Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
July 6, 2025

BALNYY

unsettledToo soon to call — players still accruing.
BALBAL Mike Elias net +$4.8M net +1.0
received −$1.6M−$1.6M ± $18M expected surplus · +$4.8M realized received 0.3 ± 2 expected · 1.0 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved BAL's 2025 odds 1% → 2% (+0.4 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Alex JacksonC·30y·R/R
−$1.6M−$1.6M± $18M exp surplusrealized +$4.8M 0.3± 2 exp WARrealized 1.0
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.54/yr
Evidence
recent form -0.5/yr over 0.6 season
Talent
0.20/yr blended
Horizon
4.0 control yrs × 0.38 age decline
NYYNYY Brian Cashman net −$4.8M net -1.0
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $0M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.0 ± 0 expected · 0.0 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved NYY's 2025 odds 91% → 89% (-2.1 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
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 →