Add new comment

Nice take, Beni.
Of course, the Mets added what high priced veteran talent in '69?
None.
In fact, they replaced their only over 30 bat (Ed Charles - 3B - .761) with Wayne Garrett .558.  (Okay, Charles was still on the team but crashed to around .600 and was replaced with the rookie).
Of course, '69 was before free agency.  But, my foundation point remains the same.  From an historical perspective, adding a "best bat" FA almost never works. 
And I'll go ahead and note again here for the record - the same effect does not seem to be true for "best arm" FA pitchers.  As a general rule, pitcher sloshing doesn't show the same team-detrimental results that "best bat" pickups do. 
Look through the WS winners from today backwards.  How many have a "best bat" (team leader) that became a star elsewhere and then was imported?
2011 - Cards - (Pujols)
2010 - Giants - (Posey)
2009 - Yanks - (Teixeira) *** (Jeter led team with 6.1 WAR, fyi)
2008 - Phillies - (Howard, Utley ... pick one)
2007 - BoSox - (Ortiz)
2006 - Cards - (Pujols)
2005 - ChiSox - (Konerko)
2004 - Boston - (Ortiz)
2003 - Marlins - (Lee, Lowell, Cabrera)
2002 - Angels - (Salmon, Anderson)
The Yankees are the only team whose offensive leader (Teixeira) that season was an established star brought in from outside.  I trust I don't have to make a case why Seattle shouldn't use the Yankees as a model for how to build a winning team.  Though I probably should point out that the 2009 Yankees had more internally developed players (Posada, Jeter, Cano, Caberra and Gardner as regulars than any of the other 2000s Yankees teams ... which all failed to win the WS).