Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
December 12, 1999

CHCLAD

LAD won this trade +$31.2M surplus CHC won this trade +0.1 WAR
CHCCHC Ed Lynch net −$31.2M net +0.1
received −$4.8M−$12.0M ± $22M expected surplus · −$6.4M realized received 5.1 ± 3 expected · 4.9 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved CHC's 2000 odds 1% → 2% (+0.8 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Ismael ValdezP·27y·R/R
+$3.2M−$4.0M± $15M exp surplusrealized −$17.6M 2.7± 2 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 2.5/yr over 2.6 seasons
Talent
1.82/yr blended
Horizon
1.5 control yr
Eric Young2B·33y·R/R
−$8.0M−$8.0M± $15M exp surplusrealized +$11.2M 2.4± 2 exp WARrealized 4.9
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 2.5/yr over 2.3 seasons
Talent
1.70/yr blended
Horizon
1.5 control yr × 0.96 age decline
LADLAD Kevin Malone net +$31.2M net -0.1
received +$7.2M−$1.6M ± $81M expected surplus · +$24.8M realized received 2.9 ± 10 expected · 4.8 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved LAD's 2000 odds 59% → 43% (-15.8 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Chad RickettsP·25y·R/R
+$6.4M+$2.4M± $62M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.3± 8 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#231 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
Brian StephensonP·27y·R/R
+$5.6M+$0.8M± $49M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.0± 6 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#49 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 × 0.76 age decline
Terry AdamsP·27y·R/R
−$4.8M−$4.8M± $15M exp surplusrealized +$24.8M 0.6± 2 exp WARrealized 4.8
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.5/yr over 2.5 seasons
Talent
0.43/yr blended
Horizon
1.5 control yr

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 →