Posted by MikeT23 on 10/1/2014 2:46:00 PM (view original):
A-Rod has been in steady decline for 5 years. FIVE YEARS!!!
What on earth would lead anyone to believe he's suddenly going to be well above average(which would be the only reason to accept the circus)?
Because he'd be better than what you'd have. If you're a team without an average 3B, A-Rod will probably be better. Continuing his steady decline would give him a .735 OPS or so? And that has value at 3B. It's worth more than $6M.
Willie Mays (tec's example) improved at age 40. Rickey would remind you that Rickey got better at age 40. Stan Musial had a beastly year at age 41. Harold Baines got better at 40. I'm not expecting A-Rod to get better, but if he does, he's a steal. If he has a .735 OPS, he might make your team better. If he falls off a cliff, ok, but even then he's probably not significantly worse than your alternative if you're SF without Sandoval, Milwaukee without Aramis, or Miami.