The "tactical" advantage to paying for a 150 OPS+ and getting a 120 OPS+ is that you can still play him. But, you are JUST as mandated to make up the extra wins from your "free" players.
Right. If your pricey 150 OPS+ guy slumps he's still a good player. Overpaid, but good. If your okay player paid half that slumps you just have dead weight.
The idea that we would pay, say, Smoak for his age-30-to-35 years, though, isn't any different or better than paying another 30-to-35 year old, except that you have a better idea how he produces in your home park. If Richie Sexson had played for us before his free agent contract that wouldn't make the last years of his FA deal any better. He aged out and died, and it wouldn't have mattered whether we were rewarding him or not.
Financial loyalty? We can no more afford to pay Felix, Pineda, Smoak and Ackley all top-free agent dollars at the same time than we could afford to buy Lee, Fielder and Pujols all now.
If we pay Ackley, that likely means that Smoak is NOT getting paid and we will need a new first baseman. Hopefully we've developed one by then (looking at you, Cron - sign already). We don't have to prove to young players that we'll sign them all if they play well. We just need young players who play well, and to have the vast majority of our money producing the requisite WAR.
And I don't care if that comes from within or without, as long as it comes.
~G