I can't believe that Cespedes or Darvish combined will command the kind of years/dollars that Pujols/Fielder will. Cespedes is reportedly seeking a deal similar to Aroldis Chapman's 6 year $30 million deal. If Darvish gets a Matsuzaka-like deal (spitballing here), that would be 6 years and $52 million (plus posting fee). Pujols reportedly turned down a 9 year $210 million dollar deal. While Pujols is obviously the better player, the combined estimated cost of 6 years of Darvish/Cespedes (assuming Darvish costs a $50 million posting fee, which I doubt) versus the cost of Pujols (assuming Pujols takes the above referenced offer, which I also doubt) is: Year 1 relative D/C costs +$38 million (mostly posting fee) Year 2-6 relative D/C costs -$9.6 million Year 7-9 relative D/C costs -$23.3 million Overall, considering 3 fewer years of commitment (to a player likely in decline) plus the difference in yearly salary spread over two younger, easier to move (if necessary) players, I think committing the money to Darvish and Cespedes gives the team a lot more flexibility, albeit far less surefire talent.