Dayton Moore and John Sherman are showing baseball what the ‘new’ Royals will be about
The call came out of the blue, from a baseball man I hadn’t talked to in at least a year. He wanted to talk about the Royals and Dayton Moore and John Sherman, and maybe you will see his name and roll your eyes.
But Scott Boras had a point to make.
The Royals aren’t just doing right by their people in promising to not release or cut pay for minor-leaguers, and in rejecting furloughs or layoffs for staffers.
They are creating a competitive advantage, and setting themselves apart from so many others in the game.
“(Moore’s) reputation right now is a spotlight in this industry,” Boras said. “Because he is guiding the industry with his experience. He’s letting them know what you’re doing is going to cost you billions, not save you money. It’s going to take that great player and not develop them correctly ...
“Parents are going to say, ‘What is this system? They say come into it, and they’ve had record revenues for 15 years, escalating (franchise) values, and they have an interruption for a few months — half of a season — and all of a sudden they’re ridding themselves of our sons? They’re dumping them?’
“That dynamic is going to wear on whether or not players and families and parents make decisions. And this is where Kansas City has been in my mind, and Dayton’s character.”
Boras did not tell Moore he was calling. And, when reached, Moore said the potential competitive advantage did not cross his mind.
But it’s an interesting thought. It’s an interesting piece of a plainly fascinating decision by an organization that had every excuse to cut or release or furlough and instead is standing by its people.
The Royals’ stance has been digested largely through the lens of what it says about Moore, but here in Kansas City it’s at least as interesting for what it says about Sherman.
He has lived his entire adult life in Kansas City, earning a strong reputation for character and philanthropy. But we’re still getting to know him as the Royals’ new owner.
We can unpack some of that here.
Moore pushed for this, but the decision was Sherman’s. He could have cut. He could have released minor-leaguers and justified it as a logical way to trim costs in a year without minor-league baseball.
Sherman could have saved more by furloughing or laying off employees, justifying it not just as financially prudent in an economic downturn but as part of the normal turnover involved in an ownership change.
He could have done all of this with an explanation unavailable to baseball’s 29 other owners: He does not have years of profits and escalating franchise value to lean on.
The Miami Marlins sold in 2017. Every other owner has been around since at least 2012, enjoyed years of profits and sits on an estimated franchise value that’s risen by at least $750 million.
The Dodgers, Cubs, Nationals, Giants, Mariners, Rays, Reds, Mets, Padres, Rangers, Blue Jays, Angels, A’s, Pirates, Rangers, Red Sox and Marlins are among the teams reported to have issued furloughs or paycuts for non-executives. Hundreds of minor-leaguers have been cut across the sport. None from the Royals, and it’ll stay that way.
Going against the grain like this — paying and keeping players and employees when richer teams aren’t — is the most significant demonstration yet of how Sherman’s group will lead.
We have three major takeaways here.
First, Sherman’s group believes in what it bought, and specifically in Moore.
The Royals pulled themselves from punchline to 2015 World Series champions with payrolls that consistently ranked in the bottom half of MLB. They did it with strong drafts and productive player acquisitions, sure, but they also did it with a mantra of personal love and support that was overwhelming inside the organization and bordered on corny to some outside.
Moore has always led with his heart. He’s being supported to continue.
Second, Sherman is following through on his stated view that owning a baseball team is a civic responsibility. He has said he is prepared to lose money, and there can be little doubt that he’s lost millions already — forget for a moment the operating costs and just think about how much the franchise’s value must have already dropped.
On this point it’s interesting to consider what someone in baseball pointed out this week: Sherman isn’t like a lot of other owners. He is self-made, the son of a military man who earned his fortune by building two businesses from the ground up.
He’s not protecting his father’s wealth. He’s using his own and, at least on some level, must have confidence that he can make more money if he needs it. That belief can be immensely empowering.
Many in baseball (including some who work for the Royals) wondered if an investor list 17-men deep was a sign that Sherman’s ownership would need to clip coupons. This was an easy opportunity to do that, and the group refused.
Third — and this is somewhat related — Sherman is his own man. One of the secrets of team ownership is that as much as teams compete against each other on the field, they work together in business, with pressure often exerted from team to team or from the commissioner’s office to team.
I want to be clear that I have no proof of this, but it makes plain sense that entrenched, powerful and wealthier-than-Sherman owners like Arte Moreno, Ted Lerner, Charles Johnson, Mark Walter and the Ricketts family aren’t thrilled that what they’re unwilling to do is being done by the small-market Royals with brand-new ownership.
Sherman has to feel that, too. He’s going against what’s easy. He’s showing his new partners, most of whom are only beginning to know him, what he’s about.
The Royals have not played a game under Sherman, and Moore’s roster is at least a year or more from competing.
But even so, we’re gaining new focus on how Sherman will lead, and some around baseball are seeing a new competitive advantage for Moore.