Piece Trading

Every position is unique and sometimes this might be enough material for it and other times it won't. The extra pawn is something, but not a game-changer here. 

There reason giving up 2 minor pieces for a Rook and pawn is typically bad is because the Rook is just one piece, but the two minor pieces are two pieces. Two pieces can coordinate with each other but a Rook can't coordinate plans by itself. Having one or two pawns helping the Rook helps little.

Additionally, this exchange of 2 minors for a Rook and pawn usually happens early in the chess game and early in the game minor pieces tend to be slightly more valuable because the heavy pieces (Rooks and Queen) tend to be undeveloped. They are of little use if not in the action, so usually giving up the 2 minor pieces actually means giving up 2 ACTIVE and developed minor pieces, whereas the opponent Rook might not even be off the backrank.

Sorry I didn't specify. But I meant in the middlegame-early endgame The trading is clear which is better.

Thanks.

Depends on the position but if not sure, then count the material as those guidelines are decent. In the endgame having a minor piece is usually better than 3 pawns as long as other things are on the board as simplifying down all the way is a draw since a lone Bishop or lone Knight can't checkmate even with help from your King. It needs other things to take away escape squares if checkmate is to happen.