TBR⇄CHC

TBRTBR Chuck Lamar net +$4.0M net +0.4

received −$4.0M−$8.8M ± $8M expected surplus · −$4.0M realized received 0.2 ± 1 expected · 0.1 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved TBR's 2000 odds 1% → 1% (+0.1 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Mark GuthrieP·34y·R/L

−$3.8M−$8.9M± $8M exp surplusrealized −$4.0M 0.2± 1 exp WARrealized 0.1

Prior

league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.21/yr

Evidence

recent form 0.1/yr over 2.8 seasons

Talent

0.17/yr blended

Horizon

1.5 control yr × 0.67 age decline

why ▾hide ▴

CHCCHC Ed Lynch net −$4.0M net -0.4

received +$2.4M−$1.6M ± $16M expected surplus · −$8.0M realized received 1.3 ± 2 expected · -0.3 realized WAR

Playoff odds: this deal moved CHC's 2000 odds 2% → 2% (-0.2 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗

receives — most valuable first

Dave MartinezOF·35y·L/L

+$2.5M−$1.7M± $16M exp surplusrealized −$8.0M 1.3± 2 exp WARrealized -0.3

Prior

no pedigree — league baseline → 0.21/yr

Evidence

recent form 1.3/yr over 2.4 seasons

Talent

0.94/yr blended

Horizon

1.5 control yr × 0.90 age decline

why ▾hide ▴

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 (composite top-100 rank / draft slot, or a baseline) with his recent track record, projected over the years of team control acquired. The ± figure is a historically calibrated predictive standard deviation, measuring how widely comparable forecasts have missed around their expected value. 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.