Welcome to SB Nation Reacts, a survey of fans across the MLB. Throughout the year, we ask questions of the most plugged-in Kansas City Royals fans and fans across the country. Sign up here to participate in the weekly emailed surveys.
Earlier this week, we asked you to tell us how confident you were in the Royals competing in 2027
It shouldn’t come as a surprise, I guess, that 69% (nice) of fans voted that Sherman’s Q&A with Josh Vernier did nothing to convince them that the Royals would be able to compete next year. Indeed, I expected the majority of respondents to vote that way. But I was curious just how much of a majority, and, well, that’s more than 2/3 of you. That’s a pretty hefty majority.
Coming in second place was “Neutral” at only 13%, less than 1/5 of the number of people who lack any confidence at all in this team competing next year. I guess it could happen. The Royals allegedly have a lot less salary committed for next season and should therefore be able to spend big in free agency without spending much more on the team than they have this year.
However, it’s still not clear to me how they can make it work without hitting on at least one premium free agent plus a few smaller ones. They need two high-quality starting pitchers plus depth and multiple relievers. Are they really going to go get Skubal plus the rest of the guys they need? Or will they continue the tradition of adding Jonathan India- and Carlos Estévez-like players who cost more than the minimum to provide a certain floor, but offer almost nothing in terms of a ceiling?
If I may, let me do a slight tangent on Jonathan India for a moment. The Royals gave him $8 million this past offseason in order to get most of the playing time at second base before he was hurt early in the season. Some people have pointed out that $8 million for a guy of India’s caliber isn’t a team that is “cheap”. But I’d argue it’s the definition of a cheap team. Let me explain.
When I was working part-time at a grocery store, I spent way more money on shoes than I do now, as a software developer. Some of that, of course, is because I was on my feet more often. But a lot of it was the fact that I couldn’t afford to get a really nice pair of shoes, and so they were constantly wearing out. When you’ve got the money to buy higher-quality, you can sometimes spend less overall because the higher-quality stuff just works better. (This is a real-life example of the Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness).
A team that spends $8 on Jonathan India is doing so because they can’t or won’t spend more on a higher-quality player, but knows they need to get somebody to do the job. If they were willing to actually be a not-cheap team, they could have added a Cody Bellinger or someone who could have made more of an impact. The upfront price would have been more, but the return would also have been more, leading to less spent (in terms of $/WAR and perhaps even in profitability if the team performed better and drew more fans) in the long run. The Royals won’t buy the nice shoes that will last a long time, so it’s cheap behavior, even if they’re spending more than some of the other cheap clubs.
Anyway, I hope I’m wrong, and the Royals can compete again next year because, honestly, this year has not been very fun at all.
These survey results are sponsored by FanDuel.