CLE⇄PHI

CLECLE Mark Shapiro net +$9.6M net +1.5

received +$30.4M+$30.4M ± $23M expected surplus · +$5.6M realized received 3.9 ± 3 expected · 2.2 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved CLE's 2006 odds 30% → 29% (-0.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Jason MichaelsOF·30y·R/R

+$30.2M+$30.2M± $23M exp surplusrealized +$5.6M 3.9± 3 exp WARrealized 2.2

Prior

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

Evidence

recent form 3.4/yr over 1.6 season

Talent

1.99/yr blended

Horizon

2.0 control yrs × 0.98 age decline

why ▾hide ▴

PHIPHI Pat Gillick net −$9.6M net -1.5

received −$3.2M−$3.2M ± $7M expected surplus · −$4.0M realized received 0.8 ± 1 expected · 0.7 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved PHI's 2006 odds 41% → 42% (+1 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Arthur RhodesP·36y·L/L

−$3.5M−$3.5M± $7M exp surplusrealized −$4.0M 0.8± 1 exp WARrealized 0.7

Prior

league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.23/yr

Evidence

recent form 1.0/yr over 2.8 seasons

Talent

0.75/yr blended

Horizon

1.1 control yr × 0.97 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.