Not sure it's worse than juicing, but absolutely worse than Pete betting.
The issue with the punishment, IMO, is that I don't think it would deter an owner from having his players engage in the same conduct. It's common sense - doesn't any punishment for rule breaking have to be severe enough to deter the rule-breaking? If in people's minds it doesn't, people are going to break the rules.
I know Crane supposedly didn't direct it and didn't even know about it, but let's do a thought experiment. What if someone propositioned Jim Crane before the 2017 season and said "Hey, let's do this sign stealing thing, which could make a material impact on your team winning the World Series. A couple years later you'll get caught. Your GM and manager will be suspended for a year, and you'll lose some draft picks, and you'll be fined $5m. Deal?" I think virtually every MLB owner would take the deal. Even if MLB vacated their titles, which some were calling for, everybody would still remember who won and of course they already made all the money from it.
The problem is that I honestly can't think of a punishment that would deter the conduct. MLB exacting some financial penalty that took a huge chunk of the revenue the team made that season might do it, but they currently aren't allowed to do that under the current constitution.