If Henson develops even into a slightly above average third baseman, this will be an OK deal for the Yankees economically, at about $3 million per season. (A very good or star third baseman would probably command at least $4 or $5 million once he becomes arbitration eligible, after making closer to minimum wages the first couple of years.) If he ends up a bust, it will obviously cost the Yankees. Still, their financial means make this a worthwhile gamble.

In terms of short-term implications, the Yankees can now send Henson to Triple-A Columbus and have him concentrate fully on his baseball career. The Yankees would like to see him ready to play in the major leagues by next season, when he would replace Scott Brosius, whose contract expires at the end of this season.

If Henson develops even into a slightly above average third baseman, this will be an OK deal for the Yankees economically, at about $3 million per season. (A very good or star third baseman would probably command at least $4 or $5 million once he becomes arbitration eligible, after making closer to minimum wages the first couple of years.) If he ends up a bust, it will obviously cost the Yankees. Still, their financial means make this a worthwhile gamble.

In terms of short-term implications, the Yankees can now send Henson to Triple-A Columbus and have him concentrate fully on his baseball career. The Yankees would like to see him ready to play in the major leagues by next season, when he would replace Scott Brosius, whose contract expires at the end of this season.

If Henson develops even into a slightly above average third baseman, this will be an OK deal for the Yankees economically, at about $3 million per season. (A very good or star third baseman would probably command at least $4 or $5 million once he becomes arbitration eligible, after making closer to minimum wages the first couple of years.) If he ends up a bust, it will obviously cost the Yankees. Still, their financial means make this a worthwhile gamble.

In terms of short-term implications, the Yankees can now send Henson to Triple-A Columbus and have him concentrate fully on his baseball career. The Yankees would like to see him ready to play in the major leagues by next season, when he would replace Scott Brosius, whose contract expires at the end of this season.

If Henson develops even into a slightly above average third baseman, this will be an OK deal for the Yankees economically, at about $3 million per season. (A very good or star third baseman would probably command at least $4 or $5 million once he becomes arbitration eligible, after making closer to minimum wages the first couple of years.) If he ends up a bust, it will obviously cost the Yankees. Still, their financial means make this a worthwhile gamble.

In terms of short-term implications, the Yankees can now send Henson to Triple-A Columbus and have him concentrate fully on his baseball career. The Yankees would like to see him ready to play in the major leagues by next season, when he would replace Scott Brosius, whose contract expires at the end of this season.

As I said in the earlier discussion of two days ago, there has been a mixed reaction to Henson the prospect, but he has yet to play a full minor league season above rookie ball when he was 18. The last 3 years he has left baseball at begining of August for football. I am curious how that affects his future growth. Does that imply a lot of untapped growth? He has been advanced every season in the Yankee chain I believe, but has only gotten approx. 300+ at-bats a season. Is this enough in lieu of other "superstar" prospects who have jumped levels but were able to get 500 or more at bats in a year. I seem to recall something by Bill James about, if a player is really good, the minor league AB's would represent this, i.e. if he had 3000 minor league AB's vs. another player with 1100 minor league AB's, the player with the lower amount was the better player becuase he forced his way up the ladder. I believe it was in an Ivan Rodriguez comment. Anyway, here we have an systematic artificial inhibitor to growth experience. A highly-regarded prospect who has voluntarily chosen NOT to play a full season, but little more than half seasons, never has played winter ball or the Arizona Instructional league that other team's "gems" have done. I wonder if there has been anyone similar in minor league history who had any kind of success?

Frannk

As I said in the earlier discussion of two days ago, there has been a mixed reaction to Henson the prospect, but he has yet to play a full minor league season above rookie ball when he was 18. The last 3 years he has left baseball at begining of August for football. I am curious how that affects his future growth. Does that imply a lot of untapped growth? He has been advanced every season in the Yankee chain I believe, but has only gotten approx. 300+ at-bats a season. Is this enough in lieu of other "superstar" prospects who have jumped levels but were able to get 500 or more at bats in a year. I seem to recall something by Bill James about, if a player is really good, the minor league AB's would represent this, i.e. if he had 3000 minor league AB's vs. another player with 1100 minor league AB's, the player with the lower amount was the better player becuase he forced his way up the ladder. I believe it was in an Ivan Rodriguez comment. Anyway, here we have an systematic artificial inhibitor to growth experience. A highly-regarded prospect who has voluntarily chosen NOT to play a full season, but little more than half seasons, never has played winter ball or the Arizona Instructional league that other team's "gems" have done. I wonder if there has been anyone similar in minor league history who had any kind of success?

Frannk

As I said in the earlier discussion of two days ago, there has been a mixed reaction to Henson the prospect, but he has yet to play a full minor league season above rookie ball when he was 18. The last 3 years he has left baseball at begining of August for football. I am curious how that affects his future growth. Does that imply a lot of untapped growth? He has been advanced every season in the Yankee chain I believe, but has only gotten approx. 300+ at-bats a season. Is this enough in lieu of other "superstar" prospects who have jumped levels but were able to get 500 or more at bats in a year. I seem to recall something by Bill James about, if a player is really good, the minor league AB's would represent this, i.e. if he had 3000 minor league AB's vs. another player with 1100 minor league AB's, the player with the lower amount was the better player becuase he forced his way up the ladder. I believe it was in an Ivan Rodriguez comment. Anyway, here we have an systematic artificial inhibitor to growth experience. A highly-regarded prospect who has voluntarily chosen NOT to play a full season, but little more than half seasons, never has played winter ball or the Arizona Instructional league that other team's "gems" have done. I wonder if there has been anyone similar in minor league history who had any kind of success?

Frannk

As I said in the earlier discussion of two days ago, there has been a mixed reaction to Henson the prospect, but he has yet to play a full minor league season above rookie ball when he was 18. The last 3 years he has left baseball at begining of August for football. I am curious how that affects his future growth. Does that imply a lot of untapped growth? He has been advanced every season in the Yankee chain I believe, but has only gotten approx. 300+ at-bats a season. Is this enough in lieu of other "superstar" prospects who have jumped levels but were able to get 500 or more at bats in a year. I seem to recall something by Bill James about, if a player is really good, the minor league AB's would represent this, i.e. if he had 3000 minor league AB's vs. another player with 1100 minor league AB's, the player with the lower amount was the better player becuase he forced his way up the ladder. I believe it was in an Ivan Rodriguez comment. Anyway, here we have an systematic artificial inhibitor to growth experience. A highly-regarded prospect who has voluntarily chosen NOT to play a full season, but little more than half seasons, never has played winter ball or the Arizona Instructional league that other team's "gems" have done. I wonder if there has been anyone similar in minor league history who had any kind of success?

Frannk

A couple of years ago, there were credible speculations made by credible journalists (Rob Neyer was among them) that Derek Jeter, due to his below average defense at short stop, would be moving over to third base in a few years. With the signing of Henson and Andy Morales (who the ESPN story said will move to the outfield?), those predictions appear to be wrong, at least for another half dozen years or so.

When those speculations regarding Jeter were made, the presumed future Yankee infield was going to be Nick Johnson at 1B, Alfonzo Soriano at 2B, D'Angelo Jiminez at SS, and Derek Jeter at 3B. Most of that will still probably come true, but Jeter moving to 3rd now seems very unlikely.

I am biased, but to my mind the A's "future" infield looks better: Jason Giambi (or Jason Hart) at 1B; Jose Ortiz at 2B; Miguel Tejada at SS; and Eric Chavez at 3B. (Go A's!)

A couple of years ago, there were credible speculations made by credible journalists (Rob Neyer was among them) that Derek Jeter, due to his below average defense at short stop, would be moving over to third base in a few years. With the signing of Henson and Andy Morales (who the ESPN story said will move to the outfield?), those predictions appear to be wrong, at least for another half dozen years or so.

When those speculations regarding Jeter were made, the presumed future Yankee infield was going to be Nick Johnson at 1B, Alfonzo Soriano at 2B, D'Angelo Jiminez at SS, and Derek Jeter at 3B. Most of that will still probably come true, but Jeter moving to 3rd now seems very unlikely.

I am biased, but to my mind the A's "future" infield looks better: Jason Giambi (or Jason Hart) at 1B; Jose Ortiz at 2B; Miguel Tejada at SS; and Eric Chavez at 3B. (Go A's!)

A couple of years ago, there were credible speculations made by credible journalists (Rob Neyer was among them) that Derek Jeter, due to his below average defense at short stop, would be moving over to third base in a few years. With the signing of Henson and Andy Morales (who the ESPN story said will move to the outfield?), those predictions appear to be wrong, at least for another half dozen years or so.

When those speculations regarding Jeter were made, the presumed future Yankee infield was going to be Nick Johnson at 1B, Alfonzo Soriano at 2B, D'Angelo Jiminez at SS, and Derek Jeter at 3B. Most of that will still probably come true, but Jeter moving to 3rd now seems very unlikely.

I am biased, but to my mind the A's "future" infield looks better: Jason Giambi (or Jason Hart) at 1B; Jose Ortiz at 2B; Miguel Tejada at SS; and Eric Chavez at 3B. (Go A's!)

A couple of years ago, there were credible speculations made by credible journalists (Rob Neyer was among them) that Derek Jeter, due to his below average defense at short stop, would be moving over to third base in a few years. With the signing of Henson and Andy Morales (who the ESPN story said will move to the outfield?), those predictions appear to be wrong, at least for another half dozen years or so.

When those speculations regarding Jeter were made, the presumed future Yankee infield was going to be Nick Johnson at 1B, Alfonzo Soriano at 2B, D'Angelo Jiminez at SS, and Derek Jeter at 3B. Most of that will still probably come true, but Jeter moving to 3rd now seems very unlikely.

I am biased, but to my mind the A's "future" infield looks better: Jason Giambi (or Jason Hart) at 1B; Jose Ortiz at 2B; Miguel Tejada at SS; and Eric Chavez at 3B. (Go A's!)

Frank, don't forget, if he had just gone to college and been playing for the U of M he'd have a lot fewer at-bats against generally weaker competition. He wouldn't have been playing in instructional fall leagues either. I think he's just fine at his age, in terms of experience.

Rich, the problem with the Jeter to 3B scenario is that the Yankees don't believe his defense is below average (I disagree with them), so they see no need to move him. Also, if Jeter playing SS allows us to keep Henson (assuming he develops) and Nick Johnson in the lineup (along w/the assumed good hitters in the corner OF positions) in the future, you can sacrifice from a good to a below average defensive SS. A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions. If you have to put Jeter at 3B and deal with a weak hitting SS, that hurts you more than having a slightly below average defensive SS in my opinion.

Rich I'll take an infield of Johnson, Jiminez, Jeter and Henson. A little more projecting involved (your guys are obviously further along), but don't lose any sleep crying for us. We'll be okay :-)

Frank, don't forget, if he had just gone to college and been playing for the U of M he'd have a lot fewer at-bats against generally weaker competition. He wouldn't have been playing in instructional fall leagues either. I think he's just fine at his age, in terms of experience.

Rich, the problem with the Jeter to 3B scenario is that the Yankees don't believe his defense is below average (I disagree with them), so they see no need to move him. Also, if Jeter playing SS allows us to keep Henson (assuming he develops) and Nick Johnson in the lineup (along w/the assumed good hitters in the corner OF positions) in the future, you can sacrifice from a good to a below average defensive SS. A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions. If you have to put Jeter at 3B and deal with a weak hitting SS, that hurts you more than having a slightly below average defensive SS in my opinion.

Rich I'll take an infield of Johnson, Jiminez, Jeter and Henson. A little more projecting involved (your guys are obviously further along), but don't lose any sleep crying for us. We'll be okay :-)

Frank, don't forget, if he had just gone to college and been playing for the U of M he'd have a lot fewer at-bats against generally weaker competition. He wouldn't have been playing in instructional fall leagues either. I think he's just fine at his age, in terms of experience.

Rich, the problem with the Jeter to 3B scenario is that the Yankees don't believe his defense is below average (I disagree with them), so they see no need to move him. Also, if Jeter playing SS allows us to keep Henson (assuming he develops) and Nick Johnson in the lineup (along w/the assumed good hitters in the corner OF positions) in the future, you can sacrifice from a good to a below average defensive SS. A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions. If you have to put Jeter at 3B and deal with a weak hitting SS, that hurts you more than having a slightly below average defensive SS in my opinion.

Rich I'll take an infield of Johnson, Jiminez, Jeter and Henson. A little more projecting involved (your guys are obviously further along), but don't lose any sleep crying for us. We'll be okay :-)

Frank, don't forget, if he had just gone to college and been playing for the U of M he'd have a lot fewer at-bats against generally weaker competition. He wouldn't have been playing in instructional fall leagues either. I think he's just fine at his age, in terms of experience.

Rich, the problem with the Jeter to 3B scenario is that the Yankees don't believe his defense is below average (I disagree with them), so they see no need to move him. Also, if Jeter playing SS allows us to keep Henson (assuming he develops) and Nick Johnson in the lineup (along w/the assumed good hitters in the corner OF positions) in the future, you can sacrifice from a good to a below average defensive SS. A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions. If you have to put Jeter at 3B and deal with a weak hitting SS, that hurts you more than having a slightly below average defensive SS in my opinion.

Rich I'll take an infield of Johnson, Jiminez, Jeter and Henson. A little more projecting involved (your guys are obviously further along), but don't lose any sleep crying for us. We'll be okay :-)

Meant to add in there, under, "A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions." I meant to add a sentence that said, "although the Yankees don't take advantage of this (see Mssrs. O'Neill, Martinez and Brosius) at the current time, it will be more important in the future."

Meant to add in there, under, "A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions." I meant to add a sentence that said, "although the Yankees don't take advantage of this (see Mssrs. O'Neill, Martinez and Brosius) at the current time, it will be more important in the future."

Meant to add in there, under, "A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions." I meant to add a sentence that said, "although the Yankees don't take advantage of this (see Mssrs. O'Neill, Martinez and Brosius) at the current time, it will be more important in the future."

Meant to add in there, under, "A big part of Jeter's value in playing SS is that he allows better hitters into the lineup at other postions." I meant to add a sentence that said, "although the Yankees don't take advantage of this (see Mssrs. O'Neill, Martinez and Brosius) at the current time, it will be more important in the future."