Is 6 years too long?

What in your opinion would make a larger difference on a baseball team: Option 1) signing two players with questionable pasts and mediocre talent, or Option 2) Landing One younger top of the line pitcher to lead your staff? I keep pondering Bill Bavasi’s free agent moves and to me they just don’t make sense. I would much rather have Barry Zito pitching at the top my rotation for the next 6 years than Jose Guillen batting 6th or 7th and Miguel Batista pitching 4th . I can understand that signing a starting pitcher no matter what their age to a 6 year deal is risky, but signing a 36 year old pitcher to a 3 year deal and a player who has been cut from 4 out of 6 teams is riskier. Barry Zito has been a consistent force for the Oakland Athletics for the past 7 years including three appearances in the All Star Game and one Cy young award. He rarely misses starts and is known for finishing the season strong. Signing him until he is 34 for $16 million dollars a year is better to me than signing 36 year old Miguel Batista to a 3 year deal at $8.5 million and 30 year old Jose Guillen to a one year $5.5 million contract with bonuses. Last year the Mariners were willing to sign Jarrod Washburn to a 4 year deal at $13 million a year. I do not see Jarrod Washburn as the ace of any pitching staff, unless he goes with Meche to the Kansas City Royals. Barry Zito would be the Ace of our pitching staff, and a player that we could count to get better as the season goes on. Not to mention that with players price tags rising like they are $16 million dollars a year will look like a bargain in 3 years. Two years ago Adrian Beltre and Richie Sexson’s contracts looked like busts, but now they look like decent deals. If we are willing to pay Miguel Batista until he is 39 or 40, then we should be willing to pay Barry Zito until he is 34 or 35. What the hell give him 7 years in my opinion, just send back Batista.