OAK⇄SFG

OAKOAK Sandy Alderson net −$6.4M net +2.2

received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $18M expected surplus · −$6.4M realized received 0.2 ± 2 expected · 2.2 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved OAK's 1985 odds 3% → 5% (+1.8 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Dusty BakerOF·36y·R/R

+$0.3M+$0.3M± $18M exp surplusrealized −$6.4M 0.2± 2 exp WARrealized 2.2

Prior

no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

no MLB track record — leans on pedigree

Talent

0.21/yr blended

Horizon

1.1 control yr × 0.91 age decline

why ▾hide ▴

SFGSFG Tom Haller net +$6.4M net -2.2

received +$0.8M+$0.8M ± $22M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.4 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved SFG's 1985 odds 2% → 1% (-0.7 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Ed Puikunas

+$0.3M+$0.3M± $15M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.2± 2 exp WARrealized 0.0

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

why ▾hide ▴

Dan Winters

+$0.3M+$0.3M± $15M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.2± 2 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.