Well ... unless he sells to McCourt or some other cash-strapped, revenue-sucking "financier", it's hard to see how it could hurt.

But, yes, the challenges facing the Royals and the other true small market clubs are endemic to being in a small market, not the ownership.

David Glass Storms Off During #FanFest Interview

Parkins: In terms of… I means it’s… it’s interesting that you say that and I guess this is the one of the
things that’s been rumored around here recently that we’ve got to ask you about. People are talking
about whether or not you are going to sell after this big event coming to town. (Glass laughing) It’s like
you have this game and then when it’s done then you will sell the team.

Glass: Yeah, that’s stupid. Uhh, I’ve never considered doing that and I would have no idea where that
came from.

Parkins: You would never consider selling the team?

Glass: No.

Parkins: What do you say to fans who would like you to sell the team?

Glass: Uhh, yeah, I’m sorry.

Later...

Parkins: Would you be willing to operate a season at a loss in order to sign a big time….

Glass: We… We’ve done that before and I suppose we’d do it again.

Parkins: We’re talking with Royals owner David Glass here on the Danny Parkins show…. Putting the
microphone down? Oh… oh… alright. Thank you sir for coming on the show he just put the microphone
down and walked away.

Sure, but firing Dayton Moore would help more.

I'm always pissed off when people insinuate that the Royals would be fine if Glass prioritized winning over profits. It's such a sugar daddy approach to analysis -- if the problem is not having money, the solution is for someone else to provide huge amounts of money for nothing in return!

Also, the fundamental problem with the Royals in the Glass years hasn't been lack of money, it's been lack of talent. During the Allard Baird years, you could easily piss away an extra $20 million a year on the free agent market and still have a crummy team. What they've needed for decades is a functioning minor league pipeline. That's something where an extra $10 million a year can really change the fortunes of a team.

Free agents have their place, but increasing payroll to produce a "winner" is not a viable strategy in Kansas City, and to the extent that it distracts from the minor league pipeline, it's unhelpful and counterproductive.

I'm always pissed off when people insinuate that the Royals would be fine if Glass prioritized winning over profits. It's such a sugar daddy approach to analysis

But isn't a baseball team a sugar daddy approach to investment?

Zach's got a point there. That's what makes the Moore Era so frustrating; Moore's a Peter Principle guy. Brilliant scouting director, in over his head as a GM, has never shown a hint he has any idea how to assemble a proper major league roster. Yet, post #3 above aside, he's been so successful at procuring good young talent that you really hesitate to fire him for fear his replacement will be worse.

I'm always pissed off when people insinuate that the Royals would be fine if Glass prioritized winning over profits. It's such a sugar daddy approach to analysis -- if the problem is not having money, the solution is for someone else to provide huge amounts of money for nothing in return!

Ewing Kauffman spoiled us.

I'm always pissed off when people insinuate that the Royals would be fine if Glass prioritized winning over profits. It's such a sugar daddy approach to analysis -- if the problem is not having money, the solution is for someone else to provide huge amounts of money for nothing in return!

Well isn't that exactly how welfare teams like the Royals operate - on the forced largess of popular, successful teams like the New York Yankees?

Zach's got a point there. That's what makes the Moore Era so frustrating; Moore's a Peter Principle guy. Brilliant scouting director, in over his head as a GM, has never shown a hint he has any idea how to assemble a proper major league roster. Yet, post #3 above aside, he's been so successful at procuring good young talent that you really hesitate to fire him for fear his replacement will be worse.

It makes you appreciate the job Rizzo has done with the Nats (especially since many D.C. fans wanted Moore, who I believe is a George Mason alumnus, to become GM once MLB sold the franchise). To be sure, landing Strasburg and Harper played a key role, but they didn't help Washington land Gio Gonzalez from the A's. Heck, I'll even give Bowden a slight bit of credit for stabilizing the farm system when the deck was stacked against him.

the solution is for someone else to provide huge amounts of money for nothing in return!

You mean like how Young Masters Steinbrenner acquired the Yankees?

You mean like how Young Masters Steinbrenner acquired the Yankees?

That's not completely fair, they had to put up with having an insufferable blowhard as a father.

That's not completely fair, they had to put up with having an insufferable blowhard as a father.

C'mon for Yankee fans, that would be considered the nice neighbor next door.

You mean like how Young Masters Steinbrenner acquired the Yankees?

Or how they acquired the majority of the funding for their new stadium.