seth Etherton and Jason Arnold; it's an easier pitch for hitters to pick up. Look, I like Mitchell, and went into the list prepared to rank him in the Top 10. I heard enough information to keep him out of the Top 10.

John Manuel: He runs well but he's getting thicker and projects as a below-average runner. He is adequate defensively, better in CF than the Padres expected, but as he slows down as they project, he'll be a decent LF with all the value in the bat. How good is the bat? That will be the question. But that's why he was "so low." He did of course rank 14th in a league of nine teams, so 14th is actually pretty high, don't you think?

John Manuel: Well, I didn't have 90 players on my follow list, but this league is half the size of the GCL. It was a decent year but the lack of first-round picks being eligible, in my mind, took the league down a notch from past years. The league had more high-profile Latin American players than it had players from the draft. I do think this year's draft was difficult from a signability standpoint, which made for more late-round "sleepers." For example, Tobin was a guy some teams had turned in in the first 10 rounds, and others had turned in much lower due to some makeup concerns. Whether those makeup concerns are overblown is anybody's guess, but it's not a 16th-round arm. Same with Anton actually; this guy didn't pitch for two years. He's not the average 22-year-old. He's a lefty with a plus major league pitch right now in his changeup, and has a pro body at 6-foot-3, 195 pounds. If he maintains or slightly improves his fringe-average fastball velocity and tightens up his curveball, he'll be a big leaguer. That's a good 12th-round sleeper right there.

John Manuel: Well, he didn't qualify for this list. I wouldn't write him off by any stretch, but no one would know who this guy was if his bonus of $710k hadn't been reported. He'd be just another Latin pitcher struggling to pitch in a foreign country as a teenager. The Brewers don't have a team in the DSL or VSL, so he has to pitch against more polished hitters--look at the guys who led the league in hitting and HRs, both 22-year-old collegians. Tough assignment for a player like that, and he hasn't succeeded yet. The Brewers may need to rethink their decision to start their Latin players in the AZL; so far, it has not put their players in position to have success or develop.

John Manuel: Alderson probably would have ranked No. 2; he would have given Villalona a run for No. 1. Tim Alderson is one of my favorite prospects, because he has plus control (not command yet) of two plus pitches, a 92-93 mph fastball and a hard breaking ball. I'll even throw out a prediction--I think Alderson will be the first HS player from the '07 draft to reach the major leagues. He's the Giants' next closer, and he could reach the majors NEXT YEAR if he stays healthy. He's that good, IMO. Main would have checked in next at No. 3, I love the athletic ability and quick arm, and it sounds like despite his 70 speed, the Rangers made the right choice to draft him as a pitcher, it's good stuff and he repeats his delivery. He also could move quickly thanks to that premium athletic ability, and because he's quite skinny (almost thin-boned), there's probably not a ton of projection left. As for Vitters . . . I had a scout tell me in the spring that he liked Vitters, liked him more than he liked Moustakas, but he predicted Vitters would struggle out of the gate because of how he relies on his hands in his swing and that with a little rust, his timing would be off and he'd need an adjustment period in the low minors. This is exactly what seems to have happened. That scout moved way up my list (well, he was fairly high to begin with), but the other part I heard about Vitters was that he didn't panic, didn't get flustered by his poor start and handled it like a pro. So I wouldn't worry about it. I'm not sure where he would have ranked, because if he had qualified and had the kind of numbers he had . . . I'm not sure where I would have ranked a guy with an .050 average over 100 ABs. That would have concerned me more than 40-45 ABs do.

John Manuel: The GCL is twice the size of the AZL. That said, I like the GCL talent a lot more; I'm a Kyle Lotzkar fan and he's down at No. 13 in the GCL list, with a scouting report that would fit comfortably in the middle of the AZL top 10. Villalona in the GCL, though, would have to rank No. 2 for me; Burgess has more all-around tools, but there are fewer concerns over Big V than there are surrounding Montero. If Montero can't be a big league C then it's an easy call for me to go with Villalona.

John Manuel: It will be up to him, and how he maintains his body. He has the footwork and agility, and he certainly has the arm. But it will all be up to him, how much he works and how much he stays in shape.

John Manuel: Tim Alderson, for sure.

John Manuel: Seems like they should but instructional league and spring training will inform that decision as much or more than just the AZL season.

John Manuel: Good question, and I like the order you gave though I'm not as informed on Tejeda as I am on the other players. Triunfel sounds like he's a bit less of a shortstop than people think. I might rank him lower on that list, even though he's the one who had success in full-season leagues this year. It's not how you start as a prospect, it's how you finish. The goal for these players is not to hit well in the minors, it's to hit well in the majors. Still, those five guys all lived up to their hype in some form or fashion this year.

John Manuel: Larry, Lissman was older and would seem to have less upside than other players in the league, but he did ingratiate himself to his manager, Ruben Escalera, who thought that Lissman could jump up to high Class A next year if he had a good spring and instructional league. He's a righthanded bat who has to really mash as his positions, and he doesn't bring great defensive value. But he can hit and he's a gamer, and he's an O-State Balla. I can't say I will count him out.

John Manuel: You're welcome for the chat. A lot of it depends on the organization and org need. For example, the Mariners push players fast under Bill Bavasi--faster than any other organization that I know of. So if Mario Martinez has a good spring, I'd suspect he'll be at Wisconsin next year, not Everett. Villalona is so advanced offensively, he should handle full-season ball next year. Engel Beltre on the other hand probably could use short-season ball next year, but again, many of these calls will be made of instructional league and spring training next year.

John Manuel: It's a low 90s sinker that peaks at 95. That's an above-average fastball, and he had an extreme groundball rate (3.14 to 1 groundout to flyout ratio), which backs up the scouting report of a heavy ball, a good, hard sinker. His secondary stuff is below-average and that's why he didn't strike out as many batters as you'd like to see. He needs quite a bit of work on his breaking ball and changeup; it's rare to see pitchers whose fastball is so good that they don't need at least one average or above-average secondary pitch. But comparing him to, say, Matt Mitchell, who also worked primarily off the fastball, Mitchell had more K's but Bucardo showed more velocity, arm strength and most importantly projection. I went with projection over stats at this level, tried to do that consistently, didn't always succeed as I already said with my Trevor Reckling remorse, but that's what I tried to do.

John Manuel: Sounds like 3b or a corner OF spot, depending on how much he fills out. Some guys like how easy he does it; others see less life and projection. It just seems like it won't be shortstop. If he hits like the Mariners think he can, corner OF will work. He's got some leverage in his swing, it seems like he will need time to grow into it.

John Manuel: A little bit of everything; the Giants didn't exactly need him at Salem or Augusta, though, they had Brett Pill at Augusta (always like those Titans) and Matt Downs and Chad Rothford at Salem-Keizer, who combined for 17 HRs. D'Alessio is a confusing player, frankly. He was a 10th-round pick twice but he turned some scouts off out of HS and college at Clemson as a junior, and his stock dropped this year. He's got a grooved swing--put it where he can hit it and he'll hit it a mile. Stay away from his power zones and he can be had. The consensus seemed to be that he'd be a 4-A player.

John Manuel: He's an interesting draft-and-follow, he pitches off the fastball but it's below-average velocity and location, not much of a power arm, not a plus pitch like Anton, so even though he's younger, I thought there wasn't quite enough for the top 20. He's a lefty who commands the fastball, two good attributes.

John Manuel: I think so, and with his fastball command he should find success. More important, he needs to develop secondary pitches, but here's one guy's take: "I loved him, pounded the zone, average fastball, breaking ball was OK, mound presence. Overall, not a huge prospect for me, but I liked him." That was the general sentiment on Matt Mitchell. I hope he's better than that, I've always liked Barstow ever since Interstate 40 was completed all the way to Wilmington, NC. You get outside of town and the road sign says, Raleigh XXX miles (whatever it is), and then Barstow, Calif., 2800 miles or whatever (maybe 2,554?). It's a neat sign, as Barstow is where I-40 ends.

John Manuel: He's an extreme groundball pitcher. I searched full-season leagues for pitchers with groundout-to-flyout ratios over 3.00 and it was a short, short list. He's got plus velocity and plus-plus sink so that outweighed his low K rate for me. For comparison's sake, Carlos Silva is a big leaguer who's a sinkerballer, and his ratio this year is 1.49. Chien-Ming Wang is an extreme sinkerballer who like Bucardo throws hard; he's at 2.34. Wang also is knocked for his lack of K's but he's repeating his success in the difficult AL for three years now, without a ton of K's. Bucardo's upside might be in between those two guys, but it's hard to know how much projection is left for his breaking stuff. How much hand speed does he have? Does he have a feel for an offspeed pitch? Early indications are somewhat encouraging, at least on his slider, but they are also early. I'd guess he won't be in the top 10 for that organization but will be in the 30, as long as he looks good in instructional league.

John Manuel: Tim, one thing to note here is no scouts really check in on the AZL. I asked and asked and asked, and if there are scouts who do AZL pro coverage, I didn't find them. Every scout I contacted said their organizations scout those players by seeing them in instructional league rather than in the AZL; the weather cools off, you can also check in on your own org's players, and you can double up later in instructs on instructional league and the AFL. So this list was all managers, hitting coaches and pitching coaches, no scouts. As for Big V, he improved his conditioning from last year to this year, and that's good progress. He needs to keep making progress to stay at 3b.

John Manuel: It's not, Roger, you're right. I'm more inclined on players like Wild and Anton to make exceptions. Wild is atypical for a 23-year-old because he played only one year of HS baseball (focused on basketball), two years in JC, two years at Pacific, and while he's older, he threw four pitches for strikes, had some life on his average fastball and missed a ton of bats. Anton, as I've explained, has a different background as well, 2 years away from the game, he's got a plus change and he's lefthanded. But those were exceptions, and as I've said, I regret not ranking another teen, Reckling, whose ceiling is probably higher than Wild's in a typical prospect list. I wasn't 100 percent consistent; those are the reasons why I was not, those two pitchers had interesting tools and back stories that for me compensated a bit for their advanced age. Anthony Norman has a feel for hitting but is very unorthodox and doesn't have much power; D'Alessio has strength but not the great bat speed that true power hitters have and again, as I've stated, was thought of more as a 4-A guy.

John Manuel: Final eight questions . . . probably

John Manuel: Suarez sounds like a guy who has more velo in him, as he cleans up his body and delivery, but I think he will be a power reliever. You don't want to write off a guy from starting, but he's already got a huge body, and with his power stuff, it would be tempting to turn him into a reliever. The Cubs have plenty of time to decide.

John Manuel: Matt, I didn't see a single player. I like to think of our lists, actually, as news--we report on the players like we report on anything else. We get the who, what, where, when and the how from coaches and managers, and the statistical data, and then put our own informed opinion on them and try to "report" the top prospects. That's the idea anyway. As for Richardson and Cruz, both very, very young, Richardson is ridiculously athletic, but both need time to learn how to hit.

John Manuel: Ivan Contreras and Clay Fuller both made the top 20, so I'd say they impressed. Contreras has offensive ability whereas Fuller is still more of a runner and is still a bit raw, though he made progress with the bat. I'd agree that the Angels' system is a bit light on hitters at the low levels; I guess it depends on what you think of PJ Phillips and others like him who are more projection than production at this point.

John Manuel: Scouts have been saying Montero has 80 power for more than a year now, starting with last July when we first reported on him. Villalona sounds like a more complete offensive player; I got an 70 power on him from a Giants official last year and he's probably a bit more polished as a hitter. They're quite comparable, it would seem, as players who both got $2 million or so (though Montero's bonus was reduced to $1.6M), and both got that kind of money for their bats.

John Manuel: Still pretty high--projection guy, good downhill plane, arm strength, good pro body. McCauley was mentioned by a manager or two but nothing that got him close enough to the 20.

John Manuel: It's not quite like that, Dobbie, but this was funny. I would like to add this: We do a chat for every prospect list we do in pro ball--league top 20, org top 30, top 100, you name it. Now we also have some podcasts to complement them, too. I like to think we're about as accountable to our readers, as transparent in our process, as we could possibly be.

John Manuel: I thought the Giants, Rangers and Angels were at the top, with the Brewers and Athletics at the bottom.

John Manuel: There are no qualifications for the top 100 other than being rookie eligible, and he's rookie eligible. I can almost guarantee he'll be on my personal top 100, can't speak for Kline, Lingo, Callis, et al.

John Manuel: I wouldn't call him small at 6-foot-2, 195 pounds, but the Royals did have concerns about his delivery that Mark Davis said they worked on, they tried to slow him down, not open up on his front shoulder, and he improved with that. He's got the potential for two plus pitches and the changeup is still nascent, so it could be average down the line or who knows, maybe better. He's an exciting guy, Lompoc Represent!

John Manuel: Jason, Chris Kline is trying to do lists for the DSL and VSL. I'm not sure if they will be top 5s, top 10s, top 20s . . . it's just harder to report those leagues than the domestic leagues. But Chris is trying and we hope to have those at the end of the cycle of the 16 domestic leagues, plus the 17th top 10 we'll have, JJ Cooper's amazingly reported Indy Ball prospects list.

John Manuel: I talked to three people with the Rangers, and Velazquez did not come up in the discussions. That doesn't mean he's no good; his name just didn't come up with the Rangers or anyone else. For what it's worth, he's a 19-year-old Puerto Rican, 19th-round pick in 2006.

John Manuel: I did the Eastern League this year and the stats there matter; in the AZL, the stats helped me get some more guys to ask about, but the stats in Rookie ball are not predictive, for me, for future success. If there's a ratio, it's maybe 60-40 tools to stats in the EL, but more like 95-5 in the AZL. Something extreme has to happen in the AZL for the stats to really get my attention. Michael Anton didn't get ranked because he led the league in K's; he got ranked because he's a lefty with a present plus major league pitch in his changeup. Josh Vitters really struggled in the AZL and was 6-for-51 overall in his debut, but he also was a consensus choice as either the best or second-best high school hitter in the draft this year. Which should I put more weight into, the scouts who project these things, or 51 at-bats? I will go with the scouts. For org rankings and the top 100, those are kind of different, it's more of a gut feel of mixing ceiling with likelihood of reaching ceiling, and knowing when to mix in a sure-thing player with a lower ceiling with someone with less experience, less statistical track record, but a higher ceiling. With the Twins last year, I wanted to rank Oswaldo Sosa high, thought I had at 11, but had buyer's remorse as soon as the book went to press and wished I had ranked him higher. From now on, I'm going to call it Trevor Reckling Syndrome. I think I get Trevor Reckling syndrome for just about every list I do.

John Manuel: Thanks for all the questions, check in Monday for Nathan Rode's first-ever BA chat and the presentation of the Appy League's Top 20. Tuesday is Ben Badler's first chat as well, Pioneer League top 20 . . . have a great weekend.