PHI⇄TEX

PHIPHI Pat Gillick net +$12.0M net +2.6

received +$15.2M+$15.2M ± $45M expected surplus · +$11.2M realized received 3.1 ± 6 expected · 2.6 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved PHI's 2009 odds 66% → 65% (-1.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

John MayberryOF·25y·R/R

+$15.4M+$15.4M± $45M exp surplusrealized +$11.2M 3.1± 6 exp WARrealized 2.6

Prior

#19 overall draft pick → 0.57/yr

Evidence

no MLB track record — leans on pedigree

Talent

0.57/yr blended

Horizon

5.5 control yrs

why ▾hide ▴

TEXTEX Jon Daniels net −$12.0M net -2.6

received +$7.2M+$7.2M ± $22M expected surplus · −$0.8M realized received 1.7 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved TEX's 2009 odds 14% → 15% (+0.7 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Greg GolsonOF·23y·R/R

+$6.9M+$6.9M± $22M exp surplusrealized −$0.8M 1.7± 3 exp WARrealized -0.0

Prior

#21 overall draft pick → 0.52/yr

Evidence

recent form -6.2/yr over 0.0 season

Talent

0.30/yr blended

Horizon

5.5 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.