CHC⇄OAK

CHCCHC Jim Hendry net +$15.2M net +6.1

received −$6.4M−$6.4M ± $10M expected surplus · +$18.4M realized received 0.2 ± 1 expected · 7.8 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved CHC's 2004 odds 79% → 81% (+2.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Michael BarrettC·27y·R/R

−$6.6M−$6.6M± $10M exp surplusrealized +$18.4M 0.2± 1 exp WARrealized 7.8

Prior

league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.24/yr

Evidence

recent form 0.0/yr over 1.8 season

Talent

0.12/yr blended

Horizon

1.5 control yr

why ▾hide ▴

OAKOAK Billy Beane net −$15.2M net -6.1

received +$4.0M−$3.2M ± $14M expected surplus · +$3.2M realized received 1.6 ± 2 expected · 1.7 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved OAK's 2004 odds 36% → 33% (-3.1 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Damian MillerC·34y·R/R

+$3.8M−$3.4M± $14M exp surplusrealized +$3.2M 1.6± 2 exp WARrealized 1.7

Prior

league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr

Evidence

recent form 1.7/yr over 2.1 seasons

Talent

1.17/yr blended

Horizon

1.5 control yr × 0.93 age decline

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.