Milwaukee Brings Back the Moose

Free agency was supposed to be different for Mike Moustakas this time around. Last winter, coming off his second All-Star appearance and a career-high 38 home runs, the longtime Royals third baseman turned down a $17.4 million qualifying offer in anticipation of a multiyear contract, only to receive a frosty reception on the open market. Ultimately, he made a belated return to Kansas City on a one-year deal, was traded to the contending Brewers in late July, and hit free agency again this fall — this time without a qualifying offer and associated draft pick compensation. Yet once again, he only landed a considerably discounted one-year contract. He’ll return to the Brewers on a $10 million deal that includes a mutual option for 2020.

Moustakas, who turned 30 on September 11, hit a combined .251/.315/.459 with 28 homers, a 105 wRC+, and 2.4 WAR in 2018. His offense wasn’t quite what it was in 2017 (.272/.314/.521, 114 wRC+) but his defense improved significantly in terms of both DRS (from -8 in 2017 to 2 in 2018) and UZR (from -4.5 to 1.0). Given that he was finally more than a year removed from the right ACL tear that limited him to 27 games in 2016, that shouldn’t be tremendously surprising; according to Statcast, his average sprint speed also increased substantially, from 24.0 feet per second to 25.7, though even that puts him somewhere around the 15th percentile of major league regulars.

Moustakas’ defensive rebound helped offset his slight offensive downturn; his overall WAR was a bit ahead of his 2.1 from 2017, if still shy of his career-best 3.8 in 2015. He’s not what you’d call the most disciplined hitter; his 37.0% rate of swinging at pitches outside the zone places him in the 15th percentile among qualifiers, while his 7.7% walk rate puts him in the 35th percentile. He doesn’t strike out much (16.2%, 72nd percentile), but even so, 2018 saw his highest K rate since 2012, his first full major league season. A pull-happy hitter, he had 372 plate appearances against a traditional shift, the majors’ third-highest total. He hit for just a .243 average with a .311 slugging percentage and a 43 wRC+ in those plate appearances, which is 14th percentile stuff. Combine that with his non-blazing speed and you get a .259 BABIP, the majors’ 15th lowest among qualified hitters.

So yes, his is a limited profile when he’s not putting a charge into the ball, but fortunately, Moustakas produces the thunder often enough to be an above-average player. Over the past two years, the only third base types with more homers than his 66 are Nolan Arenado, who plays half his games at Coors Field; Manny Machado, who’s played more shortstop than third base in that span; and Jose Ramirez, who’s spent a fair amount of time at second base in addition to third. Overall, Moustakas is tied for 14th in homers over the past two seasons, while ranking 27th in isolated power (.227).

Steamer projects Moustakas for 31 homers, a 111 wRC+ and 2.8 WAR this year, so by even a conservative dollars per win figure, say, $8 million, he’ll likely be rather undercompensated. This might not be Scott Boras’ finest hour, but the past two winters’ trend towards squeezing over-30 players is less the product of one agent’s work than it is an industry reaction to a larger set of conditions, including a reduced number of teams playing to win, an increased number of said teams treating the Competitive Balance Tax threshold as a hard salary cap, and a wave of analytically-inclined front offices suddenly becoming much more conservative when it comes to issuing longer-term deals.

That said, Moustakas is still in a better position than last year, when he waited until March 11 to sign and settled for a one-year deal that included a $5.5 million base salary, $2.2 million worth of plate appearance-based incentives that he maxed out, and a $15 million mutual option for 2018, with a $1 million buyout. He turned his side of that option down, but even if he hadn’t, it’s highly unlikely the Brewers would have picked up their side. For what it’s worth, in our Top 50 Free Agents list, Kiley McDaniel estimated that Moustakas would receive a two-year, $22 million deal, with the median crowdsource figure coming in at three years and $36 million.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

Early last winter, Moustakas reportedly turned down a three-year, $45 million offer from the Angels, though Boros has denied the veracity of that report. This time around, the Moose reportedly had interest from the Padres and Phillies — two teams still in the hunt for Machado, possibly to play third base — as well as the Angels again. Perhaps Moustakas simply got tired of waiting for Machado to make up his mind, or for the apparent game of chicken between Machado and the winter’s other marquee free agent, Bryce Harper, to end, thus helping to move the broader market along. Or, given the wobbly rumors circulating on Sunday night, connecting Harper to Philadelphia and Machado to San Diego, maybe Moustakas saw the writing on the wall and took the best of the remaining options.

By returning to Milwaukee, he does get to play for a team that fell one win short of a trip to the World Series, and one on which he apparently fit in very well. Unlike last winter, when they added Lorenzo Cain and Jhoulys Chacin in free agency and Christian Yelich via trade, the Brewers have had a relatively low-key offseason, with Yasmani Grandal’s one-year, $18.25 million deal representing their only other free agent signed to a major league contract; they’ve added a few other players to split or minor league deals, including Cory Spangenberg and Josh Tomlin. They do have pitchers Zach Davies and Jimmy Nelson returning from injury-marred seasons, as well as a whole lot of other talented young hurlers to compete for rotation spots, but they’ve also shed a lot of useful bodies, with Wade Miley and late-season pickups Gio Gonzalez, Curtis Granderson, and Joakim Soria all gone via free agency, and Xavier Cedeno, Dan Jennings, and Jonathan Schoop non-tendered. They did trade away outfielders Keon Broxton and Domingo Santana, getting back some prospects and Ben Gamel. By and large, they haven’t added a whole lot, so the return of the Moose is significant.

When the Brewers traded pitcher Jorge Lopez and outfielder Brett Phillips to Kansas City for Moustakas, they moved starting third baseman Travis Shaw to second base, a position he’d never played before but one that he took to with respectable results (-1 DRS, -1.5 UZR in 39 games).

While the initial assumption when Moustakas signed was that Shaw (who lists at 6-foot-4 and 230 pounds) would return to second base, manager Craig Counsell told reporters on Monday that Moustakas (who lists at 6-foot and 225 pounds) would spend the spring learning the position, which he’s never played professionally (he did play 65 games at shortstop in 2007-08). “We would explore Mike at second base, is what we’re going to do, because that’s what we don’t know about,” said Counsell. Prior to the signing, Moustakas had reiterated an openness to moving around the diamond that he first expressed upon joining the Brewers last summer, though at that time Shaw had a bit of a head start in preparing for the move. For what it’s worth, the two players have very similar UZR/150 rates at the hot corner (2.3 for Moustakas, 1.7 for Shaw), though DRS favors Shaw (10 runs above average per 150 games) over Moustakas (dead even), and the former was an NL Gold Glove finalist at the position despite the late-season move.

So long as the team can get some semblance of average play out of one or the other at second, the addition of Moustakas represents a significant improvement given that the lefty-swinging Spangenberg, the righty-swinging Hernan Perez, and backup Tyler Saladino — with very minor contributions from Shaw and top prospect Keston Hiura — were forecast to produce a meager 0.9 WAR, 29th in our depth charts rankings. Thus, Moustakas could represent about a two-win upgrade, and his presence does lessen the urgency to promote Hiura, a 2017 first-round pick who placed 13th on our Top 100 Prospects list and profiles as a future All-Star, but who spent the second half of 2018 at Double-A and likely needs more seasoning.

All told, Moustakas is probably far from where he thought he would be about 18 months ago. The guaranteed money on his two free agent deals doesn’t even add up to the qualifying offer he declined, to say nothing of both the rumors and even the more modest projections attached to him; after all, this isn’t a banged up 34-year-old coming off a subpar season, or showing signs of needing a reduced role. You’d think that a palatable multiyear deal would have been available to him from somewhere (and maybe there was one, if that report regarding the Angels last winter was true). That said: he’s not about to go broke, he’s healthy, and starting for a fun, contending team. It’s hardly ideal, but it works for now.





Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.

36 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Curacao LL
7 years ago

Guy either needs a new agent, or needs to start listening to his agent.
Not sure which but definitely one or the other.

Adam SMember since 2016
7 years ago
Reply to  Curacao LL

I’m really surprised more players don’t do this. Turning down the QO was a mistake at the time — the compensation pick was going to kill his market.

LHPSU
7 years ago
Reply to  Adam S

Of course, he would be on a sinking ship (sunk ship?) if he took the QO.
Which he ended up being on anyway, at the end of the day.

JoserMember since 2021
7 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

It’s an interesting contra-factual exercise to imagine what would have happened had he taken the QO. He’d be a few million richer (not sure of the exact number: his Royals contract was $5.5M plus a $1M buyout for 2019, plus “on pace to earn additional $2.2M in performance bonuses” according to Cot’s). Presumably the Royals still would have traded him in season and probably to the Brewers. But without his cold stove experience last offseason he (or his agent) might have been more adamant about holding out this offseason, so he might not have taken an offer yet, which might’ve ended up reducing what he would’ve gotten in this alternate 2019 offseason. So it might actually be a wash — more money last year, less money this year had he taken the QO.

tung_twista
7 years ago
Reply to  Joser

QO: $17.4M.
Moustakas received $7.7M in 2018 and will get $10M in 2019.
The only way accepting QO would have been awash is for Moustakas to sign a minor league contract in 2019.

gyaris
7 years ago

“Conservative at $8M per WAR”. I go with $6M per WAR (meaning 5 WAR is what it takes to get to top of market, which is roughly $30M per year). At $6M, he’s a $12M player, which is about right; a slight discount for unpredictability puts him at $10M. Not unreasonable.

dodgerbleu
7 years ago
Reply to  gyaris

Thanks for commenting. Couldn’t agree more. A win is not worth 8M. I’d personally go 5M. Wish FG could update their calculus. At this point the continued use of these arbitrary and inaccurate dollar-per-win figures are affecting not only the plausibility but also the credibility of their articles.

Brian McMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  Jay Jaffe

Thanks for clarifying, Jay.

It make me wonder at what point does the price teams are paying for WAR becomes the price of WAR. If you think your used car is worth $10,000, but people will only pay $5000, it means your car is worth $5000.

rhdx
7 years ago
Reply to  Jay Jaffe

Hi Jay, the fact that $/WAR may not be linear suggests superstars might be worth more than $8 million per WAR because you can’t find 7 WAR guys but players like Moose would be worth much less than $8 million per WAR.

WoundedSprinterMember since 2018
7 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

I think the distribution is a little more complicated than that. It’s almost certainly discontinuous, and I’m not aware that any (public facing) model accounts for that.

Moustakas might be a good example here. The Brewers are surely on a rosy spot on the win curve for 2019, and given the projections above, a psitional gain of 1.5 to 2 WAR is a big deal. For Milwaukee, it also fits the payroll. And is a one-year commitment

Right now I’d rather be the Brewers with Moustakas than the Angels with Trout.

Also, there are only 30 teams with skin in the game. For positionally limited players, in the brave new wold, we’re talking small samples.

Jon
7 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

I’m not sure about that – maybe if you were buying a guaranteed, fixed asset (i.e. Machado’s WAR totals for the next 10 seasons for known ahead of time and guaranteed) then you’d see superstars getting more $/WAR.

But there’s a lot more variability there – an unlucky season with balls in play, poor(-ly rated) defense, injury, inexplicable sudden drop-off, etc.

And even a guy like Trout who is as sure a bet for 8+ WAR as anyone – I don’t think anyone thinks he’d get $60M+ per season (even on a one-year deal).

WoundedSprinterMember since 2018
7 years ago
Reply to  Jon

True about Trout. But if the Eleventh Baseball Commandment (the Sabermetric Codicil) came down from Mount Sinai, and ye shall know that Michael Nelson Trout hath given Me great pleasure and I rejoice in his Creation, and therefore I say unto Thee that my Anointed Center Fielder shall be given all that is good, yea unto an annual salary of $60 million, as adjusted in a very spiritual sense for certain targets such as the Gloves of Gold, plus bathing in Frankincense and Myrrh …

You’d still have to find a team to build around the $60 million wunderkind. I don’t doubt he’s worth it. He genuinely is a nicer, more toned, version of Ty Cobb, in Ty Cobb’s dreams. But his wages would eat up around 25% to 30% of even a big market team.

LHPSU
7 years ago

That’s why teams give long contracts into a player’s decline in the first place – they just can’t afford to have one injury send 1/3 of their payroll onto the DL.

jim fetterolf
7 years ago
Reply to  Jay Jaffe

“Marginal WAR” might be useful. For this year a WAR for the Royals might only be worth a million while for a team that otherwise misses the playoffs due to a missing win it could be ten, fifteen, or more millions depending on market.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  Jay Jaffe

So I don’t have a subscription to The Athletic, but I do want to weigh in here because the $/win numbers that gets thrown around a lot is not what a team expects to get, but what a teams collectively actually got. This may or may not be what Eno did.

Matt Swartz’s work here (and Craig’s work) more or less took the average of what free agents produced and the amount of wins they produced, divided one by the other, and got $/win. It’s pretty obvious that what actually happened is not the same as what a team thinks they are paying for in this case. The Angels did not expect this level of production from Albert Pujols, nor did the Rays expect LoMo’s production when he signed there a couple years ago. But for every Albert Pujols, $/win goes up, and for every LoMo (Rays version) $/win goes down. What this means is that this $/win figure is not a team’s internal calculation of how much a win is worth, but the actual return on investment.

Ideally, you would divide by the projection instead if you wanted to figure out who was getting above-market and below-market deals. We don’t have each team’s internal projection system, what I would really love to see if for Dan to project out what ZiPs thinks players will perform over the life of the contract. While I can’t prove it, I bet you anything that calculation will be a way more accurate method of determining $/win in terms of what teams think they are paying for.

FWIW, I tried doing something like this a couple offseasons ago, and wound up with about $7M/win. Another commenter here, Joe Joe, tried doing it around the same time and wound up with $7.5M/win. A third commenter tried doing it based on the contracts that had been signed up until that point, and it wound up at $7.5M/win. So if you asked me what I actually think it is without any information, I would guess it is probably $7.5M/win. I can’t speculate exactly what Eno did since I don’t have a subscription there, but his number does clock in south of the $9M/win figure that often gets thrown around and seems really high.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
7 years ago
Reply to  gyaris

just curious, why do you use 6 mil?

ScottyBMember since 2017
7 years ago
Reply to  gyaris

The $8M per WAR is based on the return teams have gotten from FA over the past several years, right?
If so, it is helpful in looking back at what happened. But it is less useful as a guide for what front offices would like to spend for a WAR going forward.
Front offices weigh the $8M/WAR for FA against the $FarLess/WAR they can get from players in their own pipelines, early-career extensions, trades, and “value” free-agents.
As such, I don’t think the $8M estimate they trot out is useful anymore.
(I LOVE FG, but this is a consistent oversight on their part)

The Stranger
7 years ago
Reply to  ScottyB

I always wonder how much the $/WAR numbers are driven by the Pujols/Davis/Hosmer types of contracts that were either bad at the time or turned into albatrosses fast. If your baseline for the value of an aging slugger is defined by horrible contracts, then aging sluggers getting less than that is a sign of the free agent market succeeding, not failing.

I’m all for players getting a bigger share of the pie, but let’s ditch the hyperbole about the system being “broken.” It’s a value judgment about how money should be split between millionaires and billionaires, no more no less.

mookie monster
7 years ago

The Brewers deserve all the credit in the world for how they’ve built this team. I hope they can keep it going.

scrap1ron
7 years ago

8 million per WAR? I think I see your problem.

With this contract Moose will have made 35 million in his career and should be financially set for life.

Slave wages sure pay better than they used to.

emh1969
7 years ago

I think part of Moose’s problem is that most of the likely playoff contenders have better options at 3rd base. And for the others, he offers 1-2 WAR at best. So he really doesn´t move the needle much.

nathanjMember since 2024
7 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Good point. Definitely Brewers good fortune and moves the needle for them vs. their internal 2b options. The rest of the contenders have either a better option, equal option, or a younger/cheaper option.

dl80Member since 2026
7 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Exactly. There were 18 third basemen last year worth more than 2 WAR (Moustakas was 16th), and 17 who had a better wRC+ than Moustakas. It seems like getting average production at third is fairly easy now, especially when you consider the very cheap options just under 2 WAR: Yolmer Sanchez, Todd Frazier, and Maikel Franco.

emh1969
7 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Yeah, it´s interesting how strong of a position 3B has been recently. Looking at Baseball Reference data, 3B has been either first or second in average WAR every year since 2012.

Shirtless George Brett
7 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Exactly. I said this when he turned down the QO. It was hard to see where the market was for him given the strength at the position and his production. I never really bought the idea that he was going to land a multi year deal for more than what the QO would have paid. Of course I didnt think he would slink back to KC for only a few million either.

On the bright side my Moustakas jersey was relevant for a few more months 😉

Six Ten
7 years ago

The frustrating part of that whole situation is that to the Royals in particular he seemed like exactly the guy to sign up for a multi-year deal (bad 3B options in the minors, younger than Cain and probably better than Hosmer, could switch to first at some point if necessary). But he wasn’t that to anyone else, and the Royals were way too far from competing to pull that particular trigger.

cjbrassa
7 years ago

I think Moose is an interesting case study into teams’ analytically-informed valuation of 30+ year old league-average players with limited skill sets. If Moose’s bat slips a bit, or if his defense declines a bit, he goes from something like a league-average player to a player that you don’t want playing every day. These are the contracts that have been blowing up on teams for decades.

Teams are happy to pay Moose his $10M to (likely) put up a 2-win season, but they’re not going to give him 3/30, because he’s a slight decline away from being a below average starter. And you don’t want to be paying a below-average starter anywhere close to 10M a year. If Moose maintains his skills, he’ll keep getting 10M 1-year deals. And if his skills decline, he never would have been worth a multi-year deal in the first place.

We’re witnessing the transition from paying for past performance, to being very careful about paying for the value a player is likely to provide over the life of their contract.

carterMember since 2020
7 years ago

Apparently they are going to try him at 3rd base as well, which is a bit surprising. But I guess defensive positioning is the most important thing…but still strange.

carterMember since 2020
7 years ago
Reply to  carter

lol i meant to write at 2nd base. oops. obviously they are going to try him at 3rd, but news out of camp says he will see work/possible time at 2nd as well.

Mike NMN
7 years ago

Maybe, in the new marketplace, we should be looking for teams that are willing to spend the money to add 2.8 WAR at 3B. So, those teams need to be a) with a relative hole at 3B, so it’s a true upgrade, and b) not sitting on a prospect that they are playing with service time on and expect to bring up in May or June, and c) not a team near or over the CBT or any threshold, because Moose isn’t worth going into a tax penalty for, and d) not tanking, and e) even if a-d are ok, competitive enough to make it worth spending the money. That’s a very small subset. Moose is a perfectly solid player, but…

Spudchukar
7 years ago
Reply to  Mike NMN

If I were a Brewer’s fan I would be confused. First, they extend Kratz, then they sign Grandal. Then they add Spangenberg, and now add Moose. Maybe they have more money than I believe, but unless they spend a bunch more on their pitching staff I would prefer them to spend available cash on the pitching staff which is their weakness. Defense matters. And all they are doing is stressing out their pitching with such a poor defense on the right side. I know they believe they can hide their deficiencies there with shifts, but placing 3 statues on the right side will catch up with them, and adding another position player negates any chance of including youngsters in the near future, who could help defensively. Perez can help as a defensive replacement, but he is no whiz. The Brewers employ a predominantly right handed starting staff and NL teams will employ as many lefties against them only magnifies their poor defense on the right side.

Lanidrac
7 years ago

Well, Moose said he turned down at least one multi-year offer in order to return to the Brewers, so his market this offseason wasn’t quite as bad as you make it out to be.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
7 years ago

It’s hard to characterize this as a bad move for the Brewers because it is so dang cheap, but Travis Shaw is a pretty good defender at third base, and below average at 2nd. It would have made way more sense for the team to sign Marwin instead, or Dozier back when he was on the market, or Lowrie (although he was clearly more expensive, and maybe Marwin is too).

I will say, though, that Moustakas has a chance to hit a lot of dingers in Miller Park or whatever it is called now. That place is pretty friendly to lefty power.