DET⇄OAK

DETDET Bill Lajoie net −$1.6M net +1.4

received +$4.8M+$4.8M ± $16M expected surplus · −$1.6M realized received 1.0 ± 2 expected · 1.4 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved DET's 1986 odds 51% → 60% (+8.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Dave CollinsOF·33y·B/L

+$4.4M+$4.4M± $16M exp surplusrealized −$1.6M 1.0± 2 exp WARrealized 1.4

Prior

no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

recent form 1.1/yr over 0.7 season

Talent

0.57/yr blended

Horizon

2.8 control yrs × 0.64 age decline

why ▾hide ▴

OAKOAK Sandy Alderson net +$1.6M net -1.4

received −$0.8M−$0.8M ± $22M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.7 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved OAK's 1986 odds 12% → 9% (-3 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Bárbaro Garbey1B·29y·R/R

−$0.6M−$0.6M± $22M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.7± 3 exp WARrealized 0.0

Prior

no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

recent form 0.3/yr over 0.6 season

Talent

0.26/yr blended

Horizon

5.0 control yrs × 0.54 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.