Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
February 1, 1985

STLSFG

STL won this trade +$33.6M surplus STL won this trade +1.6 WAR
STLSTL Joe McDonald net +$33.6M net +1.6
received −$1.6M−$1.6M ± $19M expected surplus · +$37.6M realized received 0.3 ± 2 expected · 10.1 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved STL's 1985 odds 90% → 91% (+0.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Jack Clark1B/OF·30y·R/R
−$1.6M−$1.6M± $19M exp surplusrealized +$37.6M 0.3± 2 exp WARrealized 10.1
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
no MLB track record — leans on pedigree
Talent
0.21/yr blended
Horizon
4.4 control yrs × 0.35 age decline
SFGSFG Tom Haller net −$33.6M net -1.6
received +$3.2M+$3.2M ± $98M expected surplus · +$4.0M realized received 3.7 ± 12 expected · 8.5 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved SFG's 1985 odds 1% → 1% (-0.1 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
David Green1B/OF·25y·R/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $58M exp surplusrealized −$5.6M 1.2± 7 exp WARrealized -0.3
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
Dave LaPointP·26y·L/L
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $54M exp surplusrealized +$26.4M 1.1± 7 exp WARrealized 2.7
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 × 0.94 age decline
José UribeSS·26y·B/R
+$1.6M+$1.6M± $55M exp surplusrealized −$13.6M 1.1± 7 exp WARrealized 6.6
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 × 0.96 age decline
Gary Rajsich1B/OF·31y·L/L
−$1.6M−$1.6M± $18M exp surplusrealized −$3.2M 0.3± 2 exp WARrealized -0.5
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
no MLB track record — leans on pedigree
Talent
0.21/yr blended
Horizon
3.9 control yrs × 0.35 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 →