Article: Right Man for the Job

[Seth Stohs]

You can view the page at http://twinsdaily.com/content.php?r=2380-Right-Man-for-the-Job

[Jack Torse]

I saw the puff piece headline and didn't need to read the by line. This 3 year old and counting failed project is not Gardy's fault alone but a little turnover in a business is healthy. Especially when the subject despite being liked, hard working and all other glowing attributes you pointed out has failed at his job 3 years in a row. If they would have had this loyalty to Cuddy, Hunter and the list of departed players that that seemed to share Gardy's work eithic and professionalism maybe they could have avoided this dark hole in their history.

[AlwaysinModeration]

These weren't just some projects that were viewed as some as not successful. This is overall end product of a $200 million revenue, high visibility organization in an ultra-competitive industry. The results have been extremely poor, and as a result, the organization has lost a significant amount of revenue, with more revenue losses on the horizon.

 

The "promote from within" mentality is definitely meritorious, and could be a advantageous strength as this sort of loyalty can shield organizations from making rash reactionary choices that can hamper long-term progress. However, the organization needs to couple employee loyalty with a culture of innovation and learning.

 

I don't see that learning from this manager, nor a particular desire to make any changes in his approach. I don't see any defensive shifts, or maximazation of platoon advantages, or creative bullpen usage.

 

And I don't see successful development and integration of young players, which is the single most important skill the Twins will need in the coming few years.

 

I appreciate the "big picture" view of this decision, but in my view, the big picture view shows that long-term success is most likely found under the guidance of a new leader.

[raindog]

I appreciate the positive take, Seth. But I have to agree with AM's point of view. I could never have said it better.

 

Especially this part:

I don't see that learning from this manager, nor a particular desire to make any changes in his approach. I don't see any defensive shifts, or maximazation of platoon advantages, or creative bullpen usage.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I've never cared much for Gardenhire. I think he's a bad in-game manager. He refuses to platoon, often makes bizarre calls to the pen, and generally, just makes me scratch my head, as if we're watching different events unfold on the field.

 

With that said, nice piece Seth. I'm neutral on retaining Gardenhire as the manager. I simply think that the manager doesn't make much of an on-field difference unless he's exceptionally intelligent and studious (Maddon, anyone?). The players seem to like Gardy. During his tenure, we have seen very few clubhouse incidents and most of the time, this franchise was lauded for being able to put its head down and play some friggin' baseball. The players have often responded to him in positive ways, though that is certainly in question after the last three Septembers.

 

I also understand people's problem with this move, that it feels a lot like the franchise is stuck in neutral. What I don't understand is the pure, childish vitriol spewed toward Gardenhire and his coaches over this choice. Part of this franchise's strength has been in its loyalty to management and the front office, trusting in their ability to see things through to their completion. It would have been easy to cut ties with Ryan in the late 90s but they didn't do it. It would have been easy to cut ties with Kelly in the late 90s but they didn't do it.

 

And that seemed to turn out okay for everyone.

[chopper0080]

I appreciate the positive take, Seth. But I have to agree with AM's point of view. I could never have said it better.

 

Especially this part:

 

Agreed. Along with a lack of results has been a lack of improvement and development which speaks to a lack of future production.

[TheLeviathan]

If you are waiting for Gardy to make some profound mistake to justify firing him....

It will never happen. That just isn't how baseball works, managers don't have that much control. That's partly why I'm neutral as well, but I don't like the insinuation he hasn't done enough to be fired. He never will, that can't be the reasoning for moving on.

[Guest USAFChief]

Just for fun, imagine you have an employee that has the opportunity to go on to another job, where he will have more resources, but where expectations will be higher and failure will be met with stern reprimand, perhaps even firing. He chooses to stay in his current job because he knows failure will be met with "meh, he's a good guy, here's another contract."

 

Is that someone you want leading?

[Seth Stohs]

Truth be told, I'm pretty neutral on it as well. I think that you could create a pro-con list for Gardy and the Twins, and it would likely come out pretty equal.

 

I just so often hear, "Well, you can't fire the players." So teams fire the manager. Maybe it's OK to actually keep the manager that has proven himself and put it on the players. That said, with the group of players that were trying their best the last month of the season, it's hard to put too much on them. I guess, in my mind, it's all about the front office at this point. That's my honest opinion, and that's what I continually found myself going to as I was writing.

 

I may be the only one, but I do believe in Terry Ryan for the long-term. I do wonder what that means for 2014 when lots of players will get their opportunity all around the field. Aside from never having enough pitching, I wouldn't want to blog the Sano's, Meyer's, etc.

 

They are in a weird place.

[JB_Iowa]

Just for fun, imagine you have an employee that has the opportunity to go on to another job, where he will have more resources, but where expectations will be higher and failure will be met with stern reprimand, perhaps even firing. He chooses to stay in his current job because he knows failure will be met with "meh, he's a good guy, here's another contract."

 

Is that someone you want leading?

 

Isn't this the same thing that happened with Mike Radcliff? At least one team wanted to interview him for a GM position and the Twins refused to allow the interview (perhaps at Radcliff's request).

 

Again, shouldn't you want your execs & coaches to be sought after by other organizations and to advance their own careers? If they do that, it provides opportunities to add "outside talent" to your own organization. But instead of injecting new thought and perspectives from time-to-time, the Twins seem to prefer to promote from within -- usually waiting until someone retires before they do even that. I can only conclude that they really don't want anyone challenging the "Twins Way".

 

I remember reading an article a few years ago in which Terry Ryan (I believe) told a story about going to the winter meetings (or something similar) and how they could have flown but how a bunch of them wanted to drive down (to Tennessee, I think) because they all enjoyed spending time together so much. At the time I thought it was a kind of cute, Minnesota story. Now, in my mind, it has become a symbol of too much togetherness, complacency and "old boy network" in the organization.

[scottz]

I appreciate the attempt to have people look at it from a "real world" (i.e., non sports world) scenario, but my experience in the real world would say that the employee in question would not be retained in the same role. I have seen long-time co-workers being asked to consider moving on, shifted to other (lesser) roles, and in some cases, let go when a pattern of "projects gone bad" happens on their watch.

 

As a co-worker and friend, I was sad for these smart, talented managers. As someone who understands the business of my company's business, most of the time, the moves made sense.

 

Like I said, I appreciate the angle, but I believe my company would have made a move. A polite move, respectful of the guy in charge, but they would have made a move.

[Mike Sixel]

If Gardenhire was trying new things, and being innovative and failing, that would be one thing. But he's not. He is an awful game manager. He is stuck in 1971 in terms of understanding strategy and tactics. His pinch running decisions alone show that, let alone his refusal to platoon players, or his ability to RUN THE TEAM, as opposed to letting Mauer decide where he plays.

 

You, Seth, you have been saying for years they don't do the little things well. If there is one thing a coach should be able to control, it is that. He can't make a guy a great hitter if he's awful, he can't make a horrible starting pitcher a great one, but he can teach a team how to run bases, where to position themselves, and how to hit the cutoff man correctly.

 

Some will say "these are pros, they shoudl know that already". Well, if so, what is the point of a manager / coach then?

 

There just isn't evidence that he and his staff have done a good job of making the players better the longer they have worked with them. That's their role.

 

Lastly, talk is cheap. TR keeps saying this is his fault, but he still has his job. If all that happens next year is that some guys come up from the minors, and no real FA impacts happen again, will we give him another free pass?

[Guest USAFChief]

I've never cared much for Gardenhire. I think he's a bad in-game manager. He refuses to platoon, often makes bizarre calls to the pen, and generally, just makes me scratch my head, as if we're watching different events unfold on the field.

 

With that said, nice piece Seth. I'm neutral on retaining Gardenhire as the manager. I simply think that the manager doesn't make much of an on-field difference unless he's exceptionally intelligent and studious (Maddon, anyone?). The players seem to like Gardy. During his tenure, we have seen very few clubhouse incidents and most of the time, this franchise was lauded for being able to put its head down and play some friggin' baseball. The players have often responded to him in positive ways, though that is certainly in question after the last three Septembers.

 

I also understand people's problem with this move, that it feels a lot like the franchise is stuck in neutral. What I don't understand is the pure, childish vitriol spewed toward Gardenhire and his coaches over this choice. Part of this franchise's strength has been in its loyalty to management and the front office, trusting in their ability to see things through to their completion. It would have been easy to cut ties with Ryan in the late 90s but they didn't do it. It would have been easy to cut ties with Kelly in the late 90s but they didn't do it.

 

And that seemed to turn out okay for everyone.

 

a couple things:

 

I disagree that a manager "doesn't make much on field difference." He's deciding who to play, who to rest, when to take 6 innings of smoke and mirrors from Kevin Corriea and call it good or try for one more, when to sacrifice, etc etc etc. in an era where fans argue over "1 WAR" I find it hard to believe people think a manager doesn't affect the W/L record materially.

 

They ended up cutting ties with Kelly anyway. I bet the same fate befalls Gardy.

[Oldgoat_MN]

Truth be told, I'm pretty neutral on it as well. I think that you could create a pro-con list for Gardy and the Twins, and it would likely come out pretty equal....

 

Can you say the same for Anderson? The starting rotation has been bad, very bad. Is there no one who could have gotten more out of those pitchers?

 

Is there such a thing as a 'pro' on the side of keeping a guy at his position whose sole claim to fame is that he did not ruin Johan Santana?

 

I would be happy to be enlightened by some wise baseball person who could explain to me what it is that makes Anderson a good pitching coach. Then I'll have to take your word for it, as there is no evidence anywhere in MLB.

[ThePuck]

a couple things:

 

I disagree that a manager "doesn't make much on field difference." He's deciding who to play, who to rest, when to take 6 innings of smoke and mirrors from Kevin Corriea and call it good or try for one more, when to sacrifice, etc etc etc. in an era where fans argue over "1 WAR" I find it hard to believe people think a manager doesn't affect the W/L record materially.

 

They ended up cutting ties with Kelly anyway. I bet the same fate befalls Gardy.

 

Clearly the manager makes a difference.

[Mike Sixel]

If he doesn't, why keep Gardy, why not pay Seth 1/5th the money? Clearly the manager matters.

[Winston Smith]

Gardy is the right man for the job because he has it.

The Twins organization is a lot like Augusta National Golf Club. Ultra conservative, extremely slow to make any change and usually only after kicking and screaming before they do. It's an old school country club where everyone pats each other on the back has a few drinks some food and they tell stories of great times past. It's also very vanilla.

Baseball has moved on to technicolor and even some clubs to HD. This club has very little diversity organization wide and that is a problem when so many of the players are non-white. They had one black coach they fired him. They added a Texas born and raised coach that speaks spanish to solve that problem. The season ending 25 man roster had no black players and 4 latin players. How can that be?

This team has to come into modern times. They need to accept technology, they need to diversify and integrate into the organization change, not token change but real change. That means going outside the country club and bringing in new innovative people with diverse backgrounds and ideas.

Does anyone see change going forward with Gardy and Ryan in charge? If you don’t accept change how do you get better?

We all like that old chair that is so comfortable even when it starts falling apart but at some point its time to start new.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Just for fun, imagine you have an employee that has the opportunity to go on to another job, where he will have more resources, but where expectations will be higher and failure will be met with stern reprimand, perhaps even firing. He chooses to stay in his current job because he knows failure will be met with "meh, he's a good guy, here's another contract."

 

Is that someone you want leading?

 

This is speculation as to his motivation for staying, and personally I don't buy it. There are plenty of other reasons to stay, including perhaps simply enjoying living in the area, and also perhaps the young talent coming up through the system. I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume his strong desire to stay stems from factors other than a desired lack of accountability.

[CharacterGroove]

Yesterday's decision did not upset me that much - the manager wasn't the problem - but I would have preferred a change. It's not about accountability for the terrible play, either, because that's really just code for fans wanting a fall guy.

 

The whole organization is just ready for some fresh air. But because that's not to be, we'll wait patiently to see if there's a genuine interest in changing course in the next 5 months. But I have my reservations that we'll see anything significantly different, and that's where my frustration lies.

[Seth Stohs]

You, Seth, you have been saying for years they don't do the little things well. If there is one thing a coach should be able to control, it is that. He can't make a guy a great hitter if he's awful, he can't make a horrible starting pitcher a great one, but he can teach a team how to run bases, where to position themselves, and how to hit the cutoff man correctly.

 

I think that the Twins preach fundamentals as much as anyone. They have players bunt. They preach the PFP. They have Paul Molitor in the organization to help with base running. They put in their time teaching and practicing those things, from what we're told, more than other teams. But Gardy and his coaches can't actually bunt for the player, or run the bases for them. They can't run routes and hit cut off men for the players.

[Seth Stohs]

Can you say the same for Anderson? The starting rotation has been bad, very bad. Is there no one who could have gotten more out of those pitchers?

 

My initial reaction to hearing the Anderson was coming back was disappointment. But then I thought, if I'm saying that there's not much that Gardy or any manager could have done with this roster, a big part of that has to be saying that there isn't much that Anderson can do with that pitching staff.

 

And, to be fair, he did well with the bullpen, for the most part. He deserves some credit for Perkins, Fien, Burton, turning Duensing's season around, and working through things with Ryan Pressly. He coaxed Kevin Correia to arguably his best season of his career, in his first year in the American League. He should get some credit for Sam Deduno's big drop in BB/9.

 

I've always thought Anderson was overrated. He got a ton of credit for Guardado and Hawkins, and he's had a few successes since then.

 

I'm not a huge fan, but I can't be upset either.

[Chance]

Firstly, Seth, great article. I truely appreciate your opinion and your writing.<br><br>With that said, I disagree. I respect Gardy and I don't mind seeing him manage again, but what players have consistently continued to develop under him? Players don't seem to be reaching their potential. Dozier has shown more this season but how many people feel comfortable with him continuing to improve? <br><br>The pitchers have been terrible for the most part besides the bullpen. Is this on Anderson? Who has gotten better under him? Who has left and improved? This is not just the last 3 years this has been for many years. <br><br>Maybe all this is on the front office. What seems to be holding this team back is philosophy for acquiring and developing talent. Yes our minors are showing alot of promise but will that continue to be the case when they reach the majors?

[Seth Stohs]

If he doesn't, why keep Gardy, why not pay Seth 1/5th the money? Clearly the manager matters.

 

I'd take that, for sure!! Ha!

[nicksaviking]

I understand the desire to use a real world analogy but it just doesn't work. Why does Gardenhire get a pass on his consistantly failed "projects" but the players don't? Morneau got traded, not extended. Was he less of a loyal employee than Gardenhire? It wasn't Morneau's fault this club stunk, he had the second highest OPS on the team.

 

I don't blame Gardy, Ryan put him the the no-win situation and should be facing the music, but I'm really getting sick of those defending the move saying it's silly to "make a change just to make a change." That's condescending and blatently inaccurate. Just because the reasons are intangible doesn't make it voodoo. Numbers of blameless managers get canned each year and in many cases, it works and the teams win. Rarely does the ship get righted after retaining a manger after three terrible seasons.

 

Also, the implication that option #1 is the easy option is clearly false. Option one means looking an old friend in the eye and telling him he won't be coming back. Re-signing him is the easy option. I'm not upset that Gardenhire will be back, I'm just upset that Ryan continually stays within his comfort zone.

[gil4]

I just so often hear, "Well, you can't fire the players." So teams fire the manager.

 

Of course, you know that cliche is a lie. They fire players all the time, although they have other names for it to make it sound better. Just last week on another thread I made a list of a dozen players I'd like to see "fired" off the 40-man roster.

 

I've seen the comments about how the Twins stuck with TK and he got things turned around to hand over to Gardy. The thing is I don't remember TK's teams making as many boneheaded plays. His bad teams were well-coached bad players. They could get the bunt down. They could throw to the right base. They just were overmatched talent-wise.

 

That's not what I have seen the past three years. The "Twins Way" was always the TK way, and that has gradually faded.

 

I would also add that two championships buys you some time that making the playoffs and getting knocked out in the first round doesn't.

[Guest USAFChief]

This is speculation as to his motivation for staying,

Fair point.

[jimbo92107]

It's not just Ron Gardenhire that needs to go, it's The Twins Way. Gardenhire is not a bad manager, in that he does implement the philosophy that this organization has chiseled in stone. The problem has become the philosophy.

 

Many years ago, The Twins Way meant something different than what we are seeing now. The bullet points are the same: pitch to contact, great fielding, hit to the opposite field, etc. However, somewhere along the line something changed. Pitch to contact started to mean "nibble around the corners." Great fielding started to allow slow fielders with iron gloves and crappy accuracy, so long as they hit a home run now and then. Hit to the opposite field started to mean stand there and wait for ball four, only to watch strike three. Oh, and how many bases did you see this poor fielding, strikeout prone, nibble around the corners team steal this year? Sorry, our big, clumsy guys are too slow to steal bases, and the fast guys don't know how.

 

The sad fact is that The Twins Way under Ron Gardenhire and Rick Anderson has become a cartoon mockery of itself, the low-T version, the slow, passive, old man's interpretation of "the piranhas." Piranhas with dentures.

 

I do not question that the players on this team love Ron Gardenhire. Clearly the man is a warehouse of baseball knowledge, and he loves his players, too. The reason he should step aside is that the team needs to regain an aggressive edge that has been lost over the past few years. When the odds are 50-50 to swing or check, you should swing, hard. Get rid of slow outfielders. Pitch inside. When you're on base, you're a base stealer, not just a runner.

 

Baseball is a game best played hard, embracing risk. The Twins Way has become a conservative, plodding style that is dull to watch, looks boring to play, and loses over 90 games per year. Today's Twins are at or near the bottom in all the categories that make baseball fun to watch: attempted steals, home runs, strikeouts, outfield putouts, bunts, pick-offs, trick plays, etc.

 

You can't play pro baseball like you're trying to avoid a heart attack. The Twins need a manager that likes to roll the dice, and when he loses, can't wait to roll 'em again. Gardenhire himself talks about "getting after it," but his team plays like they're afraid of being too aggressive. It's like a fish that's scared of water, a bird that's embarrassed to flap his wings, a clown afraid to put on that big, red nose.

 

Embrace the risk, celebrate your own embarrassment, or hand the microphone to the next bad singer. Life is karaoke, most of us suck, but that shouldn't stop anybody from giving it a go. We love you too, Ron, but it's time for a change. Please, hand the microphone to the next bad singer. You've been kind of hogging it.

[Shane Wahl]

One has to wonder, do the loyalists around here want anything whatsoever to change in this organization? If such woeful leadership isn't enough to make a change, what on earth is? If this goes another year of 96+ losses?

 

There is a lot of "the manager doesn't do much" comments around here, so one also has to wonder why those people make so much money if they don't really alter win/loss totals in any way.

 

I just don't understand this mentality that we have to stick with the same guys out of "loyalty" and because, well, the roster stinks anyway. We have no way of knowing, of course, what any other manager would have produced in 2013, but I am now completely flabbergasted by the justifications for hanging onto proven failing coaches and the manager.

[savvyspy]

I would be careful throwing around this statement:

 

"Some choose to look at the Twins playoff record, and I understand that. However, what happens over a 162 game sample size is a more reliable indicator than a five game sample any day."

 

That only makes statistical sense if you are comparing two like items. I don't think playoff baseball games and a random regular season game of a 96 loss team can be compared this way. Playoff baseball is a different game. Just because its a small sample doesn't mean if the results a statistically significant they can be ignored. Statistically Gardy is one of the worst playoff managers of all time. That's just a fact. That doesn't mean hes a bad regular season manager but it also means his results aren't because of chance or a small sample size.

[DaveW]

Gardy is the right man for the job, the fact that he would have had other offers within a day of getting "canned" proves this.

 

People have said time and time again that Gardy should be let go, but I have yet to hear ONE person say who they should bring in instead that is a clear upgrade.