Change Agent, Brady Anderson
Brady Anderson was a fascinating – and curious – player, most notably for his outlying 1996 season when he hit 50 home runs, a number he never before or again approached in his career. While the performance came under a cloud of suspicion, there was no evidence tying him PED usage.
He now has a fascinating and curious presence in the Baltimore clubhouse, as documented in an excellent profile by Ken Rosenthal .
Anderson is a controversial figure this spring. He holds an unusual sort of hybrid role with the Orioles. Technically employed as a high-ranking member of the front office, Anderson also has a locker in the clubhouse, wears a jersey, and plays roles in coaching, dealing with agents, and in strength and conditioning
The story is well worth a read, but I took away two main points — namely, that (a) we might see more hybrid-type roles in the future, further blurring lines and testing clubhouse sovereignty, and (b) Anderson is yet another voice challenging conventional coaching practices.
It’s true Anderson’s situation is an unusual one due to his cozy relationship with ownership. He operates with little oversight or constraint. But what has become less unusual is the practice of a front office infiltrating integrating itself in the clubhouse. As front offices have trended in a more analytical direction, they’ve hired more like-minded managers. They’ve hired forward-thinking strength and conditioning staffs. And in Pittsburgh, a quantitative analyst — Mike Fitzgerald — was believed to be the first such employee to be freed of the shackles of an office cubicle in order to travel with a club, complete with his own locker in road clubhouses (although he didn’t wear a jersey). The Pirates viewed Fitzgerald’s role as significant enough that they have hired a former Amherst College shortstop and pitcher, Bob Cook, to fill the role after Fitzgerald departed for Arizona, as MLB.com’s Adam Berry reported.
Anderson, Fitzgerald and Cook are all technically front-office personnel but all have, have had, or will have, lockers in major-league clubhouses — at least road clubhouses. Anderson even chose to wear a jersey. (Why exactly do coaches wear jerseys? Why not a more defined and regal look?)
Rosenthal reports that some Orioles players have “expressed concern “ to the MLBPA regarding Anderson’s role, and that he and Orioles general manager Dan Duquette communicated “different messages” to agents. Former Orioles Matt Wieters is quoted and seems to have been among those expressing the concern:
“A baseball clubhouse is always going to be something that players want to keep locked down as much as possible. That’s where it’s a fine line,” said Wieters …
“Brady was a great player for a long time. He was a member of that clubhouse. At the same time, when you get into the season, the 25 guys in that clubhouse are who you want in that clubhouse.
“It’s just a different situation there. It’s a former player who wants to be on the performance side as well as on the front-office side. It’s tough balancing the two.”
Interestingly, in the latest round of CBA talks, Rosenthal reported the MLBPA proposed to eliminate direct contact between management and players, though those talks apparently went nowhere.
Wieters is correct that there’s a fine line to consider, and that line might continue to blur as front offices look to better control macro and micro goings-on in an organization.
Perhaps more damning is Anderson’s thoughts on the value of many traditional coaching practices. Reports Rosenthal:
[Former Orioles pitching coach Dave] Wallace said Anderson makes no secret that he has little respect for major-league coaches, and added that he has told Anderson that to his face.
Anderson said his desire to see young players “put on the proper path” stems from his frustration with his own development. …
“I don’t think they [coaches] were trying to harm me. I know they weren’t . . . Some of the advice was just so poor. It could have easily ruined my career. I see guys like that all the time.”
Coaching is an increasingly embattled professional in major-league baseball, particularly in light of certain hitters having turned around their careers by working with outside, private instructors, benefiting from teaching that goes against conventional hitting practices. One such hitter, J.D. Martinez, shared some spicy thoughts with me earlier this month on some of the instruction he had been given as a professional.
“I always thought the perfect swing was a line drive [back to] the pitcher,” Martinez said. “I’d go out there and hit the ball perfectly, and it’s [a] single. Why is my perfect swing a single?
“You still talk to coaches… ‘Oh, you want a line drive right up the middle. Right off the back of the [L-screen in batting practice].’ OK, well that’s a fucking single. To me, the numbers don’t lie. The balls in the air play more.”
While there are undoubtedly many coaches adding value in the game, it seems that conventional thoughts, practices and teaching are subject to greater scrutiny. It also seems true that more hybrid coaching/front-office positions will be created. Perhaps one day, we’ll even have a front-office staffer slotted into a type of bench-coach role, having the ear of a manger in real-time during games.
Anderson is a unique case. Few ex-players in an organization have such a relationship with ownership and such an interest in multiple facets of an organization. But Anderson is controversial not just because he has a locker or is wearing a jersey, but also because he presents the threat of change.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
I thought this was going to be an article explaining why Brady Anderson should change agents.
Ditto.
From a fan’s perspective, if coaches are losing their value, why not go all the way and eliminate coaches and managers entirely?
Think about it for a moment: What would we lose by having a player-manager and only allowing the 25 active players in the dugout (you could even use bench players as the 1B and 3B coaches) Let the front office set the starting lineup and pitching rotation. The sort of tactical decisions that affect the outcomes of games would be all the more wrenching and dramatic knowing they were being decided by the players.
It would be more entertaining, more fun and would create extra value for smart, veteran players who could handle the duties.
None of this is about in-game management. It’s all about what the coaches do off the field. In the minors, between games, and during Spring Training. You can’t just eliminate coaching, even if you want to pretend that players already in the majors are a finished product.
Team performance would suffer though, without a dedicated in-game strategist and an accountability end-stop. All those egos in the clubhouse, you need someone to be the decision-maker above question. Besides, the first questionable decision a player-manager made would be over-analyzed, the first slump he went in would be over-analyzed, and pressure would build quickly to end the experiment. Teams used to do this a lot, and they got away from it because the money got bigger and performance is more scrutinized now.
Connie Mack, Connie
Ohh, Connie Mack, when are you coming back?
“Interestingly, in the latest round of CBA talks, Rosenthal reported the MLBPA proposed to eliminate direct contact between management and players, though those talks apparently went nowhere.”
Wait, what? Why?
To keep management from doing end runs on agents and union reps.
This is my moment! Brady Anderson used to work out at the sports complex my high school team practiced at, and one day he asked our coaches if he could do some guest coaching.
He proceeded to walk out to us while we were doing warm-up lines on the grass, yelled at us for being “jack-offs” (no joke said “jack-offs” like 25 times in the first 5 minutes) (we were being jack-offs), and showed us how REAL high-knees were done with the most exaggerated ridiculous high knees I’ve ever seen.
He hung around the rest of the day – and of course we were all super excited – so then at the end of practice he decided to put on a show. One of our coaches threw him BP so he could impress us high school kids… Except he took probably 50 (increasingly flustered) cuts and didn’t get one past the warning track…lol and meanwhile we’re all running back and forth after we’ve just put away all the equipment shagging his soft grounders and pop flies.
He didn’t come back after that.
Overall 10/10 experience
Great story. But….WHY OH WHY were you guys being such jackoffs?
D7 high school baseball. Lol
We are long removed from an era when players worked jobs in the off season. There is much money in mlb. Players benefit from having their own bp pitcher and coach with their own unique styles.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2017/03/18/the-art-throwing-batting-practice-and-how-helps-red-sox/XvDihsoLVar6TeNyPgwfeI/story.html
Betting that in Anderson’s playing days, he and his teammates wouldn’t have wanted a coach (or ANY personnel) around them who were known to take information to ownership. Who was drinking too much…who was cheating on their wives….whose politics were a concern, etc. I don’t know what would have changed from that era and this one….ballplayers don’t want a spy in their clubhouse no matter how their role is couched.
You’re right and Brady more or less admits it if you read the Rosenthal piece. Honestly even though it seems to have been working ok so far, the whole situation is unsettling to me as a fan, Brady comes out of nowhere to join the team in a kind of made up capacity in 2010 with no coaching or front office experience and a few years later he is basically Assistant GM, all because he is buddy-buddy with Angelos. He has zero accountability and nobody can say for sure what his role with the team is.
Anderson didn’t come off well in the Rosenthal piece at all. A guy with a direct line to ownership coming into the clubhouse and bigfooting the position coaches, what’s a younger player supposed to do? It puts them in a complete no-win situation where you either do what the staff says, and potentially have an ownership stooge talking behind your back, or you curry favor (by proxy) with the guy who will ultimately decide on your next contract. How do you choose?
Now Anderson says he respects the clubhouse, etc, but why believe him, honestly? Angelos gets something out of empowering him in such a unique way and the players are supposed to believe that none of it comes at their expense? Also all that stuff about how he knows best because he has a special vision for watching athletes move was snake-oily as hell.
If I were an O’s fan, I don’t know if I’d be as bullish as Travis. Innovation for its own sake isn’t necessarily productive.
Surprised Sig Mejdal wasn’t brought up in article. Sig is a former NASA scientist. He turned MLB front office analyst. Then, he got hacked, and now, he’s off to be a developmental coach for a short season team.
“Wallace said Anderson makes no secret that he has little respect for major-league coaches […] Anderson said his desire to see young players “put on the proper path” stems from his frustration with his own development.”
So the front office should hire coaches Anderson respects, if they’re high on Anderson. Or if the coaches are staying, Anderson should butt out. Putting players in the middle of a coach/ownership? fight is terrible for them, and for everybody really.
“OK, well that’s a fucking single” is probably my single favorite quote of all time. I recommend Travis uses it in every article he writes moving forward.
“I don’t think they [coaches] were trying to harm me. I know they weren’t . . . Some of the advice was just so poor…”-Brady Anderson
on the other hand, Anderson gives great advice…
I can imagine it now:”want to know how to have the best season of your career…hard work, diet, F-NAH!! PEDs!!”
Brady Anderson logic: Yeah those ‘roids didn’t harm me as much as my coaches “poor advice”
Something I’ve been thinking about a lot lately is dysfunctional organizations, and specifically the Orioles and Marlins. Because as totally messed up as those organizations are, they seem to have some things going for them right now. And then I read Rosenthal’s piece and I think, “this is a great example of the dysfunction of the Orioles.”
So while I am a huge fan of Travis and everything he writes I think he’s totally missed the mark. There are all kinds of organizational problems with a guy who goes into practice, says he “fixes” them and doesn’t even tell the coaching staff what he did. This isn’t like Ray Searage who is contributing to the overall ability of the organization to fix things. This is a guy who just causes chaos, and baseball players do not like chaos. Not to mention that they are losing their knowledge base because the coaches they want to keep can’t stand working with him.
I think if you make him a person who is responsible for strength/conditioning and a roving hitting instructor you don’t get this profile. Then you get to write an article about some of the cool advanced stuff Brady Anderson is doing, both with physical training and swing doctoring and building confidence but this is not a sustainable way to do it because nobody knows how he’s doing what he’s doing.
Agent of Change, Brady Anderson
not
Change Agent, Brady Anderson.
I thought you were about to argue Anderson was underpaid.