Just a question, but when is it okay to overspend. The Red Sox needed a closer for the 2004 season and they overspent for Keith Foulke, even providing him an extra year. People saw that as a good move. He had a great season, followed up by a disaster. Boston also needed a short stop, so they paid Renteria 40 mil. Again, not a great signing, but they were paying for the best. In short, I think sometimes teams need to pay more to get more, and not rely on cheaper, more unpredictable alternatives.