Arizona Diamondbacks Need to Get an Extension Done with Paul Goldschmidt
Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports
The Arizona Diamondbacks have spent almost the entire offseason trying to revamp their offense to reflect the desires of manager Kirk Gibson and general manager Kevin Towers.
When the dust settled, it certainly looked like the D'backs had made the decision to build around first baseman Paul Goldschmidt.
The 25-year-old Goldschmidt is on the brink of stardom, as his first two seasons in the big leagues would lead you to believe. That feeling has only continued this spring, where Goldschmidt is currently hitting .429 for Arizona during camp.
It's funny that Goldschmidt ran second to Craig in average last season, because the Cards recently signed Craig to a five-year, $31 million contract extension. Craig's contract is pretty reasonable and something that Arizona should consider getting done with Goldschmidt before the season starts.
Craig is three years older than Goldschmidt, but they have similar service time and games played at the major league level. If anything, it makes it more likely that the Diamondbacks might get a better return doing a five-year deal with player this young.
By trading Justin Upton and Chris Young, the Diamondbacks made the conscious decision to sacrifice power to generate contact and the ability to grind out at-bats.
Adding experienced veterans like Martin Prado and Cody Ross will only help Goldschmidt become the run producer that everyone expects.
The Diamondbacks figure to open 2013 with their deepest lineup in years, making it far more likely that they will manufacture runs and stop relying on the home run to bail them out.
Putting players in front of Goldschmidt who will actually work counts and get on base will only help the young first baseman become the main force of the 2013 lineup.
Locking up Goldschmidt now, before he has had the benefit of another season, would provide security for both player and team.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?