Originally Posted by REDREAD
In terms of pure production, the Nats won easily.
I guess some people will claim the Reds won because they save money, but the Reds could've accomplished the same thing by nontendering Kearns and Lopez.
In the end, the Reds got 174 IP out of Bray.. about 80 IP of those (my estimate) were good. The remaining were mediocre or bad. Only accumulated 1.8 WAR over his 6 year stay here.
I remember when people were clinging to Daryl Thompson being the savior of the trade. I guess there will be a new rationalization now to justify the Reds winning this.
The biggest impact was that the 2007 team which was in pseudo-contention collapsed after the "Trade"
Clayton, Maj, and Bray (along with Freel and maybe Deno in the OF after the trade) contributed a lot to the collapse.
Seems like an obvious loss for the Reds to me.
Yes I agree. The Nats got the better players and the Reds collapsed after the deal.
The biggest reason the Reds lost on that trade is they could have gotten a better return than a sub-replacement level player in Royce Clayton and a couple injured middle relievers for those two productive starting players. The consensus around the league at the time was that the Reds rushed into the deal and ended up getting pennies on the dollar in terms of the trade value Kearns and Lopez had at the time. They basically gave away two valuable commodities for a motley collection of worthless players. To make it even worse, two of those players were injured at the time and the Reds didn't realize it because they were in such a rush and didn't do their homework first. It is really embarrassing when you get swindled by the likes of Jim Bowden.