TEX⇄NYY

TEXTEX Jon Daniels net +$1.6M net +0.0

received +$2.4M+$2.4M ± $23M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 1.3 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved TEX's 2010 odds 50% → 49% (-0.6 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Mitch Hilligoss3B·25y·L/R

+$2.3M+$2.3M± $23M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 3 exp WARrealized 0.0

Prior

#194 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 ▴

NYYNYY Brian Cashman net −$1.6M net +0.0

received +$8.0M+$8.0M ± $20M expected surplus · −$1.6M realized received 1.8 ± 2 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved NYY's 2010 odds 81% → 82% (+0.4 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Greg GolsonOF·24y·R/R

+$8.2M+$8.2M± $20M exp surplusrealized −$1.6M 1.8± 2 exp WARrealized -0.0

Prior

#21 overall draft pick → 0.52/yr

Evidence

recent form -5.6/yr over 0.0 season

Talent

0.36/yr blended

Horizon

5.0 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.