I'll say this for Dayton Moore, if the whole point of signing Scott Podsednik was to hope for a good first half and then trade him then the signing was a success but that doesn't seem to be the case (see quote below). Pods hit .309/.352/.400 as a Royal with 30 stolen bases, which is decent if you ignore the caught stealings and his adventures in left field. Originally I thought this trade was a good sign that Dayton Moore was going to view the final two months of 2010 as sort of a 2011 rough draft. Then I read a comment that totally blew that thinking out of the water:
“Without the assurance that we were going to be able to sign him long-term going forward,” general manager Dayton Moore said, “we just felt it was the right time to move Scotty if indeed we got a deal that we desired.”
Am I mistaken in thinking that Moore made the right move for the wrong reasons? The top reason to trade him is because he's 34 and his value will never be this high again, signing him to a long term deal should never have even been considered. And maybe it wasn't, maybe that's just something you say to appease the part of the fan base that objects to trading .300 hitters regardless of their age or skill set. I think getting something/anything out of Podsednik is a hundred times preferable to signing him long term.
The minor leaguers KC got from LA, Lucas May and Elisaul Pimentel, may or may not pan out. Any contributions they make in KC will probably be as a backup catcher and middle reliever. Of course this should also mean that Royally Speaking favorite Alex Gordon plays everyday for the remainder of the season. And that is something that needed to happen anyway.