Originally Posted by Kc61
I disagree with this analysis, sorry.
I look at what the Reds gained in the trade compared to what the Reds gave up in the trade. I'm evaluating the trade as a Reds' fan, from the Reds' viewpoint.
The fact that the Jays may have mishandled EE isn't the Reds' concern. The question is what the Reds got, and what the Reds gave.
If the Reds had not made the trade, and today had EE, they would have a huge asset to trade or use. They don't. That has to go into the calculus of the trade from the Reds' point of view.
Blue Jays' poor move AFTER the trade doesn't influence it IMO. That's a separate matter.
Say the Reds traded Joey Votto to the Dodgers for a lousy minor leaguer. The Dodgers then dumped Votto for some silly reason. Doesn't change the fact that the Reds would have made a terrible trade.
The fact that EE was put in waivers and didn't have many/high dollar FA suitors shows what his true value was during that period. Comping this to Votto vs a lousy minor leaguer isn't really fair...I know what you are trying to say, but the example is too much of a stretch.
Yes he bloomed, but well after the statute of limitations expired here. As mentioned above, he was not a valuable commodity at the time. And second, his defense and Votto would have prevented his emergence as a Red. Just one of those "What can you do" scenarios that really didn't have a good solution knowing what we know now.