Well to what I understand Baldwin was a greedy little bastard which is why he went to Edessa.
That's...Well, a bit exagerrated.
Granted he was ambitious, a lot. But protecting Edessa (at this point an armenian principality) meant protecting the other crusader armies from an attack coming from there.
He was actually more able than his predecessor to handle the issues of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and develloped the coast in order to secure reinforcement and trade.
The fact he spent all the dotation of his second spouse was less a mark that he was greedy than he needed money to make the kingdom something able to withstand the Fatimid and Syrian attacks.
Of course the ways he used to gain power and wealth are really discutables if not franlky bad, but I don't have any memory of an head of state being totally virtuous and pure, critically when it come to founding this state.
I think the primary results of a "successful" 1101 (all three units get to the Crusader States) is that you'd have 1) a greater pool to entice more permanent settlers. Not many, but any improvement in that situation would be a plus. 2) The Crusaders continue to be seen as unstoppable instead of a beatable faction. 3) Success will usually mean better relations between the Crusader/Byzantine factions.
1) I'm not sure. To take the exemple of Guilhèm VIII of Aquitaine, this guy never went with the idea to stay. You'll have probably the same proportion of crusaders going home after some times than the Ist crusade itself.
That said, yes, any improvement is better, but it wouldn't change the situation that much in a first time when it come to settlement. On the other hand, a sucessful 1101 means a final desintegration of Turkish Anatolian states and more regular settlers and pilgrims following.
2)Well...Ascalon already showed that their weakness was less their tactics (that were actually good, but with easily usable gaps) than their uncapacity to occupy lands where they won battles.
3)The most debatable point. A desintegration of anatolian statelets means a more powerful Byzantium that doesn't stop to retaking the coast but also the core of Anatolia.
Soon, they would want to have a real suzerainity on Antioch, more earlier than OTL with probably more sucess and more deeply.
Maybe better Jerusalem/Byzantium relations, but crusaders aren't reducable to Jerusalem.
In fact, it could piss enough some wannabe crusaders in western Christianity that it could reduce some effects of getting rid of Turks.