Subscribe to our newsletter
Search
Close this search box.

Brady Anderson Causing Tension in O’s Organization?

Brady Anderson and Dan Duquette talk with a microphone.
Share
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Most of us would love to wake up in the morning and not fear that our boss is going to make work more difficult. We would love to get by without having anyone to answer to. Unfortunately, that’s a luxury that many cannot reach because in some shape or form, we all work for the man above us.

However, there always seems to be that one guy who really doesn’t have a role. He is always in the office, but no one knows what he really does. That seems to be the case with the Brady Anderson and the Baltimore Orioles, according to Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports.

If you haven’t read it, Rosenthal released an interesting piece on Anderson’s role with the Orioles. He is technically titled Vice President of Baseball Operations, but his status with the club has apparently caused some friction between players and coaches.

Little of what Rosenthal wrote in his piece is anything we have not heard before. The disagreement between Anderson and former pitching coaches Dave Wallace and Don Chiti was well documented. It is no secret that Dan Duquette and Buck Showalter have had their differences, and Duquette almost ended up with the Toronto Blue Jays. We have also heard about Anderson’s role inside the clubhouse in regards to their strength and conditioning work.

What strikes me the most about this situation is that Anderson doesn’t answer to either Buck or Duquette. Basically, he’s the guy running around the office doing whatever the hell he wants.

You read two different player stories inside Rosenthal’s piece. Former Orioles Matt Wieters and Jake Arrieta each talk about the fine line between being a player and a front office guy. Some things are meant to stay in the clubhouse. Others stay within the higher offices at Camden Yards. As Arrieta said, whose side is he really on?

It obviously has some advantages. The team credits Anderson for being in the best shape they can be, and he has worked with several players on their approaches at the plate. He talks about welcoming players that former teams no longer covet and rebuilding their confidence.

What is inexcusable is the fact that Anderson got in the way of Wallace and Chiti. Who is Anderson to go in and tell them they are wrong? Who cares if he pitched in high school? He has never done it in the Majors and the situation with Mike Wright is unprofessional. It is the pitching coach’s job to work with the pitchers and Buck Showalter hired them to do so.

Then again, Anderson doesn’t answer to Buck, so he can get away with it. His title is technically below Duquette, but he doesn’t report to him either. When does it come to a point that someone steps in and says that’s enough?

Only if the Angelos family puts an end to it.

The counter argument is the O’s have been successful since bringing Anderson in at his current position. They have more wins than any American League team during his time with the franchise and everyone, including Wallace and Chiti, give him some credit for changing the culture in Baltimore from losing to a successful ball club. 

But does anyone like that he can get away with whatever he wants? Clearly, Wallace and Chiti were not fans of it. The players think he is walking a fine line. The Major League Baseball Players Association have question marks about the situation.

It would be nice to go to work and not have to worry about your boss looking over your shoulder. Anderson seems to have the leeway to do whatever he wants with the Orioles and situations like that never end up pretty.

The Angelos family has a lot on their plate over the next year and a half. Showalter and Duquette are closing in on the end of their contracts. The same can be said for Manny Machado and much of the Orioles’ core. This is not another situation they can afford (pun intended) to have blow up in their face.

0 Responses

  1. In addition to mis-quoting Arietta, you condemn Anderson for some perceived transgression in dealing with Wallace and Chiti, yet you know only what you read in Rosenthall’s piece about the incident. While the article was well written it was hardly an investgative report. Anyway, a little tension might get the club over the hump. Have at it Brady.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Responses

  1. In addition to mis-quoting Arietta, you condemn Anderson for some perceived transgression in dealing with Wallace and Chiti, yet you know only what you read in Rosenthall’s piece about the incident. While the article was well written it was hardly an investgative report. Anyway, a little tension might get the club over the hump. Have at it Brady.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Join our newsletter and get 20% discount
Promotion nulla vitae elit libero a pharetra augue