Here's a snippet of danmerqury:

It's likely that this conflict will fizzle out given time, but is that really the best option? If Geren has lost the clubhouse, time isn't going to solve it.

The second sentence doesn't necessarily conflict with the first, but the sentiments seem rather inconsistent.

That's a quibble, though, because the more important question is: where's the evidence? Clubhouse chemistry and leadership aren't things we can measure directly, and they're hard to measure indirectly. We'd presumably want to rely on studies in psychology and group behavior. In the absence of time to digest or ability to understand literature like that, we have to leave all this "he lost the clubhouse" nonsense to one side and move on with our lives.

Billy Beane and the rest of the front office are in the best (only) position to make these calls. They are subject to certain biases, of course, but they have information that we do not have.

This leaves us with two choices:

1. We can howl at the moon until the cows come home (...) about how Bob Geren is awful and needs to be fired, and Beane will either fire him or not according to what he thinks is best, leaving us in the meanwhile angry and frustrated at a guy who doesn't swing a bat instead of watching the team of actual players who actually do things on the actual field; or

2. We can let it go.

You know which way I'm going on this.