The Case for Trading Moose... But not Selling

[Smichaelis9]

This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while now, and before it was just sort of a fun, interesting idea in my head. After this stretch, which I have (probably willfully ignorantly) maintained confidence through the majority of, I’m starting to think it might be worth the risk.

 

The idea is to trade Moose (likely would be a three team trade) but we would not be acquiring the prospects in the deal. In the scenario in my head we use Moose for a few prospects that are in turn used to acquire a package of pitchers. We’d likely still have to include a few of our own prospects in the scenarios I’ve been looking at.

 

Just for fun I figured I’d show one of the ideas I have through the trade value website:

Brewers get: MadBum, Will Smith, Sam Dyson (21.1)

Giants get: Dubon, Corey Ray, Moose prospects (23.1)

Other team gets: Moose (6.3)

 

Obviously that looks weird in terms of value, but if the random team is getting Moose, all that matters is the value of the prospects being near 6.3 (which is what I made them worth in the Giants return).

 

The thought process behind this is that we get value out of Moose, and bank on Shaw potentially having figured it out in AAA. If he has, there’s a decent chance we aren’t really losing any production at third. And in the Giants scenario we would have greatly improved our pitching staff.

 

Obviously it’s a risk, and I’m not even sure I would do it honestly (if we got the return in my hypothetical trade I’d do it 100%, I’m not sure that’s super realistic thought) but I’d love to hear others opinions on it...

[KeithStone53151]

I don't think the Giants are getting enough as I don't think they'll get a ton of quality prospects for Moose, also it's tough to imagine the team being better without him...especially considering he's one of our best hitters and offense has been our biggest problem.

[tmwiese55]

That type of thing is just almost never seen in baseball. Creative idea and everything and you'd actually wish more teams did think outside the box like this but it just doesn't really happen.

 

Also, to me the bullpen is the biggest weakness/problem. Offense, there really isn't anything you can do other than upgrade SS. Improved offense vs the 1st half should come organically by Jesus, Huira instead of black hole at 2b, Cain being respectable instead of trash. Basically: LF has been fine. RF obviously amazing, 3B all star, 2B raking now, both 1Bs hitting now, AS at C. 4th OF has been fine. Cain has been showing life, fairly good since ASB and that treatment. Not what he was last year but way better than what he'd been this year. Bullpen has literally one guy we feel comfortable with right now.

 

In general though if they don't turn it around soon, I can get behind the idea of trading Moose since Shaw is showing life in the minors. Talk to Moose and tell him we'll still be interested in talking in offseason.

[pacopete4]

Trade Moose and bring up Shaw. This seems like a slam dunk to me.

[KeithStone53151]

I'll also add that trading Moose in a move trying to compete is not a good look...especially if he truly took less to play here. That will be a negative mark in future negotiations with players. Right now, I feel like Milwaukee is about as desired a location as we've ever been. We're maybe middle of the pack, where as normally we are a lock for every good players no trade list.

[Jopal78]

I'll also add that trading Moose in a move trying to compete is not a good look...especially if he truly took less to play here. That will be a negative mark in future negotiations with players. Right now, I feel like Milwaukee is about as desired a location as we've ever been. We're maybe middle of the pack, where as normally we are a lock for every good players no trade list.

 

No trade clauses are basically just tools nowadays to put more money in a player's pocket. If geographical location played much of a role in deciding where ball players played San Francisco and Seattle would be overflowing with great players. Rather, professional ball players go wherever the money is, often times that isn't Milwaukee.

 

It's a creative idea to trade Moustakas but trying to make the playoffs and trading him away is just weakening one part of your team to strengthen another. It doesn't make the roster more talented.

[KeithStone53151]

I'll also add that trading Moose in a move trying to compete is not a good look...especially if he truly took less to play here. That will be a negative mark in future negotiations with players. Right now, I feel like Milwaukee is about as desired a location as we've ever been. We're maybe middle of the pack, where as normally we are a lock for every good players no trade list.

 

No trade clauses are basically just tools nowadays to put more money in a player's pocket. If geographical location played much of a role in deciding where ball players played San Francisco and Seattle would be overflowing with great players. Rather, professional ball players go wherever the money is, often times that isn't Milwaukee.

 

It's a creative idea to trade Moustakas but trying to make the playoffs and trading him away is just weakening one part of your team to strengthen another. It doesn't make the roster more talented.

 

Well it's not just geographic location. The Yankees are very desired because they generally have so much other talent, and all the historic reasons. How well a franchise is run matters as well. Sure some guys will go sign with the Marlins or Orioles if they are the top bidder and only care about $, but a significant chunk of players(especially top players) want to play for a team with a plan and that has a chance to compete/win.

[patrickgpe]

this doesn't make sense to me. I wouldn't trade our 2nd or 3rd best power bat and try to make the playoffs. They have 2 weeks to figure out if they are buyers or sellers. if they are sellers, fine trade away what prospects you need to, if they are buyers, everyone that can go, that isn't part of the long term future should go. Personally, i moved to team sell over the weekend, but i could go back before the deadline. with a pen like they have, i just don't see it happening this year, even in a weak division.

[Jopal78]

I'll also add that trading Moose in a move trying to compete is not a good look...especially if he truly took less to play here. That will be a negative mark in future negotiations with players. Right now, I feel like Milwaukee is about as desired a location as we've ever been. We're maybe middle of the pack, where as normally we are a lock for every good players no trade list.

 

No trade clauses are basically just tools nowadays to put more money in a player's pocket. If geographical location played much of a role in deciding where ball players played San Francisco and Seattle would be overflowing with great players. Rather, professional ball players go wherever the money is, often times that isn't Milwaukee.

 

It's a creative idea to trade Moustakas but trying to make the playoffs and trading him away is just weakening one part of your team to strengthen another. It doesn't make the roster more talented.

 

Well it's not just geographic location. The Yankees are very desired because they generally have so much other talent, and all the historic reasons. How well a franchise is run matters as well. Sure some guys will go sign with the Marlins or Orioles if they are the top bidder and only care about $, but a significant chunk of players(especially top players) want to play for a team with a plan and that has a chance to compete/win.

 

I disagree only with the premise that a significant chunk of players want to play for a winner. If what you do for your livelihood is play baseball for money, winning is removed from the equation. There are some players (Yelich, I recall asked for a trade from Miami) that care about winning but that is the minority. Baseball season is six months long and for three of those the player is on the road anyhow. Whether or not lifestyle in one city is better than another city for those three months is probably a variable in the decision making process but is likely given very little weight in deciding.

[wntrtxn21]

This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while now, and before it was just sort of a fun, interesting idea in my head. After this stretch, which I have (probably willfully ignorantly) maintained confidence through the majority of, I’m starting to think it might be worth the risk.

 

The idea is to trade Moose (likely would be a three team trade) but we would not be acquiring the prospects in the deal. In the scenario in my head we use Moose for a few prospects that are in turn used to acquire a package of pitchers. We’d likely still have to include a few of our own prospects in the scenarios I’ve been looking at.

 

Just for fun I figured I’d show one of the ideas I have through the trade value website:

Brewers get: MadBum, Will Smith, Sam Dyson (21.1)

Giants get: Dubon, Corey Ray, Moose prospects (23.1)

Other team gets: Moose (6.3)

 

Obviously that looks weird in terms of value, but if the random team is getting Moose, all that matters is the value of the prospects being near 6.3 (which is what I made them worth in the Giants return).

 

The thought process behind this is that we get value out of Moose, and bank on Shaw potentially having figured it out in AAA. If he has, there’s a decent chance we aren’t really losing any production at third. And in the Giants scenario we would have greatly improved our pitching staff.

 

Obviously it’s a risk, and I’m not even sure I would do it honestly (if we got the return in my hypothetical trade I’d do it 100%, I’m not sure that’s super realistic thought) but I’d love to hear others opinions on it...

 

I can't believe the Giants go for it. Ray is an iffy prospect right now. I can't imagine Moose will bring back any big prospects either. The Giants are giving up three pitchers who individually would bring much more than your offer.

[Smichaelis9]

Appreciate the feedback, again I’m not exactly asking for this to happen, just something that I had cross my mind a few times and wanted to hear what others thought haha.

 

I think that there’s a part of me that doesn’t believe Moose will have nearly as good a second half and that Shaw is capable of putting up big numbers himself. But I also understand that Moose is so much more of a sure thing. I suppose more than anything, opinions are going to be based on each persons belief in Shaw turning it around, not even just this year but for the foreseeable future.

 

Honestly, the overall idea I laid out in the post isn’t one that I myself love, but there are definitely deals that I think could make the team better. Especially because of my belief in Shaw getting back close to his old self.

 

Thanks for the input guys, anyone else who wants to add in please do. I’d really love to hear what people think!

[Smichaelis9]

This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while now, and before it was just sort of a fun, interesting idea in my head. After this stretch, which I have (probably willfully ignorantly) maintained confidence through the majority of, I’m starting to think it might be worth the risk.

 

The idea is to trade Moose (likely would be a three team trade) but we would not be acquiring the prospects in the deal. In the scenario in my head we use Moose for a few prospects that are in turn used to acquire a package of pitchers. We’d likely still have to include a few of our own prospects in the scenarios I’ve been looking at.

 

Just for fun I figured I’d show one of the ideas I have through the trade value website:

Brewers get: MadBum, Will Smith, Sam Dyson (21.1)

Giants get: Dubon, Corey Ray, Moose prospects (23.1)

Other team gets: Moose (6.3)

 

Obviously that looks weird in terms of value, but if the random team is getting Moose, all that matters is the value of the prospects being near 6.3 (which is what I made them worth in the Giants return).

 

The thought process behind this is that we get value out of Moose, and bank on Shaw potentially having figured it out in AAA. If he has, there’s a decent chance we aren’t really losing any production at third. And in the Giants scenario we would have greatly improved our pitching staff.

 

Obviously it’s a risk, and I’m not even sure I would do it honestly (if we got the return in my hypothetical trade I’d do it 100%, I’m not sure that’s super realistic thought) but I’d love to hear others opinions on it...

 

I can't believe the Giants go for it. Ray is an iffy prospect right now. I can't imagine Moose will bring back any big prospects either. The Giants are giving up three pitchers who individually would bring much more than your offer.

Yeah I highly doubt they’d go for it haha, just used the trade value thing as an example of the type of return the team would need for it to potentially make sense from our perspective. I’m still not even sure it would make a ton of sense, but that was why I made the post!