Even with big FA signings, it's more about how efficiently the money is spent. Even if a crap team signs an expensive FA, that player turns into an asset that can then be dealt if need be. The issue that comes into play when you make a really bad FA signing that cannot be moved because the poor contract inhibits a trade. Nolasco is a perfect example of this. This teams issue hasn't necessarily been spending money, it's whom the money was spent on. Yes, some deals work out and others do not. Especially in the FA market, exposure to risk is the key element. Higher payroll teams can have a higher tolerance for that risk because they have the cash flow to cover for it. Less payroll teams do not have that luxury and have to be much more careful. I think with this team, signing a FA is fine, it's trading of prospects that I'm more concerned about. Now is not the time to do that. Get back to a .500ish team, then start filling holes with organization depth. That's what the Cubs and Royals have done recently with great success.