I agree with your assessment of Namba Gerry.  I believe he will be back in Lansing as well.  There seemed to be some tension between him and Mike Redmond last season that saw Namba taken out of a game and benched the last couple of games during the regular season and pretty much throughout the playoffs.  My guess is that Redmond will kind of shy away from him on the Dunedin roster.

Ahrens is in a difficult position.  He has been a disappointment, but I think you have to either move him up and pressure him or cut bait.

China fan that is a possibility.  I mentioned that at the end of my Las Vegas paragraph.

Kevin Goldstein at B Pro has his Blue Jay top 11 prospects up.  I can't reproduce the commentary but here are his top eleven:

Five-Star Prospects

1. Travis d’Arnaud, C
2. Jake Marisnick, OF

Four-Star Prospects

3. Daniel Norris, LHP
4. Anthony Gose, OF
5. Noah Snydergaard, RHP

Three-Star Prospects

6. Drew Hutchison, RHP
7. Justin Nicolino, LHP
8. Deck McGuire, RHP
9. Adonys Cardona, RHP
10. Kevin Comer, RHP
11. Christopher Hawkins, OF

Who reaches respectability first: Orioles or Astros?

Astros.

OUCH!

It's interesting how far Jenkins has plummeted in BP's estimation over the last couple of years, notwithstanding a decrease in his H/9 IP rate.

I have nothing to say about Jenkins in specific. But on the subject of H/9, I will say that K/9 is more informative and more demonstrative of a skill. A good H/9 is almost always linked to a high K/9 which only stands to reason: fewer batters putting the ball in play, ergo fewer hits allowed. But sometimes H/9 can betray luck, either good or bed, or the quality of a defense, or random variability. Sometimes it can look like a skill but not really be one.

Show me a ptcher with a good H/9 and a so-so K/9 (Francisco Cordero 2011) and I'll show you a pitcher with an unduly low BABIP whose due for a comeuppance. I don't know that you can have H/9 as a repeatable skill and not also have K/9 as a skill. (Okay, I will concede that the ability to induce DPs can be seen as a H/9 skill that is not K-related).

Ryan Day - the system may have had a guy who would be viewed as a 5 star talent later but in 2010 BA didn't see him as that. Saying there was a guy there who would eventually be viewed that way is like saying Pittsburgh had a 50 HR guy that they traded for a backup catcher when at the time it was a utility player who was overpaid (as far as many here were concerned) for a catcher who was still viewed as a prospect for more than backup duty.

This is where ceiling projections are important, though. Rehashing the obvious, Bautista was never considered to have elite power potential. He significantly altered his swing at the major league level, things got freaky, and Jays fans are now reaping the benefits. That's a lot different than looking at an arm strength prospect in short season ball and saying "if he survives attrition, smooths out his delivery, pulls his command together, tightens up his slider and learns a ML average changeup, he's a front-line starter." That's a lot of things that have to come together and a lot of times, most won't. Some do, but you just don't know if this is going to be that particular guy, and he gets discounted accordingly. When it does, that one-time interesting but raw arm ends up a 5 star prospect when he's ready to matriculate. At that first snapshot, while the talent's there, he won't have a high rank because of the risk. Often, he'll get pushed down further than a Magnuson / Farina / Farquhar type who is closer and has survived the attrition even though their peak potential isn't anywhere near the short season guy.

Basically I'm saying an important factor that gets left out when considering system rankings is whether that system has room to grow from high upside but raw talent. A system built on AA 7th inning guys, crafty lefties and scrappy second baseman is quite different than a system built around high-risk high-reward talent. In Sickles rankings, the Giants were 26th and the Indians were 27th. Going forward, however, Cleveland has a far better system outlook... they just don't know which guys are going to be the ones to blossom yet.

Rehashing the obvious, Bautista was never considered to have elite power potential.

Not so. The Pittsburgh scout who recommended drafting him gave him a 70 power, believing Bautista to have 30 HR potential. He may have been a 20th round draft pick, but ended up getting a $500K signing bonus.

Really, an evaluation should have two ratings.  One that lists the ceiling and the other that lists the probability of the ceiling.

Andy Seiler, was the only evaluator who I've seen do this. Here are 2 links, the 1st explaining his system and the 2nd his review of the Jays 2010 picks with his pre-draft ratings for each.

http://www.mlbbonusbaby.com/2010/02/01/the-seiler-rating-system/

http://www.mlbbonusbaby.com/2010/6/23/1530538/draft-review-toronto-blue-jays

"Bautista won two early converts in Pittsburgh scouts Jack Powell and Mark McKnight, and the Pirates chose him in the 20th round as a "draft and follow." The plan was to track his progress the next spring and see whether he was worth signing before he re-entered the draft. Then the Pirates invited him to PNC Park for a workout and saw a 70-grade arm and 70-plus power on the 20-80 scouts scale. It was enough to persuade then-scouting director Mickey White to recommend giving Bautista a $500,000 bonus: second-round money."

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=5542048

There's been a lot of discussion about broadcasting revenues around here lately, so I thought I'd link and interesting piece from the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

The only thing I'd take issue with is his 12-15x cash flow multiple used to value broadcasting companies.  I'm not sure he's applying the multiple to the right measure of cash flow, at least in the case of STO.

FYI, Sportsnet revenues were about $220m for F2011.