Rosternomics
← Trade Database
Share on 𝕏
April 21, 2025

CHCSEA

unsettledToo soon to call — players still accruing.
CHCCHC Jed Hoyer net +$2.4M net +0.7
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $9M expected surplus · +$2.4M realized received 0.3 ± 1 expected · 0.7 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved CHC's 2025 odds 63% → 67% (+3.6 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
receives — most valuable first
Drew PomeranzP·37y·R/L
+$0.0M+$0.0M± $9M exp surplusrealized +$2.4M 0.3± 1 exp WARrealized 0.7
Prior
league baseline (track record outweighs draft pedigree) → 0.32/yr
Evidence
recent form 0.8/yr over 0.8 season
Talent
0.49/yr blended
Horizon
0.6 control yr
SEASEA Jerry Dipoto net −$2.4M net -0.7
received +$0.0M+$0.0M ± $0M expected surplus · +$0.0M realized received 0.0 ± 0 expected · 0.0 realized WAR
Playoff odds: this deal moved SEA's 2025 odds 50% → 46% (-3.9 pts) — how trade timing is graded ↗
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 →