Surplus vs. Roster – Building and Evaluating Trades
The ottoneu Slack community continues to be a great place to discuss strategy, get feedback, and more. One of the more active channels is Trade Review, where you can talk about ongoing trade discussions and get feedback from the crowd, and on that channel, there tend to be two camps in this off-season window – those who only care about player values and those who care about roster construction.
The value-only camp looks almost exclusively at surplus value in a trade. Surplus value is the production a player provides above his salary. The theory here is that every team has the same budget, so the team that gets the most production per dollar spent will win the league. By this thinking, a player with $20 in value and a $5 salary has a $15 surplus and is a more valuable asset than a $40 player with a $35 salary and only $5 in surplus. The argument is that you can take the $5 player, spend $31 in the auction on a player worth exactly that $31, and end up with $36 spent and $51 in value, or you can take the $35 player, sign a $1 player worth $1, and have $36 spent and $41 in value.
The roster-construction camp argues that surplus isn’t everything – yes, you have your set budget ($400 in ottoneu) to work with, but you also have the same roster constraints. The team that wins won’t be the team with the most surplus value, but the team that gets the most production from their active roster slots. In ottoneu, if your 22 starting spots accrue 725 points each, you won’t win with 15,950 points, no matter how much surplus you have or how good your bench is.
The Surpluser vs. Rosterer debate is strongest when there is a deal in which one team is giving up surplus (or even taking on a player whose salary is greater his value) because of a roster fit. Here’s a hypothetical example:
Team A has a deep OF, maybe eight players, all worth about $15, none paid more than $5. Team B has a $45 SS who is paid the full $45. The Rosterers would say trading one of those OF for the SS is a great move for A. They would be moving decent production from their bench and adding elite production to their lineup. Sure, they have a less valuable roster, but they have a more productive roster. The Surplusers would say to ask for more than the SS in return or to hold – why spend the extra $40 AND give up a useful piece, when you can spend that $40 on a $40 SS at the auction. But, the Rosterers would reply, what if that $40 SS won’t be available in the auction? Or will get paid $50 or more?
Honestly, it is a difficult debate and, as with most things in life, I will preach a combination of information and moderation.
As for information, you should know the general values of the players in the deal and how those values compare to their salaries. If the deal discussed has you taking on a set of players who cost far more than they are worth – or giving up players worth far less – you should know that and you should probably reconsider before accepting.
In addition, though, you need to know your league and the expected free agent market. In one of my leagues, most of the owners have made their cuts and Adrian Gonzalez is about the only roster-worthy 1B currently in the FA pool. A couple others will likely join the party by the 1/31 cut deadline, but in that league, I would take a bigger risk to acquire a 1B than I would in others.
As for the moderation, you don’t want to go overboard in either direction. No matter what the Surplusers tell you, you probably shouldn’t make a bunch of deals for 3B paid $10 and worth $20 and end up with 10 3B and an unplayable roster everywhere else. On the other hand, if you keep overpaying to fill “needs” via trade, you’ll run out of assets to trade and money to spend before you build a competitive roster.
When you are trading (or making keep/cut decisions), you need to:
- Know how you value players
- Know how those values compare to salaries
- Understand your league dynamics (are there no 1B available? does this league overpay RP?)
- Seek to maximize the value AND production of your roster by adding surplus while also maximizing your usable value
Easier said than done, but it is the path to building a winning team.
A long-time fantasy baseball veteran and one of the creators of ottoneu, Chad Young's is the Managing Editor for RotoGraphs, and can be heard on the Keep or Kut Podcast. You can follow him on Bluesky @chadyoung.bsky.social.
I think of a $30 player as a $30 asset. Your $30 is also an asset. So, in order to correctly value a trade, you have to factor in both assets. If a $30 player is $25, then you are getting a $30 asset AND $5 in cash assets ($30-$25). So his true value is $35. Likewise, a $20 player at $5 would be a $20 asset plus $15 in savings so he would also be a $35 total value.
A $30 player at $30 is just a $30 asset at $30, which is a $30 value.
So a $30 player at $25 for a $20 player at $5 would be an even trade. To add names to it, in a 5×5 league ill sau Jake Arrieta is a $30 player, and maybe Johnny Cueto is a $20 player. So someone looking to shed cap might off a $25 Arrieta for a $5 Cueto, and that would be a fair trade. Agree?
not sure i agree 100% with this. I start with $400 to spend. If I have a $30 player at a $25 salary, i can expect to add $375 in value using the rest of my budget, which leaves me with $405 in total value. If I have a $20 player at $5, I can add $395 in additional value and end up with $415 total.
Similarly, a $30 player on a $25 contract is not a $35 asset. Again, if i start with $400, I have $400 in assets (all cash). If I spend $25 on a $30 player, I now have $405 in assets ($30 player as a $30 asset and $375 in cash). The fact that I get to keep a different asset doesn’t make the $30 player worth $35, exactly.
I should call it $35 in trade value. $30 in assets and $5 in surplus value = $35 trade value. From a mathematical standpoint, it makes sense what you are saying… But talent isn’t infinitely available. At somepoint you have to spend money to get the top talent, and it’s not always available in the auction. There is value to owning a top player at the position before the auction. I can’t just hand over my $375 in cash and get my $375 in players back. The players have to be available. In my 5×5, I’m fairly confident the ONLY decent 3B that will be on the market is Adrian Beltre, if you don’t get him, it’s a huge drop off.
Actually I think it’s pretty simple. As your team is more competitive you need to worry about composition more. When you are rebuilding then you should be targeting surplus value.
That is one way of saying that amassing value is better, but beware the possibility that you can’t make a good trade to fill a position of need.
Rebuilding teams have time to find those trades. Contending teams don’t.
I think when rebuilding, you just make smart trades and amass talent. You have advantages when rebuilding… You can afford the $65-$70 Mike Trouts… you can afford to pick up the new closer rumor, you can afford to carry more cheap prospects. The game is built to allow teams to rebuild fairly quickly.
Yeah this is where most rebuilding teams make a mistake. I took over a team in one league and flipped a number of cheaper assets that had no surplus, or negative surplus ($17 Adison Russell, $16 Soler, etc…) for a $60 Trout, a $54 Stanton, and a $15 JD Martinez with the SOLE goal of knowing I’ll be able to control both Stanton and Trouts trade markets come may.
The main issue I have with this statement is that rebuilding teams don’t NEED surplus value, they need future value. And future value has ZERO surplus, because surplus value is based on present day values.
Contending teams need surplus value.
The surplus value guys think they can accurately predict future value and spend that money efficiently in the draft. The reality is, they can’t. Just because they save X amount of dollars to spend in the auction does not mean they will end up with X worth of production.
For a competitive team, its much more important to maximize production than to accumulate as much surplus value as possible.
Now for a rebuilding team, I can see a good argument for just building up as much surplus value as possible.
EVERYONE thinks they can (or are trying to) accurately predict the future and future value. The Surplus folks think, “This player is going to be worth X more than his price!” and the Roster side thinks, “This player is going to produce X more than my other SS options!” That piece is the same.
Thats true, it does go both ways regarding predicting future value.
The surplus guys are still at a disadvantage though, because they are spending money on a group of players that might not be worth as much as the available cash. They are much more reliant on other owners cutting good players and making bad decisions imo.
And while its nice to have a deep bench, it hurts when it comes at the expense of production in your starting lineup
Basically, surplus value =/= production.
I mean think bout a team with 30 players who are valued at $8, but cost only $1 each. Thats $210 worth of surplus value! Thats a lot.
But that team is still going to get crushed by a team that has 30 players whose average price is $10 each, and are worth $12 each, for only $60 worth of surplus value.
Depends a bit on the context of the league. In an ottoneu league, with 40 spots and $400 to spend, that first team should end up with 10 more players averaging $37 in value, for a total value on their roster of $610. Plus the ability to spend so highly at auction means that they can pretty easily fill whatever needs they have.
The second team, in that case, has $100 left to spend on the same ten spots. They’ll be limited to who they can get to fill needs and will leave the auction with (theoretically) $460 in total value.
Going into an ottoneu auction, I would much prefer to be the former.
My reply was not Ottoneau specific.
Im assuming 30 roster spots.
In which case the first team only has $240 worth of value.
Obviously if a team has the ability to buy 10 playrs at nearly $40 each that would be preferred, but thats not what I was getting at.
I’d love some help from the community…
I’ve spent the last 3 years doing poor enough in partial keeper rotisserie league that I’ve been able to acquire some damn good talent. 14 team 6×6 (OBP,HR,R,SB,TB,RBI & ERA,WHIP,W,App,Ks,S). We can keep 7 MLB and 5 MLers each year with MLB guys gaining $5 in salary each year (MLers exempt)
Currently I am at
Rizzo $30, Altuve $21, Betts $12, Springer $11, Pederson $7,Schwarber $6 for my keepers. I need one more, or should one or more of the below guys be kept.
AJ Ramos $6, Severino $6, A.Miller $10, Sale $41, Soler $6, Vogt $6, Puig $16, Yelich $16
I am leaning Soler because I can just rebuy Sale if I want at that price most likely, yea? Soler was so hot in the playoffs, apparently down to like 225lbs now, he was huge last year….like Puig.
thoughts? Ideas?
thanks
23 man roster. 1 C, 5 OF and 2 U with 9 Pitchers
Severino is a terrific pitcher. Pitching in Yankee Stadium and facing so many AL East lineups costs him a bit, but he should have a ton of value at $6. It would be very hard for me to cut Severino loose in your situation.