Brady Anderson on Analytics
Brady Anderson’s title within the Baltimore Orioles’ organization is Vice President of Baseball Operations. According to the team’s media guide, the 51-year-old former all-star “collaborates with Dan Duquette and manager Buck Showalter on player development and roster management.”
Anderson, who hit .256/.362/.425 over a 15-year career, isn’t your typical ex-player. He spends a lot of time in the clubhouse – his multi-faceted role includes working with hitters — but he’s equally comfortable interacting with the analytics department. A stat geek for most of his life, Anderson is well-versed in sabermetrics.
——
Brady Anderson on stats and understanding value: “I’ve always been interested in statistical analysis. From the time I was five years old I was quizzed by my dad and my uncle about members of the 500-home-run club, the 3000-hit club, and a variety of other stats. It was just part of what seemed like normal conversation to me, because that was the environment in which I lived.
“I was drafted in 1985, and remember getting the Bill James “Historical Baseball Abstract.” I used to enjoy his rankings of players and his rationale for his rankings. I also grew up reading Ted Williams‘ “The Science of Hitting.” I used to travel with it and read it frequently while in the minors.
“My dad’s favorite player was Ted Williams. He was my uncle’s as well. I had a poster of Williams’ strike zone, with batting averages assigned, hanging on my wall when I was 12 years old. My dad and his family grew up in Los Angeles and my mother and her family are from Marblehead, Massachusetts. so Ted Williams was a frequent topic on both sides of my family. In retrospect its clear that my family’s love for baseball, with Williams at the forefront, is the reason I determined that getting on base was the only goal a hitter should have. It was why I adopted that philosophy from a very early age
“It’s always bizarre and absurd to me when a hitter looks a bit disgusted and indignant after a walk. I don’t care who you are, a walk is a victory over the pitcher and so is a hit-by-pitch. Hitters like Williams and Ruth and Gehrig and Bonds knew it all too well. Many hitters, past and present, hurt themselves due to their seeming cluelessness of this simple concept.
“There are so many factors that go into walking frequently. I’d never factored in philosophy as one of them, but it’s clear it is. To many, the route to bases on balls is “working the count.” That’s too simplistic. It’s also a good way to ensure hitting with an 0-1 count in many of your at bats.
“The number-one factor in the ability to draw walks is power, the ability to drive to ball into the gaps or out of the park with consistency. A player with power and a good command of the strike zone should get on base at a high rate That’s why Frank Thomas lead the league in walks, while players like Juan Pierre will not. Factor in Thomas’s lack of speed and Pierre’s great base stealing ability and you wonder why Pierre walked as much as he did and why Thomas didn’t walk 200 times a year. At least that’s what I wondered.
“I used to imagine what Thomas would have done had pitchers refused to pitch to him the way they did Bonds. I felt they may have been able to frustrate him in a way that would never have worked with Barry. Barry was never willingly going to chase pitches out of the zone. Not ever. Frank may have, if pitchers had worked around him more.
“I personally benefited from having enough power to keep pitchers honest, which increased my walk totals. Because I was a base stealer, I got good pitches to hit in situations where true power hitters would not have. I knew my 20-homer power was my ticket to drawing walks and my base stealing ability was a way for me to hit 20-plus homers. So it drove me crazy, and almost prematurely ended my career, when I was given the take sign after getting to a 2-0 or 3-1 count during my first several years in the majors. I got to those hitter’s counts by knowing the strike zone and I didn’t need help on what to do after I arrived there.
“I’ve been surprised, since I’ve been back in baseball, by people’s lack of ability to look at numbers and put them into context. I think they understand what the numbers represent, but many don’t seem to fully understand what’s good or bad or relevant. I had a conversation the other day where someone was explaining that Slugging Average overvalues extra base hits. I thought, well, it simply divides total bases by at bats and gives you a measure. It wasn’t until it was simply added to on base average to come up with OPS that it became overvalued, from which wOBA emerged, which is a brilliant idea.
“Sabermetrics continually evolve, and attempt to come up with the best ways to measure production and value. It drives me crazy when people act like there needs to be some division between sabermetricians and those known as “baseball guys.” The metrics — the numbers — give you a glimpse, and it’s a really good glimpse. It’s science, or at least much of it is. People rejecting this are missing the point, and in the process openly rejecting some of the best ideas available.
“Conversely, and sadly, many in the game are adopting statistics as the tell all, and misusing the science to further whatever their particular agenda is. Using small sample sizes to dictate lineups etc. is just as misguided. That’s not science. The thing I love about true science, and true scientists, is the desire and necessity to attempt to disprove their own beliefs. This is in stark contrast to those who cherry pick the data to come to the conclusion they want to be true.”
On Adam Jones winning Gold Gloves despite metrics suggesting he shouldn’t: “I haven’t researched it, although I have heard occasionally that metrics don’t favor him. I’ve addressed that a few times on his behalf. One of the reasons I haven’t researched Adam’s defensive numbers is that it’s unnecessary. We have in Adam the rare player who posts 160 games per year, with a production you can rely upon like clockwork. His offense undoubtedly helps him win Gold Gloves, as has been the case as long as I can remember. He’s solid, he’s reliable, he’s got a terrific arm and he’s into defense.
“There are very few players who play day in and day out, and Adam in one of the few. It’s not easy, it’s a grind. One of the most laughable complaints I hear, and heard during my career, is the part-time players refrain about how hard it is to perform during limited at bats, or how they had two at bats last week and they were both against the closer. Well, its way harder to play every day. The everyday player plays against all the closers as well, and also against the game’s best starters. Anyway, back to Adam: he gathers awards because he’s a gamer and very skilled.”
On the Orioles outperforming their projections: “We have a manager who is a master of managing his bullpen, and a master manager in general. I could go on for quite some time explaining Buck’s uniqueness in the game, starting from his incredibly young start as a manager in the minor leagues. His experience is massive, and combined with his intelligence and obsessive desire to be prepared, it’s easy to see the edge he provides. He’s strategic and tactical. He knows not only what to do when situations arise, he knows how to maneuver the game in a way which makes the match ups he desires more likely.
“Our defense is superb. We have the ability for the spectacular with our personnel, but we also are terrific at the nuts and bolts of defense. The tough double plays get turned, our relays are terrific, our pitchers and catchers control the running game, Our game is tight and maybe those things cant be projected.”
David Laurila grew up in Michigan's Upper Peninsula and now writes about baseball from his home in Cambridge, Mass. He authored the Prospectus Q&A series at Baseball Prospectus from December 2006-May 2011 before being claimed off waivers by FanGraphs. He can be followed on Twitter @DavidLaurilaQA.
If Brady can learn the fine art of contract negotiating, he could be a successful GM someday.
Absolutely. Add in that he was a solid player for a long time, and he can garner the respect out of every player on a team for various reasons.
I’m baffled by the dinosaur retreads the O’s publicly floated as potential Duquette replacements (Omar Minaya, Kevin Towers etc) when they seem to have a perfectly good potential GM in Anderson who’s already in the organization.
Unlike Minaya, Anderson 1) knows what wOBA is and why it’s useful 2) is one of only two players in major league history with a 50 HR season and a 50 SB season. What’s not to love?
There’s more that goes into being a GM than the analytic side of things. Seems like he has the potential to be one, but he could probably use some time on the business side of things.
I always wonder why a single person (The GM!) has to have all these qualities. We’re talking about multi-hundred million dollars businesses here. Can’t teams afford to have a GM group that incorporates a business guy, a negotiator, and an analytics guy?
That said, Brady made the most of his talents, and seems to understand the art of diplomacy as in his defense of Adam Jones, above. He never actually denies that Jones is not a great defender, just makes the point that his consistency makes him a valuable player.
Somebody has to be in charge. What happens when the business guy, the negotiator, and the analytics guy disagree? Whoever they report to, who resolves the disagreement, has to know enough about all three disciplines to understand their positions (and retain their respect when he overrules them).
A true GM type would have stared you in the face and said Jones is one of he best CF defensively in baseball instead.
Confucious would focus on the word “manager” and go over what it means. GM’s don’t need to be experts in all areas of baseball knowledge, just like the president of the u.s. doesn’t need to be an expert on the middle east, china, or russia, or whatever domestic areas happen to be in focus at the time.
gManagers just need to be good leaders in the sense that they surround themselves with good resources, manage and use their resources well, and set up a good process so that the executive and cabinet/advisors all play pretty well with each other to come to good decisions for the country.
Being a proponent of any given baseball philosophy means very little in terms of being able to predict if that person would be a good GM.
There will come a time when new trends comes to baseball. Some of the “old school” sabermetricians will dismiss this new trend just like some of the “old school” GM’s were dismissive of sabermetrics to their detriment. Being open minded to new approaches is important. Not everything in baseball will be able to be measured. Once sabermetrics gets to the point of pretty much being fleshed out as much as it reasonably can, it will become the jump-off for new/separate/related or competing new baseball analysis styles…
…and that’s why baseball is such an awesome game.
he’s pretty new to the front office. I’d think most teams would want more experience, especially the Orioles who learned a hard lesson with Mike Flanagan.
When Dan came on board Brady was still doing his off-season workouts with players, both Orioles and guys from other teams. I don’t think it is fair to say that he was truly in the organization at that time.
Under Dan and Buck Brady’s star has risen.
Anderson might be a good GM some day. I think he likes his varied role with the team, which allows him to do on-the-field and training stuff that most GMs wouldn’t do. He is a long-time workout nut, and organizes the offseason workout sessions, for example. Lots of players reference him when they talk about their dedication to working out. I think he likes that aspect of the game and may not want to do a strictly front-office job.
This:
“The thing I love about true science, and true scientists, is the desire and necessity to attempt to disprove their own beliefs. This is in stark contrast to those who cherry pick the data to come to the conclusion they want to be true.”
This is why I’m in medical school. Great interview!
It’s tough to accept Showalter as a “master GM” when all he needs to do is find which reliever feels good today, look at the lineup card for next inning, and pick one. Take away the DH and we’ll see how good he re
really is* (not to say he’d be bad, but he needs to be tested to the NL standard before we declare him great).
Are the Diamondbacks in the AL?
With that profound of an understanding, your phone should ring any minute, Timmay!
He manages in the AL, so why would he need to manage in the NL to prove how good he is? You don’t ask a neurosurgeon to perform a heart transplant to see how good he is at his job. In a few years the DH will be in both leagues and it will be moot, anyway.
Why do people have a weird belief that managing in the NL is somehow harder?
Double-switches and pinch hitting for pitchers isn’t exactly rocket science and the fact that 99% of pitchers suck at hitting makes those decisions relatively easy.
The key is knowing when to double switch and when not to, knowing when to lift a starter who is cruising to score a run, versus letting him bat to keep the opposition in check.
Plain and simple, the DH dumbs down the game.
wow, I’m impressed with him. Honestly when I read the headline I had no idea he was open to ideas like this and thought “oh, here we go, another ex-player ranting about sabermetrics”.
I’d bring back Andy MacPhail. The guy was behind all the team’s cornerstones we see today at catcher, SS, CF, 1B, 3b Ace, setup man and closer.
Our friend Duquette is masterful in his own way, but so far has added in glue to fill in the cracks
McPhail did a great job to build the core of Jones, Hardy, Davis, and Tillman.
What he wasn’t so good at was building quality depth and utilizing it. And that, more than anything, has been a key to the O’s success since Duquette came on board.
Brady Anderson always struck me as someone who valued gaining any advantage possible.
I see what you did there!
I neigh-ver get these inside jokes!
took me far too long to find the first steroid joke.
1996 was a thrilling year in baseball. Barry went 40/40. A-Rod posted 9.2 WAR in his first full season. And, not only did Brady Anderson go yard 50 times, but a whopping 42 players hit 30 or more homers (17 hit 40 or more!), topped by McGwire’s 52 in an injury-shortened campaign.
As we know, in 2014, there were a mere 11 players that hit 30 or more homers. One hit 40.
There were many players in 1996 that saw a notable increase in homers, including Barry Larkin (33 HR, 15 the year before), Bernard Gilkey (30 HR, 17 the year before), Caminiti (40 HR, 26 the year before), Ed Sprague (36 HR, 18 the year before), Terry Steinbach (35 HR, 15 the year before), and several others. It was one crazy year. I couldn’t make sense of it while it was happening. At that time, my little brother pointed out that 1987 was a commonly shared career-year that stood out on many of his baseball cards and that this was just 1987 all over again. I simply and quite ridiculously chalked it up to a more tightly-wound ball from Rawlings.
I recall that year vividly, and I remember as the season progressed thinking, man, Brady Anderson is on one heckuva a hot streak, but it is going to end any day now. But it didn’t end the next day, or the next month. It didn’t end until the next season, when he quit being Superman and went back to being Brady Anderson.
Was Brady Anderson eating some really special cereal in 1996? Were all those other guys that had huge HR spikes eating the same breakfast? How bout’ the pitchers? There is no way for me to know with great certainty. It really doesn’t matter to me much, anyway.
All I can say for certain is that 1996 was a really interesting year in baseball, and it is one I still think of fondly.
It was compelling to read about Brady’s take on stats now that he is in a pseudo-analytical role of sorts with the Orioles. Thanks, Dave, for another good article.
Was Brady Anderson /eating/ something special.
No…
“So it drove me crazy, and almost prematurely ended my career, when I was given the take sign after getting to a 2-0 or 3-1 count during my first several years in the majors.”
I wonder if this still happens, if managers are giving “take” signs in non 3-0 counts… I can’t imagine that it does.