I think I heard a report on the radio that re-signing Mike Lowell in the offseason will be a priority of the team... Good to hear in my opinion, as opposed to locking $300 million into A-Rod for the next 10 years, especially after he gets implicated in Canseco's next steroids book... I can accept that A-Rod's overall season #s are better than Lowell But I can also accept the fact that we can get to the post season without A-Rod's $30 mil a season - especially if we use that $30 mil elsewhere Now this should cause one to examine what A-Rod's post season production is... at first appearance it seems he might get a bad rap Post season A-Rod has a .279 batting average, a .361 OBP and a .483 slugging average over 10 post-season series going back to his time with Seattle. Lowell however only has a .261 batting average, a .340 OBP and a .443 slugging average, over 6 post season series (including the not yet completed World Series) Of course one needs to look a little deeper and determine how A-Rod and Lowell both do when it counts the most. With 4 fewer post seasons series, A-Rod has the same number of RBIs - 17... as Lowell Over his last 3 post-season series, Lowell has 12 of his 17 RBIs... Over his last 3 post-season series, A-Rod has just 1 - only 1 - RBI. So that is a big red flag, with Lowell playing at his best when the heat is on and men are in scoring position - and A-Rod doing just the opposite. So since we're all confident that we can get to the playoffs without A-Rod's $30 million salary, who would you rather have come the post-season when it really counts? Is A-Rod really worth 10x the money you'd pay for Lowell? And even if you overpay Lowell by extending him a year more than you might like to - isn't he still a bargain compared to A-Rod?