I will do some book signings, but as of right now nothing specific is planned, and it's more up to Harper Collins than me. I will figure out some way to sign books if I'm not doing many appearances for that.

I've said there's no such thing as a bad one year deal. That's pretty much how I feel here. The Jays get to roll the dice on having Bautista get healthy and produce more than he did last year; if he does 2015 again, it's a steal.

Bautista, easily.

I don't think so. I think he's just the name you know.

Yes, I think there is - and I think we've even seen a little more of that this past year. There's an old baseball maxim about catchers developing later offensively because of the physical and mental toll of the position. I don't know how true that is, or how you'd really measure that given the various ways catchers become catchers, but we've seen a lot of examples of late-blooming hitters behind the plate, like Lucroy and Mesoraco, enough that I try to keep an open mind on guys like Kelly.

He was going to be #2 on my Seattle list, and is on the top 100. No-brainer for Atlanta, even with the very high risk Gohara brings. Huge LHP with ++ fastball and the chance for a plus breaking ball.

Twins come to mind immediately. Chargois, Reed, Melotakis, Burdi if healthy, etc.

Not true. I ranked Sanchez as a top 20 prospect in baseball one year.

There is no way you're getting Buehler for Cesar Hernandez. That's wishful thinking to the extreme.

Not really. I'd just prefer to see us remedy past mistakes by declining to repeat them.

Yes, it's already starting. The objective data are clear that he's not deserving. The illusion of memory - or the simple desire for something false to be true - can't trump that. And oh, by the way, Vizquel got exactly one MVP vote, 8th on someone's ballot in 1999, in his entire career. So the guy was never considered by any voter as a top ten player in his league except that one time, but he's a Hall of Famer? These are essentially the same voters, and they're just changing their minds on a whim, because he was a nice guy or some shit like that.

He's the President of the country where I live, of which I am a proud citizen. Therefore, he is 'my' President, even though I do not support him, his actions, or his proposed policies. I don't get to pretend there's some shadow government in exile and that that's my president instead.

I get a bunch of these questions every year, and the answer is always the same. One prospect just doesn't make that kind of difference. This week's trade of Dan Straily wasn't factored into the org rankings because it happened too late, but I wouldn't move any teams for it either.

Definitely a chance, but he does have to answer real questions about his hit tool. There's power, but I don't know if he will actually hit.

Sale's the slightly better pitcher, Quintana has the extra year of control, so I think it's fair to say you expect as much for Q as for Sale. I don't see a case for saying more or less.

That's true of almost every team in the 11-20 range. Plus we'll have another draft, another July 2 period, another trade deadline...

Helps his value right off the bat, but the bat is the question, isn't it? He hasn't hit enough to be an everyday catcher yet.

Hold him. No way I deal him for Dozier. Or anyone, practically speaking.

Because there are ten better? Saying your team should be in the top 5 or 10 is meaningless unless you can make a specific case that they're better than, say, Cincinnati or Milwaukee. And really, the Phillies' system as a whole did not have a good 2016. Crawford struggled. Appel got hurt. Quinn got hurt, which he does a lot. Kilome struggled way more than he should have. Williams regressed badly. They had a nice draft, but not a great one; Moniak wasn't #1 on my board then and he's below a few other 2016 draftees on the top 100. Now, I'm just listing negatives here - there are many, many positives - but that gives you some sense of why they might not be as high as you, thinking only of their system and not others, expected.

Keep it short (and polite - God only knows what kind of vile calls they're getting). Are you planning to vote to confirm Person X? If so, I wish you'd reconsider; if not, thank you. And that's it. You're probably talking to some poor staffer who's getting deluged with calls on both sides. Imagine being him/her, and how you'd like the callers to treat you, and do THAT.

Hasn't had a healthy, effective season for 2011. I would not bet on him working out. Maybe a ten percent chance. Not saying it's a bad signing, but it's more like throwing a dart with the lights dimmed.

Yep, makes sense to me. I'm all in on Gsellman. Definite starter, right now.

Love it for the Reds. Top 100 guy in Castillo, decent RHR in Brice, lottery ticket in White (probably doesn't work out, but a guy worth having in the system to try to develop). Makes no sense for the Marlins.

Nope, guy can't play first at all, and he's a mediocre hitter with brute strength power. Asked a lot of scouts about him this year; outside of the Jays themselves, I can't find anyone who buys him as a regular.

It's pretty incredible - I remember the Jeter, A-Rod, Nomar, Tejada years and how people talked of that as a historical moment, but the current belanger of shortstops in the big leagues is even better, and similarly young.

I can't do that, because any player could be traded at any time. (Look at Kopech, Moncada, and Giolito, all top 25 guys, all traded last month.) The rankings are always team-agnostic.

Wiegel, because I think he's pretty close to it, and his ceiling is lower than some of the others'.

Definitely not. Think he goes to AAA and works on receiving, game calling, and taking a pitch every week or so.

Support, strongly. European countries that have decriminalized drug use have had much better results and lower cost than we have with the War on Drugs. And I say that despite having never tried any illegal drugs (not even weed), and having lost an uncle to suicide after years of addiction.

Ehhh, eh? Eh.

It's been very weird how even Mets fans have tended to believe the worst on Smith, even though he was the 11th pick in his draft, highly rated as an amateur, and has been young for everywhere he's played. Dude can hit.

They're expecting a pretty constant output from him, hoping he'll add some length to their rotation, and that he doesn't end up a max effort guy.

Lindor and Bogaerts are 100% shortstops to me. Correa is most likely to move of the four, given his size and defensive metrics that say he's been below average. Seager is already defying the odds; he's the biggest SS in MLB history, but he's playing well there and I doubt they move him until he either plays worse or they have a better option in the system (which I don't think they do anyway).

You're welcome. Two different competencies for organizations, and there are absolutely teams that excel in one and fail in the other. Under Doug Melvin, the Brewers acquired a lot of talent in two separate waves, but they couldn't develop a pitcher to save their lives, and in fact ruined some pretty good prospects along the way. The White Sox had trouble getting and keeping talent in their system for some time, but their development guys worked wonders with castoffs like Quintana. Different staffs with different people, and if the two departments (really more like three, with amateur separate from international) don't communicate, you're probably going to have trouble.

Yes, and lots of independent book stores too. I have a soft spot for buying books in person too.

No, I think it's the lack of women in the pipeline. If there's sexism, which there might be, it's all the way at the start of the process. But I suspect there's some self-selection going on - women see few women rising in the orgs, so they don't apply for entry-level jobs because they believe the opportunities aren't there.

I would not have voted for him, so I can't say "well, he should still be on the ballot," but I agree with the sentiment that one and done makes him seem like less of a player than he was.

Yes, in the sense that Gleyber could be the cornerstone shortstop for a decade, and Kaprelian has ace stuff and size if he stays healthy. They haven't had prospects like this in some time.

Nope, Lofton was a borderline candidate who got no support whatsoever. The electorate as a whole does a poor job. They get the obvious ones right, but it takes a few years in some cases. They really struggle with a lot of guys who are comfortably above the historical standards but don't "feel" like HoFers. And then they support clearly unqualified guys like Hoffman or, soon enough, Vizquel. But remember, I'm the bad guy here for trying to hold people accountable for their votes.

Nope. See earlier answer. These rankings aren't just about a guy or two. Atlanta's system might run 30 deep in players who project to some sort of real major-league value.

You're welcome. And if that's Sydney, Australia, can I hang out with you for the next four to eight years?

I alternate. Pour-over one day, espresso the next. If I had to choose just one, espresso. But sometimes I get single-origin beans while traveling or from friends with roasters, and those often are too potent for espresso.

If those are the choices, I'd go 70% franchise player, 30% seen the best.

Fame, ego, more money. Never underestimate the desire of rich people to get richer.

That stuff does not bother me at all. I know some people would say any hazing amounts to bullying, but if it's not violent, doesn't involve public humiliation, and the coaches are playing the responsible adults (making sure the trivial doesn't become more than that), I think they can have positive effects.

I would agree. All these anti-science people overseeing departments where science matters? The Holy See is more friendly to modern science right now than our federal government.

That's Benintendi. I think he's the better prospect/player anyway, but catchers wear down faster, are more prone to injury, and play 20-25 fewer games per year.

Or like it's a rooting interest. I care about our country - about me and my family, about all the people I know across the country, about my readers, about people who are economically or socially marginalized or at risk. I truly believe this administration will pursue policies that will hurt many of those people, far too many, without helping enough. This isn't rah-rah stuff. And if you want to disagree with me on policy questions, by all means, let's talk about them. But "get over it" tells me you don't want to have that conversation. You think you won something.

Yes, although it bugs me that all three lost velocity at AAA/majors. What the heck was happening in Arizona to cause that?

I'm not a big fan of his OBPs. He may be a nice guy. I just like hitters who get on base and/or play a position. I didn't like the Baltimore deal - he's being paid to be a fringy regular, but if he's back to a .300 OBP he's closer to replacement-level.