No, but I think it's plus. I got some grief over ranking him as high as I did - not just from readers but from friends within the game. Granted, it's only high-A, but at least he's played well out of the chute. That's all for this week; sorry there were some little software glitches and a brain cramp or two on my end. I'll be back at some point next week, but with travel to Omaha for BBTN it might not be on Thursday. Thank you as always for reading.

I get the sense that's over with now. I hope so at least.

Um .... Jackson Stephens! Aristides Aquino! Nick Senzel! Wait, that might be cheating.

Not really, unless the body language is terrible, like Donavan Tate's was in HS - totally disinterested.

Almost none. Definitely some selection bias here.

Big gap between those outcomes. I think Kuhl's a two-pitch reliever. Keller might be a 2. Good athlete, fresh arm, chance for three pitches.

No change. Isn't AJP the worst framer or one of the worst in baseball? So an elastic net would be better behind the plate.

Thank you for that. I think it's doctor to doctor. That raging crackpot pediatrician in Tennessee who came out as a vaccine-denying quack is an MD, so there are idiots on both sides.

Yep, totally see why it won the Pulitzer. Oddly gripping given the subject matter and lack of any traditional narrative element like a mystery or concern over a sympathetic main character.

Very good point. Even helps for the Cal League - you can send Puig to rehab in Rancho Cucamonga and, uh, keep tabs on him while he's there.

Actually I'd advocate Finnegan over those others. Always need more pitching in those games and in one inning he'll hit 97 a few times with a wipeout slider. And he's been their best starter.

Allard, Anderson, Wentz, in that order.

I did not like the pick - he wasn't on my top 100 for the draft that year - but I believe a lot of it was that they loved the kid, knew him really well because he'd played on their scout team that summer at East Coast Pro and Area Codes, and perhaps overrated him as a player because of his makeup.

What if they get back multiple pieces who can help them?

Really believed in his swing. Was not the same for two-plus years after the wrist injury ... and maybe he was never that good before? Long way to go to reestablish himself, since it's only 11 games in AAA and he's played at that level before.

That's fair, other than Crawford.

He's a GUY, but probably not really ready for AA, more there because the Rangers didn't want to leave him in the Cal League. Kate Morrison (@unlikelyfanatic) saw his last outing. She'd have more for you.

I get hundreds of questions every week. The software says I have over 400 this week. Can't get them all.

Not sure I'd put that on anyone in this draft. It was really weak at the top. My top 3 guys were Ray, Groome, and Garrett, so that would be my answer, but even so I'm not sure they have that kind of potential ... Ray because he doesn't have quite that upside as a probable LF, the other two because they're high school pitchers.

The latter.

Yes, he is. Think I mentioned him last week in chat. Got MUCH stronger this winter, body totally changed.

Cocina Lolo, La Fia, Two Stones are our favorites in the area. The best food is in Philly though.

Liked Crawford's swing more. Better runner underway. Didn't know Crawford was this disciplined a hitter at the time.

Also, I said he'd be a closer, potentially, which is like an $8-12 million a year job. It was a childish comment and I did not respond for that reason.

I doubt those numbers are true, sorry.

Most hope for O'Hearn. Not much of a believer in the other two. Mancini's 24 and hasn't been anything special in AAA.

None. I think that's pure recency bias - he's the same guy he was in May and April and 2015. What would you project him to be the rest of this year - the player he's been the last 70 PA, or the guy you and I discussed him being when we talked a few weeks back?

Completely serious question: Why do so many fans assume players jump in or out of the top 100 after 60 games? Is the skill set the same? The swing, the body, the delivery? Is there an underlying explanation, like an injury (remember when Hosmer played half a year in low-A with a broken metacarpal in his hand), that might explain a poor performance? Phillips is still the same guy he was last year. He might just take a little longer than we'd like.

Could be a 3 if healthy but he's had some real health issues.

I think anyone who misses that much time with an arm injury is a risk going forward.

Beloved, then Song of Solomon, then stop. It's all downhill from there.

Broke his hand, I think. I know some Atlanta blogger(s) tweeted a picture of him wearing a cast.

I saw him very bad last summer, but apparently he played much better over the winter. I highly doubt he can come right to the majors and contribute, given his age and time off, but he could be an everyday player next year for someone. I'd be really concerned about investing too much given how slow and old he looked last July, though.

Twenty guys, maybe? Not enough to really talk in more than general terms. I try not to use any bandwidth on the year ahead until the draft has passed.

No, but he said my cat wasn't clutch and needed more AAA seasoning. (Grow up already.)

I agree and favor much stricter laws on who can buy guns and what guns they can purchase. (I do not own a gun and hope I never have cause to change that.)

Sorry, I totally misread the question and you're right. Still, the difference is the thirty innings, not the complete games. I guess the better analogy would be Player A makes 20 starts and completes them all, while Player B makes 30 starts and averages six innings in each, so 180 innings each. Is Player A somehow more valuable because he's completing all of those games? I don't buy it. How?

Yes, assuming he at least can put the ball in play 75% of the time.

Nothing really, other than that we're a month from the signing deadline and anything players say at this point is probably codswallop. Perhaps it's a ploy on his part or his agent's - I don't know that, but it's possible.

This looks like a new philosophy in the draft and it certainly doesn't match mine.

No. He's a starter long-term and I would transition him into that role.

Yep, stuff is great, still the same great athlete, just raw. Going to take him a while. I think everyone knew that when the Dbacks drafted him and when they gave him away.

Thanks! Glad they've worked out. One of the consolations of heavy travel is that I find some pretty fun places to eat.

I think he's a below-average defender at short but the triple-slash line is probably right, maybe a little too low in the batting average.

It really goes against the original purpose and main current value of the game: Get the best players all on one field at one time for the mass audience to watch. No one but Mrs. Duvall is turning on the game to watch Adam Duvall play. People will tune in to watch a genuine star having an off half-season, like Giancarlo Stanton. If you want to slip in a few guys who've come from nowhere, then make them young players, especially rookies, who will form the next generation of stars.

Start Contreras 4 days out of 5, let Ross catch the other day, give Montero a fruit basket.

Yes. Mengden might be a 4. Odds are both are 5s. Above replacement level, below average. Overton I'd like more if the velocity ever gets all the way back to pre-TJ levels.

I haven't liked their handling of Wong for a while now, going back to the weird (punitive?) demotion ... last April? or was that 2014? Either way, moving him off 2b seemed awfully reactive. He was never great there, never bad.

Yes - I'm most impressed that he's not striking out, actually, as that was a real concern I had about him. Power was absolutely there, Cal League or not, but I didn't know if he'd hit enough to get to it. He's doing that and more and is still just 21 in AA.

Travis MacGregor was the only day one guy on whom I had nothing. Not coincidentally, everyone I asked called that the 'worst' pick of the day - the subset of teams I asked had him either as a fifth rounder or as someone who should go to college.