Production, minus salary, over time
For each season of team control, the model starts with projected WAR, applies a roster-spot allowance and the selected price per win, then subtracts salary. It discounts future surplus according to your settings and adds up the controlled seasons. Prospect values use a separate Future Value-based estimate.
Illustrative example, not a current player or the full model: if one season’s production is valued at $30 million and salary is $10 million, that season has $20 million of surplus before discounting. Another player with $40 million of production and $35 million of salary has only $5 million of surplus, despite producing more.
Why a better player can rank lower
The board ranks contracts and team control alongside talent. A star on a market-rate contract can have less surplus than a good player earning an arbitration salary. That does not make the cheaper player better on the field.
Surplus is not an asking price
A club also considers roster fit, contention, payroll limits, player consent, and the difficulty of replacing an elite player. A model match is a starting point for a trade conversation, not evidence that either team would accept it.
What the range means
The ranges are scenario allowances, not confidence intervals. They are not calibrated probabilities, and overlapping ranges do not guarantee a fair trade. Inspect the player details and change the assumptions you disagree with.
Check the settings, not just the headline
The tools show the projection source and valuation horizon. Player details expose forecasts, salaries, and control years; the builder exposes prices, premiums, and discount rates. The data is a dated snapshot rather than a live feed.
Explore value rankings · Full model assumptions
For a dated worked example, see the original McGonigle–Judge comparison. Its historical inputs and model settings differ from the current board.