Sign Moustakas, Trade Travis Shaw?

[Eye Black]

This seems really far fetched, but according to Jim Bowden:

 

#Brewers continue to be “in” on RHP Jake Arrieta & also 3B Michael Moustakas with the idea that if they signed Moustakas they could trade Travis Shaw to NYY, ATL or NYM according to a club source.

[mlloyd10]

Both guys are represented by Boras

[MrTPlush]

I don’t think it is that far fetched. It seems Stearns is pretty motivated to use the payroll he is swimming in. This concept seems to follow a theory I have thrown out there a couple times this offseason. Trade someone(Stearns seems to be targeting the sell high guys Santana/Shaw) to gain prospects and sign someone to replace their production. Essentially you are spending your payroll to gain prospects. Though you do cause yourself to become a little older and add that decline risk with age vs. flash in the pan decline risk.

 

I think the Cain/Moustakas interest is pretty serious and the Brewers may be playing a big part in the slow market we have seen. However I think his wording is wrong. I don’t think they would sign Moustakas without already trading Shaw.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

This "rumor" seems to scream of Boras artificially creating a market for his guys. Besides a cheap salary, why would a team give up the haul of prospects its going to take to land Shaw when they could just go out and sign Moustakas? Also, I would imagine that Moustakas would be signed to play 3B, as he is great defensively, which would allow the Brewers to move Shaw over to 1B. That would make Thames and Aguilar trade bait.

[MrTPlush]

This "rumor" seems to scream of Boras artificially creating a market for his guys. Besides a cheap salary, why would a team give up the haul of prospects its going to take to land Shaw when they could just go out and sign Moustakas? Also, I would imagine that Moustakas would be signed to play 3B, as he is great defensively, which would allow the Brewers to move Shaw over to 1B. That would make Thames and Aguilar trade bait.

 

Because the team needing a 3B can’t afford to add a Moustakas salary? Maybe the Brewers would trade Shaw instead of moving him to 1B because they could gain major prospects or MLB pitching etc.

 

Thames and Aguilar aren’t worth that much and would not get nearly as much as Shaw.

[patrickgpe]

it would make no sense to sign Moustakas to a large free agent contract, and trade shaw unless the return is huge. Plus why wouldn't the teams that would potentially acquire Shaw wouldn't just sign Moustakas and not have to give up prospects.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Because the team needing a 3B can’t afford to add a Moustakas salary?

 

I can't imagine the Yankees, Mets or Braves would have any problem fitting Moose into their salary structure.

 

You are right about what would be needed to trade away Shaw. The return would have to be huge. I'm talking 2-3 Top 100 guys. Or a high-end starting pitcher. Maybe a Shaw for Archer deal? Show could take over for Longoria.

[MVP2110]

it would make no sense to sign Moustakas to a large free agent contract, and trade shaw unless the return is huge. Plus why wouldn't the teams that would potentially acquire Shaw wouldn't just sign Moustakas and not have to give up prospects.

 

I could see the Yankees dealing quite a bit for Shaw to try and stay under the tax.

[KeithStone53151]

I think this is being reported widely enough that these types of moves might actually happen. I guess I don't mind exploring this type of move, but I don't have a lot of optimism that it's going to work out how we want at any position. This is a bit of a unique offseason in that so many big market clubs aren't willing to spend, but I just don't see us getting the talent I think we'd need to get in order for a set of coordinated moves to make sense.

 

With the Yankees, I wonder if we could also take on a bad contract to get better prospects in a Shaw trade. Not Ellsbury obviously, but maybe Gardner as the 4th outfielder if he can move enough other outfielders? Though I've gotten the impression from prior trades that the Yankees either rip off a team in a trade or don't trade at all(I suspect that's why they didn't get Cole), so I'm even less optimistic about making something work with them even if it makes all the sense in the world on paper.

[MrTPlush]

Yankees and Mets definitely would have motivation to want the cheaper guy. Yankees probably want to save as much as possible for mega contracts(Harper) or avoid the luxury tax, Mets really don’t want a high payroll and it is already up there, and the Braves never make sense.

 

I guess everyone needs to understand such a flurry of moves probably depends on very specific things happening that would be favorable in the eyes of Stearns. To downgrade at 3B and spend money to get older I’m guessing the return on Shaw would be really good. Just like the Cain signing after a Santana trade. If we sign Arrieta or Darvish I am sure it would be at a not jaw dropping price.

[brewerfan82]

I think the Cain/Moustakas interest is pretty serious and the Brewers may be playing a big part in the slow market we have seen. However I think his wording is wrong. I don’t think they would sign Moustakas without already trading Shaw.

I would lean towards I don't think you trade Shaw unless you have already signed or are 99.999% sure you can sign Moustakas first. If you sign Moustakas and then don't have a trade lined up for Shaw, you still have options (playing Shaw at 1st, trading Thames instead, etc.) and an incredibly deep major league roster at the corner infield spots. If you trade Shaw and then aren't able to convince Moose to sign here, the big league club takes a huge hit. Either way isn't preferable/optimal, but I think that strategy requires both pieces to be done almost simultaneously, while leaning towards "getting stuck" with too much talent instead of having a hole in your roster.

 

it would make no sense to sign Moustakas to a large free agent contract, and trade shaw unless the return is huge. Plus why wouldn't the teams that would potentially acquire Shaw wouldn't just sign Moustakas and not have to give up prospects.

Definitely would need to be a huge return to deal Shaw, however, to the second point:

 

Moustakas Prediction via MLBTR: Five years, $85MM

Shaw Contract: Under team control and arbitration eligible through 2021

 

This offseason has seen teams hesitant to spend on big name free agents and maneuvering their rosters to keep payroll down. The market for a player like Shaw is simply larger than it is for an expensive free agent like Moustakas. With the added emphasis on spending money wisely, the value of low-cost, team controlled talent is higher than ever and you might get the return you need to pull it off.

 

There's been a few rumors floating around involving Stearns signing a FA in order to flip less expensive players (ie. Cain), perhaps he sees this as an opportunity that the Brewers can take advantage of with their current payroll.

[Madhawk23]

While I doubt this happens, I'm at least a bit intrigued by what a Shaw to Atlanta deal might look like. Let's say we do sign Moose to man 3B for the next four years, and then Atlanta offers up either Allard/Soroka and Wentz for Shaw - that would be hard to take a pass on. Now, maybe there is no way that ATL would ever offer up that package for Shaw, but I think that's what it would take for me to trade him if I were DS.

 

Or, is it possible that we sign Moose to play 3B, then move Shaw over the 1B - and then we find a trade partner for Thames? I'm not sure if Thames has much value out there on the market right now, but I guess this could be another option, right? I know Shaw played 1B before, so that could be a possibility. But, this option would probably then force us to find trading partners with both Thames and Aguilar as there would be less of a reason to now have a platoon at 1B if you had Shaw there.

 

Again - I doubt anything happens with Moustakas and the Brewers, but the Shaw to Atlanta idea would certainly be intriguing if the Braves were willing to part with some of their good, young pitching.

[tmwiese55]

If they did this I'd be hoping for Thames to be the one traded so that we're trying win now. However, I guess if you can get a legit starter back like Archer for Shaw then I get it.

 

To me, I just don't think Moustakas is anything special to be spending money on. Has anyone actually looked at his stats? He's had one season above a .314 obp. And how fluky was getting 38 HR last year with a previous high of 22, and still only had a 314 obp. Now we're going to pay him 15-20 mil while he gets to his mid 30s? No thanks imo.

[patrickgpe]

it would make no sense to sign Moustakas to a large free agent contract, and trade shaw unless the return is huge. Plus why wouldn't the teams that would potentially acquire Shaw wouldn't just sign Moustakas and not have to give up prospects.

 

I could see the Yankees dealing quite a bit for Shaw to try and stay under the tax.

The Yankees would intrigue me since they have a ton of talent in their minors. Since they traded for Stanton, I really don't think they care about the tax threshold though.

[KeithStone53151]

While I doubt this happens, I'm at least a bit intrigued by what a Shaw to Atlanta deal might look like. Let's say we do sign Moose to man 3B for the next four years, and then Atlanta offers up either Allard/Soroka and Wentz for Shaw - that would be hard to take a pass on. Now, maybe there is no way that ATL would ever offer up that package for Shaw, but I think that's what it would take for me to trade him if I were DS.

 

Or, is it possible that we sign Moose to play 3B, then move Shaw over the 1B - and then we find a trade partner for Thames? I'm not sure if Thames has much value out there on the market right now, but I guess this could be another option, right? I know Shaw played 1B before, so that could be a possibility. But, this option would probably then force us to find trading partners with both Thames and Aguilar as there would be less of a reason to now have a platoon at 1B if you had Shaw there.

 

Again - I doubt anything happens with Moustakas and the Brewers, but the Shaw to Atlanta idea would certainly be intriguing if the Braves were willing to part with some of their good, young pitching.

 

I can't imagine Allard/Soroka moving for pretty much anyone. Both guys have had frontline starter written all over them for every moment of their careers, and they aren't far off from making an impact at the MLB level. That's not to say we can't get a good pitching prospect. That team is so stacked with SP, that even getting the 3rd or 4th best pitching prospect would be fantastic for Shaw.

[tmwiese55]

Heck, if we're determined to sell high on Shaw (likely for pitching or higher end prospects) I think I'd honestly rather sign Neil Walker for 2/20 to play 3B than give Moustakas 100 mil and be locked in for 5-6 years

[Madhawk23]

While I doubt this happens, I'm at least a bit intrigued by what a Shaw to Atlanta deal might look like. Let's say we do sign Moose to man 3B for the next four years, and then Atlanta offers up either Allard/Soroka and Wentz for Shaw - that would be hard to take a pass on. Now, maybe there is no way that ATL would ever offer up that package for Shaw, but I think that's what it would take for me to trade him if I were DS.

 

Or, is it possible that we sign Moose to play 3B, then move Shaw over the 1B - and then we find a trade partner for Thames? I'm not sure if Thames has much value out there on the market right now, but I guess this could be another option, right? I know Shaw played 1B before, so that could be a possibility. But, this option would probably then force us to find trading partners with both Thames and Aguilar as there would be less of a reason to now have a platoon at 1B if you had Shaw there.

 

Again - I doubt anything happens with Moustakas and the Brewers, but the Shaw to Atlanta idea would certainly be intriguing if the Braves were willing to part with some of their good, young pitching.

 

I can't imagine Allard/Soroka moving for pretty much anyone. Both guys have had frontline starter written all over them for every moment of their careers, and they aren't far off from making an impact at the MLB level. That's not to say we can't get a good pitching prospect. That team is so stacked with SP, that even getting the 3rd or 4th best pitching prospect would be fantastic for Shaw.

 

Yeah, I would agree that Allard is not happening in any kind of a trade - so that's why I threw in Soroka as an either/or option as I thought the chances might at least be a little greater getting them to deal him? Like you said though, they might have both of those guys off limits? And if they didn't want to part with two pitching prospects for Shaw, maybe they'd consider a Soroka/Riley type package? That still might be doubtful.

[JosephC]

To me, I just don't think Moustakas is anything special to be spending money on. Has anyone actually looked at his stats? He's had one season above a .314 obp. And how fluky was getting 38 HR last year with a previous high of 22, and still only had a 314 obp. Now we're going to pay him 15-20 mil while he gets to his mid 30s? No thanks imo.

 

Exactly. I do think it's far-fetched that the Brewers would be willing to drop another 40+ million in payroll because it would put them 6-7 million higher than they have ever been before and they have arbitration raises coming in the near future (although trading Shaw would help that situation). But the thing that puts Bowden's theory at borderline crazy is the addition of Moustakas. This lineup suffered badly last year because they had too many bats in the lineup that made too many outs, and Moustakas has a long history now of making too many outs.

[bill hAll Star]

I would do this if Mous was gotten at a bargain (4 years or less). Interesting suggestions here about his fly ball rate which would do very well in Miller Park (and Great American/maybe Wrigley).

 

He'd be a high power/low OBP guy, which I realize isn't what we necessarily need, but I could see him being valuable at Miller Park for the right price.

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/mike-moustakas-is-the-former-royal-you-want/

[splitterpfj]

In my opinion, the Brewers are doing what they can, to find the pitcher they want.

 

That can mean spending on a pitcher, or that can mean trading an established player for a pitcher, and then spending on his replacement.

 

If the price is too high on the available arms, then trade for one, and sign Moustakas, or Cain, etc for less money.

[MVP2110]

In my opinion, the Brewers are doing what they can, to find the pitcher they want.

 

That can mean spending on a pitcher, or that can mean trading an established player for a pitcher, and then spending on his replacement.

 

If the price is too high on the available arms, then trade for one, and sign Moustakas, or Cain, etc for less money.

 

Yep, this is my takeaway too. Seems Stearns is focused on adding good controllable pitching. Might be by signing a free agent whose price drops. Or it could be by dealing for one. It seems Stearns really is willing to deal anyone for the right price. I really like that about him.

[ThisIsMyCrew]

I’d definitely listen to sell high on Shaw. In reality, he’s only had one good half. Stearns activity in “doing due dillagence” may be a cause in slow market.

[Lathund]

If there is indeed anything to the Cain/Moose rumours (and thus the related Santana/Shaw trades), I do see what Stearns is trying to do; acquire (potentially) elite prospects essentially in exchange for salary. As a concept I don't mind it, it's a creative way to turn payroll flexibility into future assets, and if the return would be a Zach Davies type of prospect even into more immediate production. His batted ball profile does seem to be ideal for Miller Park, and he's a 29 year old who seems to have improved in his mid-late twenties. So I don't even hate this particular deal, in principle.

 

So it really does depend on the haul for Shaw, and the deal for Moustakas. With the slow FA market and the Yankees (and others) looking to stay under the salary cap, there might indeed be a chance that he might not get a Boras-like contract. As always, I think Stearns has a price he's willing to pay, and will stick to it. It seems like the Brewers have those kinds of offers to a lot of FAs; if their demand drops low enough, we'll sign them.

 

There are a lot of moving parts here, but I approve of Stearns looking at every type of move in order to improve. And I'm confident that this is only something that would happen if the offers on both fronts were highly favourable.

[ThisIsMyCrew]

I’d definitely listen to sell high on Shaw. In reality, he’s only had one good half. Stearns activity in “doing due dillagence” may be a cause in slow market.

[brwrsfan]

Just throwing it out there, but I'd much rather keep both of them and move Shaw to 1b. And look to see if we can move Thames.