What's more potentially disruptive?  Giving a new manager an entire offseason to prepare for 2015, or the historically unprecedented act of retaining Gardenhire that may result in a slow start and an in-season switch with potentially fewer options available as replacements?

 

There are probably a number of good reasons why no other organization in the history of baseball has brought back a manager after a four year skid like Gardenhire's.  Something tells me the Twins are determined to demonstrate those reasons.

I don't know if it's quite that simple.  He has a contract for next year, and any firing is also disruptive.  So the better question is if there is someone who is so much a better fit that it outweighs the various costs of cutting the ties.

 That's the point--to demonstrate that failure has consequences.  When a player fails, he is often demoted to the bench or the minors--or is "designated for assignment"--FIRED.   It is disruptive and it sends a message.

If Gardy returns, please put me down as the first to say it will be 5 90+ loss seasons in a row.

 

With so many succssful teams in baseball, you would think the Twins could find one manager to poach who would be able to at least  lead us to 90 loss seasons just like Gardy.  I think this board gives him both too much credit, and too little accountability for a manager of a team who has lost 90+ games, 4 seasons in a row.  Someone said it isn't smart to make change for change sake, I'm pretty sure we would be making a change because we are one of the worst teams in baseball for the 4 year in a row.

Be fair to the org: they did dump half the coaches over the past couple years, and I could easily see Anderson getting the axe this winter based on the poor return on their pitching investment this season. 

 

If Sano and some of the other young studs had shown up on schedule and failed then I think Gardy would be facing some music as well. But they didn't arrive, and he got good seasons from a handful of unexpected youngsters (Santana? Escobar?? Vargas?!?) which will count in his favor as they decide on 2015.

 

In 21015 look for Gardy and the new guys to stay, Anderson to go.

Be fair to the org: they did dump half the coaches over the past couple years, and I could easily see Anderson getting the axe this winter based on the poor return on their pitching investment this season. 

 

If Sano and some of the other young studs had shown up on schedule and failed then I think Gardy would be facing some music as well. But they didn't arrive, and he got good seasons from a handful of unexpected youngsters (Santana? Escobar?? Vargas?!?) which will count in his favor as they decide on 2015.

 

In 21015 look for Gardy and the new guys to stay, Anderson to go.

Half the coaches? Have those moves produced the desired results?

 That's the point--to demonstrate that failure has consequences.  When a player fails, he is often demoted to the bench or the minors--or is "designated for assignment"--FIRED.   It is disruptive and it sends a message.

I went away for a day, and come back to find several responses to my post that argue against something I didn't say.  I've been on record for about a year now as wanting Gardenhire replaced.  I was responding to the notion that it was simple.  Replacing a pitching coach is simple - you ask the manager who he'd like and then you pretty much hire that guy - replacing a manager is not. 

 

The disruptions include, for instance, that every minute the GM spends vetting and interviewing managerial candidates, is a minute he's not scouring the waiver wire for astute pickups or constructing genius trades for prospects.

 

I'm all about process.