PIT⇄MIA

PITPIT Neal Huntington net +$41.6M net +5.4

received +$1.6M+$1.6M ± $18M expected surplus · +$41.6M realized received 1.2 ± 2 expected · 5.4 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved PIT's 2016 odds 9% → 8% (-0.4 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Trevor WilliamsP·24y·R/R

+$1.8M+$1.8M± $18M exp surplusrealized +$41.6M 1.2± 2 exp WARrealized 5.4

Prior

#44 overall draft pick — at the 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 ▴

MIAMIA Mike Berger net −$41.6M net -5.4

received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $6M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.2 ± 1 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved MIA's 2016 odds 22% → 23% (+0.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Richard Mitchell

+$0.3M+$0.3M± $6M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.2± 1 exp WARrealized 0.0

Unidentified minor-league throw-in — valued at the ~0.2 WAR base rate (most produce nothing)

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.