The Diamondbacks are in negotiations with Paul Goldschmidt for a long term deal

3 Comments

Diamondbacks first baseman Paul Goldschmidt isn’t arbitration-eligible until after the 2014 season and is under team control though 2017. The team, however, is interested in locking him up long term. When asked about it last month, Goldschmidt said that he’s prefer to think it over for a while.  Apparently he’s done thinking:

 

Not a bad idea to get something done if you’re the team anyway, as Goldschmidt hit .286/.359/.490 with 20 home runs, 82 RBI, 18 stolen bases and an .850 OPS and, at 25, is likely to improve upon those numbers going forward.

The Giants are looking at Jarrod Dyson for center field

Getty Images
Leave a comment

The Giants, you have have heard, picked up Andrew McCutchen yesterday. As things currently stand, McCutchen is first on the depth chart at center field. That’s probably a placeholder situation, though, because (a) McCutchen really shouldn’t be playing center field anymore; and (b) the Giants know he shouldn’t be playing center field anymore. I mean, if an evil genie appeared and told Bruce Bochy he’d be granted any wish he wanted, but the price of it would be that McCutchen HAS to be his center fielder, I’m sure everyone would make do, but it’s not an ideal situation.

To that end, Jerry Crasnick of ESPN is reporting that the Giants have free agent Jarrod Dyson in their sights. Jon Jay and Cameron Maybin are considered some backup options.

Dyson is obviously a superior defender, and he has some wheels too. The bat is no great shakes — he’s never been even a league average hitter in terms of OPS+ — but you can put up with the .251/.324/.350 with five homers and 30 RBI he posted in 2017 if you’re getting good leather in the spacious AT&T Park outfield. He’ll steal you some bases too, having swiped 28 in 111 games for the Mariners last season.

The big splash move would be to go get Lorenzo Cain, but that’ll cost the Giants, who are already near the luxury tax threshold, some more money. Dyson may be a better fit in light of that.