Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
April 18, 2017

ANATOR

ANA won this trade +$0.0M surplus ANA won this trade +0.1 WAR
ANAANA Billy Eppler net +$0.0M net +0.1
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $38M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.8 ± 5 expected · 0.1 realized WAR
receives — most valuable first
Juan GraterolC·28y·R/R
+$0.0M+$0.0M± $38M exp surplusrealized +$0.0M 0.8± 5 exp WARrealized 0.1
Prior
no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.6/yr over 0.1 season
Talent
0.23/yr blended
Horizon
5.5 control yrs × 0.65 age decline
TORTOR Ross Atkins net +$0.0M net -0.1
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $0M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.0 ± 0 expected · 0.0 realized WAR
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 →