Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
November 7, 2007

HOUPHI

HOU won this trade +$178.4M surplus HOU won this trade +10.7 WAR
HOUHOU Tal Smith net +$178.4M net +10.7
received +$13.6M+$13.6M ± $74M expected surplus · +$102.4M realized received 4.7 ± 9 expected · 11.9 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved HOU's 2008 odds 22% → 16% (-6 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Michael BournOF·26y·L/R
+$12.0M+$12.0M± $44M exp surplusrealized +$107.2M 3.2± 6 exp WARrealized 11.8
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 1.3/yr over 0.8 season
Talent
0.64/yr blended
Horizon
5.0 control yrs
Mike Costanzo1B/DH·25y·L/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized 0.0
Prior
#65 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
Geoff GearyP·32y·R/R
+$0.0M+$0.0M± $14M exp surplusrealized −$4.8M 0.3± 2 exp WARrealized 0.1
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.2/yr over 2.4 seasons
Talent
0.23/yr blended
Horizon
2.0 control yrs × 0.62 age decline
PHIPHI Pat Gillick net −$178.4M net -10.7
received −$12.8M−$12.8M ± $26M expected surplus · −$76.0M realized received 2.9 ± 3 expected · 1.2 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved PHI's 2008 odds 71% → 79% (+7.4 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Eric BruntlettSS·30y·R/R
+$4.8M+$4.8M± $22M exp surplusrealized −$7.2M 1.3± 3 exp WARrealized -0.9
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.9/yr over 1.2 season
Talent
0.55/yr blended
Horizon
3.0 control yrs × 0.80 age decline
Brad LidgeP·32y·R/R
−$17.6M−$17.6M± $14M exp surplusrealized −$68.8M 1.6± 2 exp WARrealized 2.1
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.26/yr
Evidence
recent form 1.5/yr over 2.6 seasons
Talent
1.10/yr blended
Horizon
1.5 control yr × 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 →