Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
December 5, 2023

PITATL

unsettledToo soon to call — players still accruing.
PITPIT Ben Cherington net −$1.6M net +0.2
received +$0.8M+$0.8M ± $12M expected surplus · −$1.6M realized received 0.8 ± 2 expected · 0.2 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved PIT's 2024 odds 1% → 1% (+0 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Marco GonzalesP·32y·L/L
+$0.8M+$0.8M± $12M exp surplusrealized −$1.6M 0.8± 2 exp WARrealized 0.2
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.29/yr
Evidence
recent form 1.0/yr over 2.3 seasons
Talent
0.76/yr blended
Horizon
1.0 control yr
ATLATL Alex Anthopoulos net +$1.6M net -0.2
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 ATL's 2024 odds 57% → 56% (-1.2 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 →