Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
January 3, 2023

BALKCR

unsettledToo soon to call — players still accruing.
BALBAL Mike Elias net +$36.8M net +5.5
received −$1.6M−$1.6M ± $20M expected surplus · +$36.8M realized received 0.0 ± 2 expected · 5.5 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved BAL's 2023 odds 50% → 58% (+8.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Ryan O'Hearn1B·30y·L/L
−$1.6M−$1.6M± $20M exp surplusrealized +$36.8M 0.0± 2 exp WARrealized 5.5
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form -0.9/yr over 1.2 season
Talent
-0.34/yr blended
Horizon
2.0 control yrs
KCRKCR J.J. Picollo net −$36.8M net -5.5
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 KCR's 2023 odds 1% → 1% (-0.4 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 →