RRosternomics
← Exit to Trade Database
June 21, 2026

HOUWSN

unsettledToo soon to call — players still accruing.
🗳 Trade VotingRate every deal of the season — biggest first. Your verdict vs. the model.
70 / 148skip →
Fan verdict — who overpaid?
HOUHOU Dana Brown net +$0.0M net +0.0
received +$1.6M+$1.6M ± $56M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 1.1 ± 7 expected · 0.0 realized WAR
receives — most valuable first
Marcus BrownSS·24y·L/R
+$1.8M+$1.8M± $56M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.1± 7 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#138 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 × 0.89 age decline
WSNWSN Paul Toboni net +$0.0M net +0.0
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $0M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.0 ± 0 expected · 0.0 realized WAR
receives — most valuable first
cash / PTBNL
+$0.0M+$0.0M± $0M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.0± 0 exp WARrealized 0.0
Cash or player to be named — no projection

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 (Baseball America rank / draft slot, or a baseline) with his recent track record, projected over the years of team control acquired. The ± band is the uncertainty — wide for unproven prospects, tight for established veterans. 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.

Historically these expected values are unbiased and land within ±2 WAR of reality 75% of the time — yet the side the model favors actually comes out ahead only 53% of the time. The grade is a calibrated bet, not a prediction. Why trades are an efficient market →