PHI⇄TEX

PHIPHI Pat Gillick net −$0.8M net +0.1

received +$1.6M+$1.6M ± $22M expected surplus · −$0.8M realized received 1.2 ± 3 expected · 0.1 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved PHI's 2006 odds 41% → 42% (+1.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Fabio CastroP·21y·L/L

+$1.8M+$1.8M± $22M exp surplusrealized −$0.8M 1.2± 3 exp WARrealized 0.1

Prior

no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

no MLB track record — leans on pedigree

Talent

0.21/yr blended

Horizon

5.5 control yrs

why ▾hide ▴

TEXTEX Jon Daniels net +$0.8M net -0.1

received +$2.4M+$2.4M ± $24M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 1.3 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved TEX's 2006 odds 10% → 9% (-0.4 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Daniel HaigwoodP·22y·R/L

+$2.3M+$2.3M± $24M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 3 exp WARrealized 0.0

Prior

#480 overall draft pick — at the league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

no MLB track record — leans on pedigree

Talent

0.21/yr blended

Horizon

6.0 control yrs

why ▾hide ▴

Each player is valued on what he was expected to produce at the time of the trade, versus what he actually produced for his new team.

Expected WAR blends a player's pedigree (composite top-100 rank / draft slot, or a baseline) with his recent track record, projected over the years of team control acquired. The ± figure is a historically calibrated predictive standard deviation, measuring how widely comparable forecasts have missed around their expected value. Surplus values that production at the FA market price of a win (~$8M/WAR) minus salary — so cost-controlled players carry large surplus and expensive ones little, even at the same WAR. Who won is descriptive, not a skill claim: ~99% of a trade's outcome is unforeseeable at the time.