Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
January 28, 2016

COLTBR

COL won this trade +$44.0M surplus COL won this trade +16.7 WAR
COLCOL Jeff Bridich net +$44.0M net +16.7
received +$7.2M+$7.2M ± $60M expected surplus · +$62.4M realized received 3.0 ± 8 expected · 19.7 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved COL's 2016 odds 20% → 17% (-2.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Jake McGeeP·30y·L/L
+$5.6M+$5.6M± $18M exp surplusrealized −$24.8M 1.8± 2 exp WARrealized 0.6
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 1.3/yr over 2.6 seasons
Talent
0.97/yr blended
Horizon
2.0 control yrs × 0.93 age decline
Germán MárquezP·21y·R/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized +$87.2M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized 19.1
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
TBRTBR Matt Silverman net −$44.0M net -16.7
received +$20.8M+$20.8M ± $67M expected surplus · +$18.4M realized received 6.2 ± 8 expected · 3.0 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved TBR's 2016 odds 4% → 4% (+0.7 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Corey DickersonOF·27y·L/R
+$19.2M+$19.2M± $34M exp surplusrealized +$18.4M 5.0± 4 exp WARrealized 3.0
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 2.3/yr over 1.2 season
Talent
1.24/yr blended
Horizon
4.0 control yrs
Kevin Padlo1B/3B·20y·R/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized -0.0
Prior
#143 overall draft pick — at the league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
no MLB track record — leans on pedigree
Talent
0.21/yr blended
Horizon
5.5 control yrs

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 →