John Manuel: Thanks everyone for coming out. I anticipate this being a lengthy chat so I jumped in a bit early.

John Manuel: Ehlers is in consideration for the 30, but the Yankees system is deeper now, and he may not make it. He wasn't in consideration for the 10; he's not an impact guy.according to everyone I've talked to. He had a nice season, and the more he hits, the better his chances for playing in the major leagues, but he does not profile as a regular as a 5-foot-11 first baseman with average power.

John Manuel: No on Montero. The jury was always still out on him catching, and several scouts I talked to when he signed in July thought he was a 1B. Then if he's a 1B and not a C, all the value will be in the bat, and you're projecting a 16-year-old's bat. Add to that he's got 80 raw power, yes, and they spent a lot of money, but the Yankees also removed the man (Lin Garrett) who oversaw his signing, and every report I've heard on Montero's performance at the Yankees' mini-camp (which functions as their instructional league team) has been negative. There's no guarantee that Montero even makes the top 30, frankly. All the news and rumors I've heard about him since signing are the opposite of positive, to put it politely.

John Manuel: As for the system, it is deeper, particularly on the mound. Mark Newman told me this is the deepest the system has been in terms of pitchers since he's been in NY, more than 15 years. I agree with him, deepest Yankees system on the mound since I've been at BA, though the hitters are not up to par with the late '90s, when you had Nick Johnson, Soriano, Juan Rivera, plus D'Angelo JIminez and of course guys who didn't work out like Drew Henson. To me, the Yankees' top four guys were easy . . . after that, the order was difficult, right down to the 30. I'm still finalizing the end of the list, frankly. No. 40 guy in the organization isn't a bad prospect this year, whereas a couple of years ago, I was putting guys in the 30 that I thought would never make an impact.

John Manuel: McAllister will be in the top 30. It sounds like the Yankees are going to take their time with him. They like his arm strength and his physical ability. He was kind of a sinker-slider guy in high school, though, and the Yankees really strongly prefer the hard curveball over the slider (as they've shown with Philip Hughes). So they're not remaking McAllister, but they are changing him some, teaching him the curve, taking away the slider, and adjusting his mechanics a bit accordingly.

John Manuel: Jackson is a tough guy to get a read on. I had a Juan Encarnacion comp on him the other day . . . it sounds like he's not quite as good an athlete as the Yankees thought he was, he's not a great runner, and might have to be a LF. If that's true, obviously more will be expected of his bat, so that's why he's not in the Top 10. He's going to need a lot of ABs.

John Manuel: Reyes really made some noise in mini-camp and is probably the best lefthander in the system. That's not necessarily a good thing, because he hasn't pitched a full season yet, but he's got live stuff . . . good body, low 90s fastball that touches 94, and he made progress with the curveball and changeup in minicamp. He's headed to Charleston next week. I think I'll be conservative at this point and say No. 3 starter, but he's got helium.

John Manuel: No, no and no for the top 10. Duncan just missed; I actually still believe in him a bit. When he was healthy and at the appropriate level this year, he hit. Problem is, the back is pretty balky, and that's an injury that often lingers. If I were in a different mood, I could have put him in the 10, there's not a ton of difference between Nos. 7-13 for me in this system. Duncan's injury is what really kept him out. Jackson, as I've said, isn't the prospect the Yankees thought they were getting last year, and he's not in the 11-15. Vechionacci is, and I believe he may not be a star but should be a big league regular. Marquez is up there, Montero and Jackson are lower. I'm still trying to get more info on Montero before I decide if he makes the 30.

John Manuel: Just put this here to focus more on Duncan. You know, he never really was "mighty" and we need to have some perspective here. First, I was wrong to rank him ahead of Robinson Cano after the '04 season, as Cano has been better than I thought (though I recall Newman saying he had Cano No. 1 at the time . . . wish I'd listened). Second, Duncan isn't even 22 yet. He hit when he was healthy this year, and as a lefthanded hitter with above-average pull power, he's still well-suited for Yankee Stadium. If he's healthy, I think he hits for power and could be a starter at 1B for New York. But, I'm pretty hesitant about back problems. Just wanted to say those two things.

John Manuel: Well, I over-rated Eduardo Nunez, who may not even make the top 30 after ranking in the top 10 last year. It sounds like his tools never showed up this year, he struggled mightily when rushed to high Class A, and was just as bd when playing at a more adequate level in low A. One club official put it this way: He kept waiting for the moment when Nunez flashed something and he would say, 'oh, there it is.' But he never saw it. That's pretty damning.

John Manuel: Battle might be my No. 30. His ceiling is considerable but the bat is probably a 30 now, and might only be a 40 future. But . . . the defense is a 70, so is the speed, and the arm is above-average, as is the raw power. He made some adjustments this year, quieting his stance and approach at the plate, moving a lot less and keeping things simple. He's worked hard to improve. He's the organization's best athlete. To me, that's the type of guy you keep trying, you keep giving him a chance, because if it clicks, it clicks big-time. Gardner is a tick faster; I've heard they have raced each other, just for kicks, and Gardner beats him.

John Manuel: I saw a question, just jumping a bit ahead, about Gardner's speed. I've seen 80, I wrote 70, went with a 70 grade because he consistently turns in 70 times to first base. I'm sure he's shown an 80 in a 60 yard dash, but he doesn't run 60 yard dashes on the field, his usable speed to me is what matters most, and a 70 is pretty freaking good anyway.

John Manuel: Not really accurate. He was a projected first-rounder last summer; he was an Aflac All-American, and he is 6-foot-7 and throws hard. He ranks third because he quickly took to some mechanical adjustments the Yankees had him make and also showed a feel for a changeup, a pitch he never had to throw in high school. He also improved his curveball; the Yankees really love the way Nardi Contreras teaches the curveball, and apparently Betances does too. So he wasn't a 3-pitch guy when he was drafted. That said, the $1 million price tag scared off a lot of teams, Betances got off to a slow start, and the track record for 6-7 RHPs from the City is . . . well, it is short. Just a lot to ask a team to spend $1 million or more on a lot of projection. But for the Yankees, they can do that. Some other teams could have, but the Yankees deserve credit because they did.

John Manuel: I love P.J. but no, he's not a prospect because he doesn't profile. I'd love for him to make it, heart of some great Fullerton teams, shared catching duties with Kurt Suzuki on the '04 title team. P.J. hit in college, he's hit as a pro . . . but he's also 25 and not a great defender at C. Man, the more I talk about him the more I want him to make it . . . If he wants to be a manager, I wouldn't put it past him to make it to the majors that way, as a coach or manager. He knows the game, learned from a master like George Horton, and is a grinder. I really like P.J., can you tell?

John Manuel: He's been eligible for that for two years, so let's start there. Second, he doesn't throw hard; he's most effective in the upper 80s. Not many big league closers throw like that (Hoffman does now, actually throws slower, but he's got an 80 change). Third is the arm angle, though I really respect JB for his improved changeup this year, he assaulted lefthanded hitters, held them to a .150 average. Only reason I didn't have him as the future closer this year is Melancon--I'm a big Melancon fan, believe in him even if he has surgery because the reports I have on the makeup for him are as good as any I've received. Plus, Melancon's stuff fits the profile more--harder fastball, more life on the FB, plus he has the power curveball, which is more of a strikeout pitch. Bottom line--a curve is a K pitch, a slider is a groundout pitch unless you're Carlton or Guidry and you have a two-plane slider. Cox sounds like his slider is pretty good, but I prefer Melancon as a closer profile, and my sense is the Yankees do as well.

John Manuel: Tough call on Dellin vs. Joba . . . Chamberlain is just tearing up Hawaii Winter Baseball and throwing 94-97 mph with control, if not command. Joba's size and health issues give me a bit of pause, but he should get there a lot quicker than Betances. Kennedy's ceiling isn't the same as those guys, but I asked "Kennedy vs. Clippard" to two high-placed Yankees officials, and both picked Kennedy because he has similar stuff and more polish. That's something, saying he has more polished than a guy who tore up Double-A like Clippard did. I decided to take their advice.

John Manuel: First Hughes question, wow . . . Hard to imagine him picking up where he left off. That's as in the zone as I can remember a minor league pitcher, just a long run of dominance at Double-A, very, very impressive. I think he'll be up in May if he has a good spring--no need for a fifth starter in April, plus you get to give Scranton, your new affiliate, your top prospect for a month. And some Triple-A time shouldn't hurt him. If he's that good in March, though, if he's dealing 3 plus pitches . . . or a 60 fastball, 60-65 curve and 60 command . . . then he might just make the New York rotation out of spring. He's for real, no doubt.

John Manuel: Good question, I'll say Andy Pettitte, circa 1994.

John Manuel: I don't believe so. Look, Clippard is what he is. He's filled out--he's close to 200 pounds now. And his fastball was 86-91 this year, that's where it sat. That's average to fringe-average. It's never been described to me as a pitch with above-average life. It has "some" life. Last year, he threw harder, I wrote 89-92, touch 94. That's how I asked about him this year--so, still 89-92? And the answer consistently was, no, not that hard. So they don't push guys with fringe fastballs, with guys who pitch backwards. Clippard had a great year, and I believe he will be a big leaguer, but he's still a No. 4 or No. 5 profile for the Yankees if his fastball is still 86-91. I think the Yankees will move him to Triple-A, but I don't think he's a guy you "jump."

John Manuel: Well, Hughes and Betances are easy since I ranked them that way . . . then I'd go Chamberlain, Garcia, Marquez, Reyes, McAllister (but he's a long way off), Kennedy and then Karstens and Rasner.

John Manuel: I don't think that's what the Yankees are concerned with. Their system right now reminds me a lot of the Giants way of doing things. The Yankees can buy hitters or trade for them by assuming large contracts. But developing power pitchers is a better way to get them than trading for them (they're never on the market) or trying to sign them as free agents (again, hard to find). So the Yanks have made a conscious effort to go after pitching; this year was a pitching draft and they exploited that. But top three organization . . . they aren't too strong up the middle, have very little catching depth, very little LHP depth . . . not top 3 yet, maybe not top 10, definitely top 15 for me though, and improving.

John Manuel: Sorry, Matt, but yes, there have been 80 catchers . . . how about Mike Piazza? Jeff Clement is probably a 70 in terms of raw power and might even be a tick above. But yes, 80 catchers are rare. Now the trick is for Montero to be a catcher. The fact I haven't been to high on him in this chat should tell you what I think of his chances to catch. One scout described him as having Travis Hafner's body, at this age. That's not a compliment.

John Manuel: No. 1, and yes, the Yanks would be right up there. Daisuke Matsuzaka would be my No. 1 prospect in the game, period, if he signed. Obviously he's not a "prospect" but he's rookie-eligible, so he meets the threshold for our top 100, and I'd put him 1. Easy.

John Manuel: Early returns are he's not doing so great. Kennedy is vexing; I've seen him very good with Team USA, and the reports I had on him this spring were pretty mixed. I think he can move quickly and be a No. 4 starter. Here's what I don't understand: Why did the Yankees draft him at 21? I think he would have been there at 41 but I could be wrong. If so, that still doesn't answer this question: Why $2.25 million for a guy who does not fit the Yankees profile? Kennedy has average stuff and, in the Yankees estimation, will have above-average command. I think that's reasonable, but that's a No. 3 starter at best, and by the Yankees profile, it's probably more like a No. 4 or No. 5. That, and the $2.25 million, those two things don't add up to me. Not saying I don't like him; I like him, I think he will reach his ceiling. I'm just saying it seemed an odd thing for the Yankees to do.

John Manuel: Long, long question . . . Brian, Axford used to have serious stuff. He was pegging 94-95 mph on the gun in the 2002 College World Series as a freshman, and sat at 92-93 as a starter in '03 for Notre Dame, when he was 9 games. But he hurt his elbow and had Tommy John surgery, and he pitched for Canisius in '06 (long story short, the coach at Canisius is Canadian, and Axford knows him, already had his ND degree and went to pitch for his guy), and he walked 75 in 70 innings. I just don't think he's ever going to be what he was pre-surgery. TJ is not a magic elixer. The track record for the surgery is good, but not perfect.

John Manuel: Carlos, come on . . . this is really the first time the Yankees did it to this degree. They did it a bit in 2005 with Alan Horne (no Horne questions?) and Austin Jackson, but it was more widespread this year. They did it for Sean Henn five years back . . . in other words, they have done it a bit, but so have other teams (Mike Rozier, 12th round, $1.55 million, Red Sox . . . ) The Yankees should have done it more. Now let's see if any of these guys make it work out.

John Manuel: It's not great, Brett Gardner has very little power and ideally wouldn't be the No. 2 position player in the system. Vechionacci and Duncan are next and neither has dominated yet; they have tools and are young, but the performance hasn't matched the tools for either one yet. I don't see a lot of everyday players elsewhere, unless Jackson's bat really comes on . . . obvoiusly Tabata has a chance to be special, but up the middle the Yankees went backwards this year--Henry wasn't great and was traded, Nunez went backward, so did most of their 2Bs, though they did discover Reegie Corona.

John Manuel: Garcia is a breakout candidate. He has lots of pieces, but hasn't put it together. He has a good fastball but in the past didn't throw it enough and fell in love with the curveball. Now, he had the oblique strain and missed time. His change comes and goes; same with his feel for the strike zone. He is the classic breakout candidate. I don't know that I'd predict him to pull a Gallardo, that's a nice thing to hope for though.

John Manuel: Well, you just were off, Steven White never had a Kevin Brown sinker. He does pitch off his fastball, but it's not a Brown sinker, Yankees Brown or Marlins Brown or any Kevin Brown. I don't believe he ever profiled as a dominant pitcher. His curveball's always been average at best, he lost some feel for a change over the years, and he pitches off his fastball a lot, so he was going to be as good as his fastball command could take him. It sounds like that is still Steven White. Now, I thought he'd be able to do it, but guys like that are probably No. 3 starters at best. There's no plus secondary pitch.

John Manuel: That's right, Jesus Sanchez. Right now, the Yankees don't have a sure-fire guy. That's a big hole; if I had to pick someone, I'd say, wow, I guess I might say Joe Muich, a 12th-round pick out of Wichita State last year. How about that? Actually, scratch that, though I think Muich is a bit of a sleeper . . . I'll say Frank Cervelli, who impressed in the NY-P with his defense and offensive potential. Cervelli's an interesting guy, just 20, and has some athletic ability and switch-hits.

John Manuel: No. Schilling has no curveball to speak off, he's fastball-splitter. A healthy Mark Prior is still the best comp IMO.

John Manuel: Never say never . . . The Yankees do not have a short-term replacement at 3B. Vechionacci is a long-term solution, but he needs to master A-ball first. He has not done that. I'd imagine any A-Rod trade would bring a 3B in return, but I haven't really followed those talks, mostly because I don't believe he'll be traded. If it were me, I think I would try to trade him, but I get the feeling that's easier said than done with that contract, that ego and everything else wrapped up there.

John Manuel: Karstens and Rasner are fringe No. 5 starters at best. Karstens impressed the Yankees this year with his aggressiveness but he's got less stuff than Kennedy or Clippard, and the same is true of Rasner, who is a groundball guy and that's not a great fit for the Yankees, who have a modest infield defense (OK but certainly not rangy and not ideal for a groundball pitcher). Chamberlain and Garcia have No. 2-3 starter stuff, and Kennedy, as I wrote earlier, has more polish, according to the Yankees, than Clippard, even though one has dominated AA and the other has made 1 pro start on the U.S. mainland. Beam . . . he's a 6th-7th inning guy, his secondary stuff is fringy, while Cox has shown he can pitch off his average FB, he's durable, great makeup, very good slider, and a third pitch, and changeup, that looks pretty good. Cox ranked below the starters because he's an 80-90 IP reliever vs. a 180-220 IP starter. Big difference for me.

John Manuel: Joe, I believe in Karstens. I didn't last year, ranked him 30th on the advice of a Yanks official I trust, and he made me look good. I saw one of his big league starts on TV and was impressed by his aggressiveness, and I think he makes sense as a 20-starts guy. If he succeeds, great, if not, try Rasner, but it makes sense, to me, to give him a try. He also could relieve, which he did in college at Texas Tech.

John Manuel: I would say yes on Poterson. No offense to Mr. Poterson. As for Abreu, he does keep performing, admirably, but he apparently is 84-88 mph with the fastball and is going to have to keep proving it to the Yankees, level by level.

John Manuel: He does remind me a bit of Marte physically, nice . . . I was never a Marte fan, you can google it and see . . . That is really the only concern on Tabata, his frame. Everyone thinks he will hit; everyone thinks at least average power, if not much more, will come. Will he remain athletic enough to stay in RF? That's a big question, but it's about the only one.

John Manuel: Not a lot, he's in the 11-15 range and is interesting, he throws hard, needs a better feel for pitching, but he's a groundball guy with a heavy sinker. The secondary stuff ranks behind that of Clippard, Garcia and even Kennedy, so that's why he ranks behind those guys.

John Manuel: Betances and Chamberlain definitely have a shot, I'd put them on my 100 without reservations. Two guys with potential 70 fastballs.

John Manuel: Thanks for coming in . . . I like Sardinha as a role player. He's basically a platoon guy, he doesn't hit lefties well, but he is athletic, can play either corner OF spot, has some power and runs OK. I thik it is a guy who is talented (not elite, but talented) finally putting it together. Not a regular, but a useful role player (probably in a different organization).

John Manuel: I'd take him over Drabek--bigger, sounds like better makeup (though we've heard some good things on Drabek lately, which is good). But Kershaw's got similar stuff and is lefthanded, I'd take the lefty every time in that scenario.

John Manuel: David, he's legit, and yes, top 20 material. Big frame, big ceiling, 90-94 mph fastball right now and he could come quickly, he's shown some decent raw secondary stuff too. Nice call.

John Manuel: Let's grade him out. He's an above-average hitter; he's going to have to keep proving it, but to me, he can hit .290-.300, with a .360 OBP or so, but to do that, he has to prove he can turn on inside pitches and drive the ball, if not for home runs, then to the gaps. From what I have been told by those in and out of the organization, he has the strength and bat speed to do that. Add that to his speed and defense, and he's a CF profile.

John Manuel: Ha, Lou . . . I think you're wrong, as I consider the Yankees system superior to that of the Red Sox, as the Yanks have more going on at the upper levels and the best prospect in either system in Hughes, and Tabata, for that matter. I'd go Rays, Yanks, Sox, O's and Jays in this org.

John Manuel: Trying to go lightning round but it goes against my nature. . . I'll say Taylor because he's a LHP.

John Manuel: Robertson's not quite on that fast a track, Charleston for him, but he threw well on the Cape. As long as he avoids Chad Flack I think he'll be fine . . .

John Manuel: Henn's dead to me as a prospect so to speak . . . Chase Wright has many supporters in the organization. He will be in the 30, still not sure how high, and actually has a chance to start as a No. 4-5 type of guy, but that's only if everything works out, 'pen more likely.

John Manuel: No, which is a good sign for the org.

John Manuel: I'll say Hughes, though it will be close between him and Cox.

John Manuel: Not many, Wright and Reyes are the top ones. No, I don't think Clippard will throw harder, I keep seeing Yankee fans blog or message board about that and they kind of need to give that up. He's filled out, he's not 175 anymore. And Kennedy, he can be more consistent with all his stuff but he's 88-92 mph tops. He's just not a huge guy and doesn't have an exceptionally quick arm, either.

John Manuel: I like Maybin best of this group personally; I'd go Maybin, McCutchen, Bruce, J. Upton, Tabata and F. Martinez. But that's an exciting, exciting group, and there's very, very little difference between them all. What a group. I'd love to talk to a scout or two that has seen all six.

John Manuel: Little of both, but it does sound like he has a shot to be a regular.

John Manuel: Nothing, really. I like them both a lot. There's very little difference between them in prospect status. Martinez plays CF now, but it sounds like he's more of a corner OF. If he were a CF, I'd take Martinez over him.

John Manuel: Very interesting question . . . off the top of my head, it's around 18. He's an elite guy, obviously.

John Manuel: Yes, and no, Karstens is more 21-30.

John Manuel: My bad for posting this question . . .

John Manuel: Nice point, 49th overall in '95 is after his '94 season. Hughes is a better prospect and Brian Taylor would be a better answer. The Yanks also gave Wang $1.9 million in 2000, and Hideki Irabu was comparable to the buzz that Matsuzaka is getting now, so there are two other names to consider. I'm a huge Matsuzaka guy, saw him in Sydney in 2000 (that has to make it into every chat, some Sydney 2000 reference) and he was sick as a 19-year-old. Matsuzaka vs. Sheets in the first Olympic game with American and Japanese professionals . . . pretty special. U.S. won in extras on a homer by Mike Neill.

John Manuel: Also a good point, but those were three teenagers last year, this is two college RHPs, so I would hope the Yankees are projecting less and have more of known quantities here. Good point though.

John Manuel: Horne and McCutchen, and Marquez isn't really second tier, he's just on the back of the first tier.

John Manuel: Brendan, I think it does preclude a top 3 system. A top three system has balance. No Cs, no LHPs, no SS-2b depth, those things matter. Get some LHPs and some Cs especially (I like a couple Yanks SS-2b types, like Corona and Wilmer Pino), and then think top 3-5. Or sign Matsuzaka, I guess . . .

John Manuel: All of them do, almost in that order . . . move Kontos up to the front.

John Manuel: I would guess no, and they mean Southern California's catchers weren't good in '06 so Kennedy didn't trust his stuff. My problem is his stuff isn't that nasty, so I guess I'm not 100 percent buying.

John Manuel: Double-A, and he really took off in the second half . . . I'd say he's got a shot to be a No. 3. His history of inconsistent command makes it unlikely he will be more than that.

John Manuel: I like 'em both, especially Kontos, gotta root for the Greek-American. Norton's probably more of a reliever, but both are 21-30 guys, Kontos maybe a tick above.

John Manuel: I'm just not a huge Curtis guy and don't think he has Ethier's bat or power.

John Manuel: They got the Crushin' Russian, Kouzmanoff . . . I like that. Potentially nice move for both clubs, Nevada represent with Kouzmanoff, too bad the Tribe didn't throw in Inglett too. Andy Brown has a better arm than most in the Padres system, so I think it could work for both.

Moderator: That's enough folks . . . thanks for all the questions. Jim Callis will be here Friday with the Red Sox top 10 and chat.