I would disagree with that. They were already rushed a little. If they have a poor season, it means they are definitely off the fast track of development. Look at Lind or Romero who came a little slower. The Jays will now have their best years under control. Who wants to have Snider as a free agent at the agent of 27 or 28? The most important thing for these players is staying healthy and getting their at bats in.

Assuming Jackson and Ahrens stay healthy in 2010, both guys would have received over 1200+ AB’s to show what they could do at the plate. If they repeat their 2009 performance, you’re not going to find too many players that went on to a meaningful career in the majors after such a poor start. Heck I did a little bit of digging and the only name I could find was John McDonald. Internally I don’t think anybody views Ahrens as the future starting 3B although there might be a little bit of hope left for Jackson as a future starting SS. It’s a big year for both players and I’ll be rooting for them.

Damon would be interesting, though he'd do ugly things to outfield defence. On the other hand, while I like Bautista as a bench player - versatile, mashes lefties - I really don't think he should be the full-time right-fielder or leadoff hitter. You could mix & match defence and righties/lefties depending on the situation.

Of course, I don't know how likely Damon would be to come to Toronto after playing in New York & Boston. And he's still represented by Scott Boras, so I don't know how much of a bargain you're going to get.

The objective indicators have Damon as a slightly above-average defender in left-field over the last 3 years.

This off-season, Damon's defensive reputation has diminished to Pat Burrell level, which, of course, is absurd. Repeat something often enough and people will eventually believe it. Defensive reps are like "cancer in the clubhouse" reps, not easily shaken once webospherically entrenched.

Damon can't throw. That's obvious. But he can run and catch more proficiently than any of the team's existing corner outfielders.

The O's have some good young talent, but it doesn't always come together all at once. Only Jeremy Guthrie pitched more than 125 innings last year, and only two starters - together totalling 200 innings - with an ERA+ over 100.

They might break out and beat the Jays, but they might not. Since they haven't even won 80 games since 1997, I'll believe it when i see it.

Better prospects than Matusz have struggled in their first shot at the Majors. Young pitchers are unpredictable, which is a danger both the O's and Jays face; some bad luck or injuries could put either team in the cellar. They could both win anywhere from 60-80 games, depending on how things break

Both teams have some major wildcards - the Jays could also get a big boost if Vernon Wells and Shaun Marcum are healthy and effective, and Travis Snider figures out which pitches to swing at.

BA have a feature today, the 32nd team.  It has prospect reports for some players who were bumped or cut out of the top 30 prospects list.  The Jays have two players in the list, Brian Jeroloman and Bobby Ray who presumably would have been in the top 30 before the Halladay trade.

Brian Jeroloman obviously did not make the Jays top 30 list.  This is not a big surprise based on his poor 2009 season.  Ray is a bit more surprising to me, other than any lingering concerns over his injury history.  I though Ray did not look overmatched in his brief trial last season.  His stuff moves a lot and if he could control it he could have a nice career.

In any event these are setups for the BA top 30 prospect book which is now shipping.

I think it's a ranking of prospects of the decade, not just drafts, since Izturis wasn't drafted. It also shows that BA's not flawless - they chose Shaun Macum as best pick of the decade (not sure by what metric), but Marcum was never on BA's top ten Jays prospects lists.

Will, order the damn book.  It is a must for anybody who is even mildly interested in prospect porn.  I keep it on my bedside table year round. 

As for the Orioles, they strike me as the mid-decade Rays, with a bit less young talent and a bit more payroll.  The Rays took a few seasons of missing expectations before finally breaking out and I suspect the Orioles may follow suit.  The payroll issue may mitigate that somewhat though.

It seems intangibly that young teams take a bit longer to "learn" that they can be a top team in the league.

It is a must for anybody who is even mildly interested in prospect porn.  I keep it on my bedside table year round. 

I may never read a scouting report again.

You know you're a sorry ass organization when...

... you sign Kevin Millar to a minor league contract. Gotta love them Cubs.

broadcaster still in his prime.

That's a bit overstated -- he is close to 60 and been broadcasting for more than 30 years, so while the examples of Ernie Harwell and Harry Caray and the like ring out, they are exceptions, not the rule.

It is extraordinarily unlikely that Miller will be on the air, at least regularly -- if at all -- when he is 74 or 75.

That said, your point is well made about Cheek, but I think Miller clearly has posted Hall of Fame worthiness in his career to date, too.

However, as The Hardball Times points out, there's a convincing argument neither of those is correct. It's Evan Longoria's.

However, as The Hardball Times points out, there's a convincing argument neither of those is correct. It's Evan Longoria's

I find the article quite disturbing. What is wrong with quality people not being greedy, and giving something back to the team that gave him an opportunity. He will make enough money during that contract to never have to worry about money again. His team is a small budget team and maybe just maybe winning means more to him than an extra dollars on top of the 10 or so Million he will already be making.

Nothing is "wrong" with it. If that's what Longoria did then it's actually quite admirable. I hope Travis Snider feels similarly. The issue is, as the author points out, what reason do we have to assume that was his motivation, aside from the fact his contract already appears to be vastly below the current market?

If you are assuming that Longoria wants to maximize his earnings, particularly while young and healthy and talented, than his contract was a giant blunder by him and his agent. Alternatively, it wasn't a blunder, but it was a severe discount in return for $17 million up front (admittedly not an insubstantial amount of money).

I think the author was just drawing attention to how Longoria's contract is already looking like a huge benefit for Tampa. I don't think the author was trying to be "disturbing" and portray selflessness as a negative quality. Until there's evidence or at least some indication that this was Longoria's main motivation, I don't think we can ascribe that characteristic to him. I'll greatly admire Longoria if he signs another significantly below-market contract with Tampa when he nears free agency, but if he signs a market-value contract there or elsewhere, I'll wonder why he didn't try to maximize his earnings earlier.

Market value is assessed at a point in time.  It cannot be afforded the benefit of hindsight.  If the contract wasn't a blunder at the time, it cannot be one now.  He has no doubt outperformed his contract to date, but that is not a judgement on the agent.

6-10 year contracts for 22 year-olds is a rare occurrence.  I'm sure there'll be ones constructed the same way that will be considered bulnders on the part of the GM.

There's been plenty of can't miss 22 year-olds that missed, badly.

As the author points out in the comments section, Alex Gordon, a can't-miss prospect who seems to be headed in the direction of missing, will probably earn close to $17 million in his pre-FA years. If he doesn't, he won't miss by very much. So, Longoria didn't really save anything in his pre-FA years. What he gained was some guaranteed money once he hit FA ($27 million), but he seems to have potentially lost much more than that amount in possible FA money. Also, he lost the ability to sign a long-term contract at 27 instead of 30, which likely would have been to his benefit.

There are can't-miss prospects who miss, but there are fewer can't-miss prospects who are picked 3rd overall after an outstanding career as a collegiate hitter and who rocket through the minor leagues.

Terming it the worst contract in baseball is not the issue. The main point is that he traded a lot of potential future earnings in return for some guaranteed security. Maybe he values the security of that deal very highly, but he sacrificed substantial future earnings in order to get it.