PIT⇄OAK

PITPIT Neal Huntington net +$4.0M net +0.3

received +$2.4M+$2.4M ± $21M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 1.3 ± 3 expected · 0.0 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved PIT's 2013 odds 36% → 38% (+1.8 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Zack ThorntonP·25y·R/R

+$2.3M+$2.3M± $21M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 3 exp WARrealized 0.0

Prior

#695 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 ▴

OAKOAK Billy Beane net −$4.0M net -0.3

received +$0.8M+$0.8M ± $7M expected surplus · −$4.0M realized received 0.4 ± 1 expected · -0.3 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved OAK's 2013 odds 58% → 56% (-1.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Chris ResopP·30y·R/R

+$0.6M+$0.6M± $7M exp surplusrealized −$4.0M 0.4± 1 exp WARrealized -0.3

Prior

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

Evidence

recent form 0.3/yr over 2.2 seasons

Talent

0.28/yr blended

Horizon

2.0 control yrs × 0.75 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.