I'm on board for adding Morales (relatively young and can play first base, switch hitter without platoon splits). Hart is another question. He missed all of last year and may or may not bounce back and be a productive hitter. I would avoid Loney, since he had his best year since 2007, seems like an aberration.

I'm on board for adding Morales (relatively young and can play first base, switch hitter without platoon splits). Hart is another question. He missed all of last year and may or may not bounce back and be a productive hitter. I would avoid Loney, since he had his best year since 2007, seems like an aberration.

 

Hart is the riskiest option of the three, but also holds the greatest potential reward at the lowest cost. 3rd highest ISO among available free agents for the years 2010-12. Should be available for a very reasonable short-term contract plus incentives ($6-10M/yr?). Not only could his midwestern career proximity in Milwaukee appeal to him.....and his family man/good guy/big teddy bear status play well to the fanbase in Minnesota, if he does have a good rebound physically and production-wise, he would also make an excellent trading chip at deadline.

So, they should not sign free agents, because they will not be winners next year, but they should risk the long term value of your best player? Does that make sense to those that argue against them trying to be good next year?