Originally Posted by F.B.N.
If we had a 1st or 2nd base prospect in the system then I would hesitate to sign him for 3 years. All we have is Chris Carter (25) and Aaron Bates (23) in the sytem. Most, if not all the 1b and 3b prospects of any worth are a few years away from being FA's. I would overpay for Lowell, the return you get in the clubhouse for him more than offsets the overpaying.
I guess I come down to the point that the market dynamics dictate we're going to overpay for a thirdbaseman.
It's a question of whether we're going to overpay Lowell or overpay A-Rod.
Lowell's 33 years old -causing many to question what he'll contribute in year 3 (or even year 4) of a multi-year contract that someone will likely offer him if not us... he'd be 36 or 37 at the end of a contract that would probably pay him about $12 million a season I'm guessing.
A-Rod's 32 years old - and no one seems the least bit concerned about paying him $30 million a season when, in years 7, 8, 9 & 10 - i.e. ages 38-42 - he's unable to field and questionable at DH.
Why do we want to lock ourselves in with a 38 - 42 year old DH at $30 million a year right now?
We don't even know who's going to be available in free agency 5 years down the line - maybe there's another Big Papi!?
And seeing what A-Rod's RBI record in the post season is in his prime, why do we think he's going to get dramatically better as he slows and ages?
I'm just not understanding this - I'd much prefer to have Mike Lowell and another starting pitcher, and take my chances on who might be available in free agency 3 or 4 years down the line than commit $300 million to A-Rod.
A-Rod's good - but not that good - not by a longshot - and only in the regular season.