I’m very open to hear everyone’s opinions on this, and I’m interested to hear what people think. My dad and I (Nats fans) were discussing the 2016 trade between the Nats and White Sox that sent Adam Eaton to DC in exchange for Lucas Giolito, Reynaldo Lopez, and Dane Dunning, all pitching prospects at the time, but Giolito was regarded as one of, if not the top prospect in baseball. Looking back on the trade, the Nats got a few solid years out of Eaton, and the White Sox have a rising star in Giolito (they also traded Dunning this offseason to acquire Lance Lynn and he is a breakout candidate now in Texas, and Lopez hasn’t really blossomed into much as their back end starter). The major caveat to the trade, however, is that Eaton contributed heavily during the Nats’ 2019 playoff run that ultimately won them a world series. So the question is, does winning the ring constitute the trade as a win for the Nats, even though it’s starting to look like the talent side would favor the White Sox in this trade?

My opinion is that nothing else matters if you win a ring (à la Billy Beane). My dad believes that because the White Sox are in a better position now strictly from the trade, this trade should be seen as a loss for the Nats. In response to the idea about winning the ring, he feels that since Eaton wasn’t really a star in that lineup, he thinks that the Nats could have easily gone out to trade for a comparable player to fill his spot and they still would’ve won anyway, which is where I disagree. I don’t think that is a valid argument in defense of the trade. Additionally, Giolito did breakout in 2019, but given how starters tend to be used in the playoffs he would not have even played that large of a role in the grand scheme of things (he would’ve basically replaced Joe Ross’ 2 appearances, one of which was a start in game 5 of the WS). The other aspect of the trade I think you can consider is that if the Nats already had a rotation they thought could carry them to the playoffs of Scherzer, Strasburg, Giolito, Anibal Sanchez, and Joe Ross/Erick Fedde/Jeremy Hellickson, then they might not have signed Patrick Corbin and instead went out to sign a higher end OF like Michael Brantley, who probably could’ve contributed a lot as well. I don’t really like playing the “what-if” game that much though, so I don’t agree with that logic either.

I am sure a trade like this has happened to many teams, where you trade awayPlease let me know what you think, I’m interested to hear everyone’s opinions!