Dana Brown's public comments post Astros dismissal highlight his failures as GM

As it normally goes, Dana Brown made the rounds following his dismissal as Astros general manager last week. One of his more prominent stops came on Sirius/XM's MLB Radio, where he made some perfunctory comments along with some comments that raised some eyebrows. We will cut straight to the good stuff.

The most notable comment was when he said that Jim Crane allowed him to make some moves and he blocked other moves. In other news, it might be sunny tomorrow or it might rain. Obviously, I jest, but this is something every general manager could probably say. No owner would allow a general manager to trade a franchise icon without clearing it through him first. While we may not know all the particulars because none were given, that general statement fits just about every team in the league.

The vast majority of these interviews are perfunctory in nature. Brown wants to get his name out there, and wants to sanitize his name as much as he possibly can. This means walking the tightrope between passing blame to people other than him and not torching the Astros in such a way that he will look petty or won't get positive job recommendations. So, usually, not a lot is said in these things.

Another interesting comment Brown made was that he felt he needed an assistant general manager. Clearly there were people that worked for the team with that title, so he was thinking something specific that he didn't get into. That raises some questions. First, at what point did he make this determination? Is this something he discovered fairly early on, or is this something he is just realizing now?

If he discovered it earlier, did he approach ownership about getting another guy and was rebuffed or did he just quietly stew and do nothing? One of the weaknesses of Dana Brown is that he never played the media game all that well. There are ways to say a lot of things without saying anything at all and there is a way to say very little, but have it speak volumes.

The assistant general manager gaffe is one of the latter examples.

If he approached Jim Crane about hiring an assistant and was rebuffed, then this is just an example of how he was undercut by ownership and did not have what he needed to have in order to succeed. However, if this is a case of him having a need but never really addressing it, then this lack of a move just matches all of the other non-moves that ultimately got him run out of town. Either way, it seems like something Brown should have pressed if it was that important to him.

This is really quite simple. The team recently added Brent Strom. There are reports that Brown did not want him. Is there a reason for that, or was this just another example of inaction? There have been numerous players that could have been acquired that weren't, begging the question of why. It may not seem like much, as the difference between a Luis Robert Jr. and a Nelson Velasquez might be negligible. However, when you add up your one game here and one game there, especially in a tight division race, you start talking some real games.

It seems there is a pattern that has formed here. He may have thought about the need at some point, but didn't act on it. Dana either didn't have the confidence to pound the table for what he wanted, or didn't have the authority. One can lead to the other, but to be a successful GM in MLB simply knowing what needs to be done is not enough. You have to have the follow through to do it. This is where Brown failed most often, and why he is no longer the Astros GM.

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Follow