Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
July 29, 1989

CHWTEX

CHW won this trade +$49.6M surplus CHW won this trade +14.1 WAR
CHWCHW Larry Himes net +$49.6M net +14.1
received +$27.2M+$27.2M ± $83M expected surplus · +$34.4M realized received 6.7 ± 10 expected · 16.1 realized WAR
receives — most valuable first
Scott Fletcher2B/SS·31y·R/R
+$24.0M+$24.0M± $18M exp surplusrealized −$23.2M 4.3± 2 exp WARrealized 1.7
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 3.3/yr over 2.2 seasons
Talent
2.23/yr blended
Horizon
2.0 control yrs × 0.97 age decline
Sammy SosaOF·21y·R/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized +$1.6M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized 0.8
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
no MLB track record — leans on pedigree
Talent
0.21/yr blended
Horizon
5.5 control yrs
Wilson ÁlvarezP·19y·L/L
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized +$56.0M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized 13.6
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
no MLB track record — leans on pedigree
Talent
0.21/yr blended
Horizon
5.5 control yrs
TEXTEX Tom Grieve net −$49.6M net -14.1
received +$14.4M+$14.4M ± $37M expected surplus · −$15.2M realized received 4.4 ± 5 expected · 2.0 realized WAR
receives — most valuable first
Harold BainesDH/OF·30y·L/L
+$8.0M+$8.0M± $18M exp surplusrealized −$17.6M 2.5± 2 exp WARrealized 1.1
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 1.9/yr over 2.3 seasons
Talent
1.32/yr blended
Horizon
2.0 control yrs × 0.96 age decline
Fred Manrique2B·28y·R/R
+$6.4M+$6.4M± $32M exp surplusrealized +$2.4M 1.9± 4 exp WARrealized 0.9
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.7/yr over 1.5 season
Talent
0.50/yr blended
Horizon
4.0 control yrs × 0.95 age decline

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 →