Rick isn't saying that the Reds are somehow in a much worse position or that Hernandez was a bad acquisition. He's simply stating that the Reds produced what's likely a 20 Run Diff gain versus Bako in exchange for resources that can no longer be used to barter for the rest of the Run Diff help the club needs. That's not an indictment of the acquisition. It's a statement of fact.
While better players are always the goal, I certainly didn't sense any kind of major undercurrent in this thread about how the Hernandez deal was a negative for the team. I don't like that the Reds had to include what I feel was one too many prospects to take on a player like Hernandez (below-average offensively for two years running, not a defensive whiz by any means), but I don't think there's any denying that Hernandez likely represents a significant Run value upgrade versus what the Reds ran out behind the plate last season.I fail to see how "statistical analysis" of this deal amounts to anything more than the usual looking-down-the-nose at minor transactions -- such as when it is proclaimed that such-and-such a newly acquired role player will not deliver the division and that it would be far better for the team to have, oh, a much better player.