I can certainly squint and see the resemblance. But since this is the internet, I feel compelled to argue.
First, "while a six year deal worked out for Lester" is at least an arguable point. I recently read something that suggested his production was worth about $30M less than the salary he received. While that's certainly within the margin of error for these WAR estimates (and particularly so when there's a world series title involved), I think whether he was really worth the contract or not is at least up for debate. I'd lean towards "yes" but that's hardly settled.
But more importantly, Lester's contract fulfilled a very specific role that Nola's cannot. Lester's signing was a statement. Signing Lester signaled we were going all-in, and that (plus the development of our young core) made us an interesting destination in 2016 for free agents. Heyward probably would have signed anyway based on the money. But guys like Zobrist, Lackey, and Fowler could have all received millions more elsewhere and opted for here because they thought we represented their best shot at a title.
There's no replicating that aspect of that signing. We had held the purse strings tight under the Theo regime prior to Lester's signing. But there's been examples since then. We have signed Swanson, Suzuki, and Taillon. Our payroll is already on the higher end of the league. So there's no statement to be made. And any statement that might be implied is muddied by the treatment of Darvish -- signed to a massive deal and traded shortly thereafter. Unless we're going full Mets with it, and that ain't happening.