Baltimore traded running back Joe Washington to Washington…
Baltimore traded running back Joe Washington to Washington for the 52nd pick in the 1981 draft. The Colts did not use that selection on Jarvis Redwine; they immediately included No. 52 in their move-up with Minnesota for No. 18. Joe Washington, meanwhile, became an immediate dual-threat contributor in Washington and gave his new team the stronger realized return.
Indianapolis Colts Received
- pick 1981 second round pick (#52) [later traded to Minnesota; Vikings selected Jarvis Redwine]
Washington Commanders Received
- player Joe Washington (b)
Trade Analysis
The first correction is structural. Baltimore received the 52nd overall pick from Washington in exchange for Joe Washington, but the Colts did not simply sit at No. 52 and select Jarvis Redwine. Their own transaction history shows that the pick was immediately bundled with No. 39 and No. 123 in a separate deal with Minnesota for the 18th selection. Minnesota then used No. 52 on Redwine. The asset description therefore needs to follow the pick rather than crediting Baltimore with another team's selection.
The football verdict also changes when Joe Washington's production is considered. He became an immediate centerpiece for Washington in 1981, rushing for 916 yards on 210 carries while catching 70 passes for 558 yards. That combination gave the offense a versatile back who could create both as a runner and receiver during Joe Gibbs' first season. Washington remained part of the club as it developed into a championship contender.
Baltimore did not waste the acquired pick. Packaging No. 52 helped the Colts move up for Donnell Thompson, who became a long-term starter. But only a portion of that later move-up value belongs to this transaction because Baltimore also surrendered two other selections. It would be misleading to attribute Thompson entirely to the Joe Washington deal.
Washington therefore earns an A- for obtaining substantial immediate production at a second-round price. Baltimore receives a C because the pick retained real trade value and helped facilitate a useful subsequent move, but the direct return was less impressive than the player it gave away. The Commanders win on realized value, and the revised asset description makes the downstream path clear.