Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
January 11, 2003

DETMIA

MIA won this trade +$10.4M surplus DET won this trade +6.5 WAR
DETDET Dave Dombrowski net −$10.4M net +6.5
received −$4.0M−$6.4M ± $91M expected surplus · +$18.4M realized received 1.3 ± 11 expected · 9.9 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved DET's 2003 odds 0% → 0% (-0 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Rob HenkelP·25y·R/L
+$4.8M+$2.4M± $62M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 8 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#71 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
Gary KnottsP·26y·R/R
−$4.0M−$4.0M± $42M exp surplusrealized +$2.4M 0.0± 5 exp WARrealized 0.8
Prior
#289 overall draft pick — at the league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form -0.5/yr over 1.1 season
Talent
-0.12/yr blended
Horizon
5.0 control yrs
Nate RobertsonP·26y·R/L
−$4.8M−$4.8M± $51M exp surplusrealized +$16.0M 0.0± 6 exp WARrealized 9.1
Prior
#146 overall draft pick — at the league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form -0.9/yr over 0.4 season
Talent
-0.06/yr blended
Horizon
5.5 control yrs
MIAMIA Larry Beinfest net +$10.4M net -6.5
received +$76.8M+$73.6M ± $67M expected surplus · +$28.8M realized received 9.7 ± 8 expected · 3.4 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved MIA's 2003 odds 52% → 68% (+16.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Mark RedmanP·29y·L/L
+$71.2M+$71.2M± $26M exp surplusrealized +$28.8M 8.4± 3 exp WARrealized 3.4
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.40/yr
Evidence
recent form 3.1/yr over 1.7 season
Talent
2.83/yr blended
Horizon
3.0 control yrs × 0.98 age decline
Jerrod FuellP·23y·R/R
+$5.6M+$2.4M± $62M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 8 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#297 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

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 →